# Is The MPAA Getting Too Preachy? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 20, 2002, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-mpaa-getting-too-preachy/120024 "2002-07-20T23:25:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![RexDart](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/b77776/32.png) [@RexDart](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RexDart)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2002, 7:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-mpaa-getting-too-preachy/120024/21 "2002-07-22T07:05:51Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by ScoobyTX \* > \*\* > > How about [WISDOM](http://www.capalert.com/capreports/index.htm)? If you think the MPAA is preach, wait 'til you get a load of these guys. \*\* LOL, those guys deducted a point from _Doug’s First Movie_ for “adolescent arrogance against a father’s dominion.” And if you really want to see a Christian freaked out by a movie, check their review of _Dogma_. They actually have two reviews posted because the first time they went to review it, the reviewer walked out 38 minutes into the film. If I had that one on DVD I’d pull that time up just to see what was the final straw for this nutball, since he seemed personally offended by almost every word of that film. ---
**Author:** ![Tars\_Tarkas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Tars\_Tarkas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tars_Tarkas)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2002, 7:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-mpaa-getting-too-preachy/120024/22 "2002-07-22T07:47:40Z")
From the Dogma review: > [@](#): > > Impudence/Hate: > flatulence Nice to know if i eat too many beans i commit hate! I’m not even going to comment on the difference of my interpetation of Matthew 7 and the reviewers. That guy seemed awfully defensive and narrow-minded in that review, and according to him, i can judge him as such. from other reviews… > [@](#): > > Godzilla 2000 was nowhere near the quality of Godzilla (1998) > [@](#): > > Does Phil 4:8 apply to the violence in Godzilla? Wow, debate on the scripture’s relavence to Big G!! I’m impressed! But he didn’t pay too much attention, that wasn’t the guy’s wife in Godzilla 2000, he wasn’t married anymore…sigh…but > [@](#): > > And I was a little disappointed to find that Mothra did not make at least one cameo appearance. Nor did Megalon, the Smog Monster, nor King Kong. I’ll forgive him since he’s a daikaiju fan. and from toystory 2 > [@](#): > > many Barbie™ dolls dancing in swimwear while characters ogle at them with sensuous expressions southpark > [@](#): > > _South Park_ is another movie straight from the smoking pits of Hell. from Spirit > [@](#): > > Even the anatomy of the adult horses was responsibly done. This is some funny stuff!! ---
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2002, 8:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-mpaa-getting-too-preachy/120024/23 "2002-07-22T08:05:05Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by RexDart \* > \*\* > > LOL, those guys deducted a point from _Doug’s First Movie_ for “adolescent arrogance against a father’s dominion.” And if you really want to see a Christian freaked out by a movie, check their review of _Dogma_. They actually have two reviews posted because the first time they went to review it, the reviewer walked out 38 minutes into the film. If I had that one on DVD I’d pull that time up just to see what was the final straw for this nutball, since he seemed personally offended by almost every word of that film. \*\* ROTFLMAO!!! I’m reading that review now, and its by far his “best.” He certainly seems to have no idea of what the movie is about or what it’s trying to say. I think that this is a good example of what goes through MPAA screeners minds as they watch a film. Personally, I think that we should put WISDOM’s reviewer in a theater with [this](http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/cm/member-reviews/-/AA9IP6AYACFK5/1/ref%3Dcm_mp_rv/104-5523516-8811134) guy and see what comes out! ---
**Author:** ![ElwoodCuse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/edb3f5/32.png) [@ElwoodCuse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElwoodCuse)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2002, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-mpaa-getting-too-preachy/120024/24 "2002-07-22T19:06:10Z")
Is _Spaceballs_ the only PG movie where they say “fuck”? I’ve heard _Orgazmo_ (by the creators of South Park) is one of the worst examples of MPAA hypocrisy. I’ve never seen the movie, but I heard that it was rated NC-17 mostly because of its language, and that there isn’t all that much nudity in the film, especially considering that it is about a porn star (thus their satire in the South Park movie about movie ratings). Kevin Smith also talked about this on the “Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back” commentary–he said of all the gross things they ever do in their films, nothing riles the MPAA like a dick joke. I think it’s a little strange how they seem to be hypersensitive about anything even remotely “gay”. ---
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2002, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-mpaa-getting-too-preachy/120024/25 "2002-07-22T19:18:13Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by ElwoodCuse \* > \*\*Is _Spaceballs_ the only PG movie where they say “fuck”? > > \ \*\* No. You can get a PG rating if you say “fuck” and it has nothing to do with sex. (Don’t ask me to explain the logic, I can’t). _Undercover Brother_ had the work “fuck” in it at least once. (Not sure if it was PG or PG-13) ---
**Author:** ![Max\_Torque](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e9bcb4/32.png) [@Max\_Torque](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_Torque)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2002, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-mpaa-getting-too-preachy/120024/26 "2002-07-22T20:13:06Z")
There’s a great article in line with the one **pldennison** referred to above, concerning the battles independent filmmakers have had with the MPAA: [**Separate and Unequal? How the MPAA Rates Independent Films**](http://www.moviemaker.com/issues/41/mpaa.html). It’s fascinating reading. One of the problems of making a new rating system listing various types of content is clarity. Right now, a person can glance at a movie, see the “PG-13”, and get a general idea of where it falls on the scale. Having to read four letters, each followed by a number, and then doing some mental arithmetic to get an idea about the content of a movie is just not as efficient, at least for “casual browsing” purposes. I think it’s a good step that they now include descriptions of the reason for the rating below the rating itself, but I wish there were some uniformity to it; I got a good laugh out of the rating for _Cats & Dogs_, which said that the movie contained “Animal Action”. What, exactly, does that mean? Sounds like it should be X-rated! The R rating is essentially meaningless. Many filmmakers have to “soften” their work to receive an R rather than an NC-17, and many more who just can’t quite get to PG-13 wind up in R. Basically, R is a vast dumping ground for films that say “fuck” too much at one extreme (_Planes, Trains, and Automobiles_), films that show hundreds of people getting killed in violent and gory fashions (_Saving Private Ryan_), and everything in between. When those two kinds of films wind up with the same rating, the system clearly needs revising. PG-17 isn’t a bad idea, but what we really need is a non-stigmatized, restricted, adult rating for the upper end of the scale. And to address the OP more directly: the MPAA isn’t supposed to “protect us from harmful content,” though it seems that they’ve taken that duty upon themselves. What they are SUPPOSED to do is issue opinions, which we, being intelligent adults, may respect or ignore as we see fit. Of course, instead, they’ve become a de facto censorship board. sigh. ---
**Author:** ![Procacious](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Procacious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procacious)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2002, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-mpaa-getting-too-preachy/120024/27 "2002-07-22T20:23:30Z")
> [@](#): > > And if you really want to see a Christian freaked out by a movie, check their review of Dogma. They actually have two reviews posted because the first time they went to review it, the reviewer walked out 38 minutes into the film. If I had that one on DVD I’d pull that time up just to see what was the final straw for this nutball, since he seemed personally offended by almost every word of that film. Okay, I can approximately answer this question, but due to the fact that I do not know when exactly he started his watch (i.e. did he start it before or after the disclaimers) and when he last looked at his watch (i.e. did he check his watch just before storming out or after he was already outside), I cannot be certain what the very last thing he saw was. Approximately 5 minutes before he walked out was the scene on the bus where the angel of death killed the adulterer. You can tell from this quote that it was quite upsetting to him, so I imagine he had one foot in the isle ready to leave at that point. > [@](#): > > Two characters who were supposed to be angels were the quintessential counterfeiters of the Scriptures – one of them committed gunfire murder of an adulterer with as much regard for what he had done as if he had just sneezed. The approximate moment he left was when Chris Rock was first explaining how he was the 13th apostle and followed Jesus around. It really is too bad he left and this moment, because he only barely missed the part explaining that there are different ways to interpret the Gospel. This obviously upset him since he made it his first quote in his second review where he saw the entire movie: > [@](#): > > [Rufus] “Folks who build faith on that message (the Gospel) are color-blind” with emphasis on “that”, as if there is more than one Truth in the Gospel’s message of Salvation. But, in his defense, comments like that are bound to make him mad, which in turn warms him up, thereby expanding the metal rod he so clearly has nestled in his rectum. It is amusing how people can get so upset over someone’s different interpretation of the Gospel. He says that there can be only one “Truth”, but in reality Chris Rock was not claiming that there was more than one Truth, only that the author’s interpretation was incorrect. ---
**Author:** ![SisterCoyote](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/958977/32.png) [@SisterCoyote](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SisterCoyote)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2002, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-mpaa-getting-too-preachy/120024/28 "2002-07-22T20:40:41Z")
I seem to recall that there is, in fact, a “fuck count” that a movie can’t exceed if it wants a given rating…but I can’t find it anywhere. ---
**Author:** ![KellyM](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/57b2e6/32.png) [@KellyM](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KellyM)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2002, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-mpaa-getting-too-preachy/120024/29 "2002-07-22T21:03:54Z")
**SisterCoyote** : According to the article linked by **MaxTorque** , just one use of “fuck” will get a PG-13 rating, and just one use deemed by the MPAA as “sexual” will get an R rating. The MPAA seems to make up other limits as it goes, if the discussion regarding head bobs and pelvic thrusts is indicative of anything. ---
**Author:** ![fallom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a88e57/32.png) [@fallom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fallom)\ **Post date:** [July 22, 2002, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-mpaa-getting-too-preachy/120024/30 "2002-07-22T21:14:36Z")
I saw a preview for that new surfing movie, and right next to the PG-13 rating was… Teen Partying. So, yes, the MPAA **is** getting way too preachy. ---
**Author:** ![ricksummon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ricksummon/32/3333_2.png) [@ricksummon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ricksummon)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2002, 6:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-mpaa-getting-too-preachy/120024/31 "2002-07-23T06:58:52Z")
> [@](#): > > How about WISDOM? If you think the MPAA is preach, wait 'til you get a load of these guys. If you read some of his reviews, you’ll notice that he deducts points from Drugs/Alcohol merely for showing someone **holding** a glass of wine. When I sent him an E-Mail noting that Jesus turned water into wine and served wine at the Last Supper, he replied that drinking wasn’t a sin, but drinking to excess was, and besides, he wasn’t making moral judgments, he was just listing what was in the movie. Bzzt! Sorry, wrong answer! If only drinking to **excess** is a sin, why are you deducting points for someone **holding** a glass of wine? And, if you’re not making moral judgments, why are you deducting points **at all?** I’m just waiting for the day he deducts points from Drugs/Alcohol for a movie depicting the Last Supper itself. ---
**Author:** ![ElwoodCuse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/edb3f5/32.png) [@ElwoodCuse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElwoodCuse)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2002, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-mpaa-getting-too-preachy/120024/32 "2002-07-23T18:23:01Z")
The CAP alert guy is famous for saying he makes no allowances for context or message when listing offensive things in a movie. I wonder why he hasn’t reviewed _Schindler’s List_. Also, we recently estimated that a good deal of his bandwidth is used when Fark links to one of his reviews. There was a thread about that this week with graphs and everything. It was wild. ---
**Author:** ![ElwoodCuse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/edb3f5/32.png) [@ElwoodCuse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElwoodCuse)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2002, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-mpaa-getting-too-preachy/120024/33 "2002-07-23T18:29:45Z")
The CAP alert guy is famous for saying he makes no allowances for context or message when listing offensive things in a movie. I wonder why he hasn’t reviewed _Schindler’s List_. Also, we recently estimated that a good deal of his bandwidth is used when Fark links to one of his reviews. There was a thread about that this week with graphs and everything. It was wild. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-the-mpaa-getting-too-preachy/120024.md?page=1)