Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!mit-eddie!thakur
From: reiher@onyx.jpl.nasa.gov (Peter Reiher)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.cinema
Subject: Re: NC-17 controversies
Message-ID: <1990Dec1.224319.8195@eddie.mit.edu>
Date: 1 Dec 90 22:43:19 GMT
References: <1990Nov27.205705.5453@eddie.mit.edu> <1990Nov29.062845.10281@eddie.mit.edu> <1990Nov29.193335.3766@eddie.mit.edu> <1990Nov29.222832.11821@eddie.mit.edu>
Sender: thakur@eddie.mit.edu (Manavendra K. Thakur)
Reply-To: reiher@onyx.jpl.nasa.gov (Peter Reiher)
Followup-To: rec.arts.cinema
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA
Lines: 44
Approved: thakur@zerkalo.harvard.edu


In article <1990Nov29.222832.11821@eddie.mit.edu> bhanafee@ADS.COM (Brian Hanafee) writes:
>
>In article <1990Nov29.193335.3766@eddie.mit.edu> reiher@onyx.jpl.nasa.gov (Peter Reiher) writes:
>>
>>In article <1990Nov29.062845.10281@eddie.mit.edu> pauls@tellabs.com (Paul Silver) writes:
>>>
>>>A third possibility is that the MPAA could refuse to rate the porn
>>>film.  
>>
>>Do you have any actual knowledge that the MPAA can or would do this?
>>Everything I have ever heard about them suggests that their supposed charter
>>is to rate any and every film submitted.  
>
>This discussion is ignoring a simple solution the MPAA can use to
>solve the problem.  If pornographic films are submitted for rating,
>the MPAA can simply give them an X rating.  This would leave NC-17 in
>the region between R and X. As I understand it, the X is still a
>valid rating that the MPAA can assign; 

The MPAA has officially abandoned the X rating.  If they were to go back to
it, they would be making yet another of those policy shifts they so hate, of
the same kind as refusing to rate a film.  Presumably they could make up
guidelines describing the difference between an NC-17 and an X film.  But
Valenti has very, very clearly stated that he doesn't want to do this.
Here's why:

The supposed purpose of the MPAA rating system is to serve as a guide to
parents, and a safeguard for the tender little minds of our nation's
children.  It is not, repeat *not*, a censorship board.  (And I do believe
in Santa Claus, too.  But that's the MPAA line, at least.)  The NC-17 rating
already prevents any child from seeing a film, at least if the theaters
enforce it.  Therefore, what would be the purpose of an X rating?  The only
purpose would be to inform adults of the difference between the material in
"Henry & June" and "Deep Throat".  But the MPAA isn't set up to advise
adults about what they should see, just to protect the kiddies from the
violence they also see on TV, the dirty words they hear on the playground,
and, of course, the all-important demon, sex.  Valenti feels that the MPAA
would be treading too close to the censorship line if they got into this
business, and he might well be right.

			Peter Reiher
			reiher@onyx.jpl.nasa.gov
			. . . cit-vax!elroy!jato!jade!reiher