f13.net

Sundance has been pretty anemic this year (one of the most meh I can remember), but I just got back from seeing the documentary This Film is Not Yet Rated which is about the MPAA system and how ridiculous it is. It features interviews with many of the filmmakers who have run up against the system (Aronofsky, Kevin Smith, Matt Stone, Wayne Kramer, John Waters) and also investigates the history and secret nature of the ratings board.   It itself got an NC-17 rating (for showing scenes that had to be cut form other movies to get an R) so I don't know exactly where it will show up. It was made with IFC money so it may show up on the IFC channel late at night sometime. I recommend it.

On an unrelated topic, this is first film I've seen that was filmed digitally that was also projected digitally and holy crap did it look good.

Thanks for the headsup...will keep an eye out for it on IFC.

If you detect it on IFC, let me know because my TiVo-fu is weak.

I read a write-up in the local rag that said it will be on IFC this fall.

Another funny note is that the MPAA (which is behind the outrageous copyright expansions of late as much as the RIAA) made illegal copies of this movie to distribute internally.

This movie does sound interesting. The MPAA is really an odd thing. The review at aintitcool is worth a read.

What ratings movies are given, and somewhat directly what we can view, is decided by a secret group that has zero accountability. They aren't voted in, they aren't a representative sample and we don't even know who they are! It's amazing really.

At least I'd like these people to explain why crotch-hair is an NC-17 but a guy shooting another guy in the head is PG-13. Whether you argree with that or disagree it it seems nice to have someone actually make the case.

Hopefully this will come out on DVD cause I don't think I get IFC since I moved into a new place, which is a shame.

I don't remember where I read it, but the FCC can't regulate violence. It's a good taste sort of thing that companies make TV cuts of movies, but essentially they regulate language and sex, but you could show people snuff films at 2 in the afternoon and the FCC really couldn't get on your back. Perhaps the MPAA has the same sort of regulations in place.

You don't think the MPAA requirements are the way they are because of the FCC's restrictions?  Chances are it's a direct relationship.

Snuff films at 2 in the afternoon.  Good times.

(http://www.royalcollection.org.uk/egallery/images/collection_large/8968.jpg)

Miller v. California (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_v._California)
So government can regulate obscenity and violence isn't obscenity.  Although some people are trying to get obscenity to include violence.

They should knock this censorship shit off and let the free market decide.  If it's good enough Social Security, its good enough for TV.

We did.  We got Hollywood for mainstream entertainment and we got the internet for nudity and porn.

That's the same with the games ratings, comic books (used to be) and any other form of censorship out there that isn't government-mandated. Because really, the MPAA isn't a censorship body because they have no legal authority. They are an industry group that self-regulates in order to keep the government from actually legislating shit.

The problem isn't the MPAA, the problem is the incestuous, backwards-ass movie industry that is strangled by Hollyweird bullshit.

So, you know, it's like the Oscars. 8 nominations for Reacharound Ridge. Fab-ulous.

As the film points out, this is one and the same thing. The MPAA is controlled by 8 companies that control 96% of all movies distributed and 90% of all media in this country.

It's kind of funny actually.  If you follow the chain of ownership, Brokeback Mountain was released and distributed by GE.