talkingdigital.org

photo credit: irina slutskyby Adam Cochran
Most people don’t pay much attention to movie ratings. The rating system is primarily there for parents and kids who don’t want to uncomfortably sit together through a sex scene on family movie night.

As our kids have grown older we have adopted a strict, no rated R movies, rule for the whole family. That means that even my wife and I don’t watch them unless they have been edited for TV.

We made the rule in 2005 after a discussion about redeeming qualities in movies. This is a valid concern when discussing movies like American Pie, Bad Santa, and most Tarantino films.

But, what ab0ut the Green Mile, Planes, Trains and Automobiles, The Jerk, BladeRunner, and many other R-rated films that have a single scene that pushes them past the PG-13 rating.

On the other hand, what about Goonies, Top Gun, or Sixteen Candles these are films which carry a PG or PG-13 rating that would almost certainly be R today based on sex, language and crude humor throughout the film.

I am not trying to initiate a discussion on whether kids should be allowed to see R-rated movies or which movies should be rated R.

I am concerned with the fact that film makers don’t see how lucrative it would be to release edited versions of the films. Every film comes out with an unedited or R-rated version, but why not a family edit?

The kids are allowed to see PG-13 films as long as we see them first and approve them. Often it only takes one single scene to change a PG or PG-13 rating to an R. Why not release edits of films with those scenes removed or edited?

The debate usually centers around the film as art and seeing the film the way the artist intended. I can understand that. However, the film industry is also a business and I would have seen a lot more films over the past four years if they hadn’t carried an R-rating.

Hollywood no doubt undertands that R is not as profitable as PG-13. The latest Die Hard and Terminator films were both PG-13. Each film was a lower quality film than its predicessors, in order to draw a larger audience, the films were edited for lower ratings. On the other hand, Watchmen or Away We Go certainly could be easily edited down to PG-13 ratings but short scenes were included to move the film up to an R-rating.

This is not proposing that we change all the “sh**ts” to “shucks.” I just wish the film industry would realize that adding a single scene or adding “f**k” into the scrip three more times to get an R-rating often prevents a good film from being scene by an audience who would otherwise enjoy it.

Annother irritation is that the rating standards have changed. In the 80s sex was edgy and everything except for F**k were given unlimited usage in PG films.

We saw Indiana Jones pull a man’s heart out in real time with his bare hands, but Planes, Trains and Automobiles was given the R for using the F-bomb 18 times in a little over 60 seconds. While the themes of Indiana Jones in the Temple of Doom were deserving of the PG-13 rating, Planes, Trains and Automobiles could have a family edit released by deleting a minute from the film.

Granted, the scene in Planes, Trains and Automobile was historic comedy footage, it is also what gives it the forbidden rating from many family homes.

Perhaps I am prudish but I am also a consumer. I am simply explaining that the reason I don’t pay to see many movies has nothing to do with whether I want to see them and more to do with the letter at the bottom of the poster and what it represents.

I am also not petitioning for the banning of R-rated movies. I have no problems with the existence of such films, I just don’t pay money to see them. Just as many people avoid movies with a given actor or from a given director, I don’t pay money to see R-rated films. There are millions like me too and they all went to see something other than District 9 last weekend.

According to this article in the Dallas Observer blog, Unfair Park, Blockbuster is blaming their $359.7 million loss for last quarter on the lack of good movies to rent.

You see, previously numbers had been higher because of titles like, Atonement and I am Legend.

I must say I agree, I would rather pay Netflix a monthly subscription and see all the crappy movies I want for $9/mo. as opposed to $5 for a single crappy movie. Better yet, I can stream tons of crappy movies on Hulu for free.

Dallas – Unfair Park – Why is Blockbuster Suffering? Simple, Says CEO Jim Keyes. Because the Movies Suck..

There are lots of reasons I don’t watch the Sci Fi channel much. I don’t watch it because the shows are better on Hulu or Netflix. I can’t imagine that I will watch it any more often if they change the name to Syfy?

Who’s idea was this?

I can just imagine the marketing conversation that lead to this decision.

Sci Fi Channel Aims to Shed Geeky Image With New Name – TVWeek – News.

Nerds are excited about this geek’s know better.

MTV Movies Blog » EXCLUSIVE: ‘Star Wars’ Live-Action TV Series Casting Underway.

With all of the great headlines coming from the Pirate Bay trial over the past few weeks, I have really been thinking about how hard it must be for both sides to make their case.

Copying software, music or movies without paying for them is illegal. Anything that is illegal is wrong.

I was at the Goodwill this week and looking through their CD collection this week and it got me to wondering if buying a used CD was technically legal. The artist has collected the royalties from the original sale, but does that make it OK?

Are libraries legal? Every book I read from the library is a book that I will likely never buy. Same goes for magazines. I can go to the library and read any issue of any magazine without having to subscribe. Today most libraries even have music and movies available for checkout.

True, someone has paid for those items, but what about all of the lost sales and royalties from people who borrowed but didn’t buy?

Back to my Goodwill analogy, if I buy a shirt from Goodwill that is still in new or near-new condition, am I stealing royalties from the designer?

If the fact that the library, thrift store or yard sale host has already paid for  these items, doesn’t that weaken case against file sharing and illegal piracy.

If someone pays for a song then gives it to someone else, is that illegal? Yes.

If someone buys a Rolex then lets each of his neighbors wear it on alternating days, is that illegal? No.

If someone buys a fake Rolex, pirated copy of Windows or pirated movie, and they never would have purchased the item otherwise, are royalties lost?

I need to be clear, I am not writing in support of piracy. I am just trying to follow the logic behind the various anti-piracy laws. While it may sound crazy, I also wonder if it will be illegal a few years from now for libraries, thrift stores and yard sales to have certain items for sale.