From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The "X" Rating

The "X" rating was never actually deleted. It has moved down the list of ratings, and is now not shown on posters. Films that are rated "NC-17" cannot actually show penetration of the genitals and explicit sex. The "X" rating is what the rating of strictly-pornographic films showing nothing but explicit sex are rated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.41.26.154 ( talk) 18:25, 15 August 2010 (UTC) reply

The "X" rating was indeed removed in 2001 when the Association took a vote on the matter and majority ruled against keeping the rating and completely replacing it with NC-17 —Preceding unsigned comment added by MRiknowalotaboutmovies ( talk • contribs) 03:27, 15 November 2010 (UTC) reply

There is no end to the rumors and speculation. Both of these statements sound confident, but lack references. The introduction of the NC-17 rating itself removed the X rating from the list of official MPAA CARA rating symbols. Unofficially, it could still be used, since it was the one rating allowed to be self-applied. Look at the poster from CARA: 1990 the NC-17 replaces the X rating. http://www.filmratings.com/why.html Why would a 2001 vote be needed when their printed directory of ratings had listed X as a discontinued category for the previous 10 years? ( talk) 20:55, 1 November 2013 (UTC) reply

The X rating was originally created for more adult thematic elements in a film that could not be fully explored in a R rated film. It was only after the MPAA allowed filmmakers to self apply the rating to their films, without going to the classification board, was when pornographers began to use the rating for their films. Yes there was a time in movie ratings history before "X Meant Sex". It is because of that self application that we relate X rated films with pornography. WatchinDaFilms ( talk) 19:51, 3 April 2014 (UTC) reply

  • The MPAA always allowed filmmakers to self-apply the X rating, from day one of the rating system in 1968. However, it took a couple of years after that before pornographic films started to become well-known. -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 08:11, 2 June 2021 (UTC) reply

The X rating was not copyrighted by MPAA. It could assign an X, but the filmmaker or production company could simply self-rate a film X and avoid a submission. The MPAA did not want to defend films challenged as obscene in court; the other ratings, most notably R, would be defended. The problem is that the X rating was also used as a rating for legitimate Hollywood films such as "Midnight Cowboy", which won the Oscar for best picture of 1969. The blurring of adult art vs. porn was created by the X rating, and has haunted filmmakers, since an X or even NC-17 film cannot be exhibited in most American movie theaters. Ang Lee's "Lust, Caution" made little at the box office with an NC-17, but it did very well in home media (everyone wanted to know why it got the NC-17). Hifrommike65 ( talk) 07:29, 20 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Other films contributed to the PG-13 label

Including Disney's bloody Dragonslayer, Tootsie, Poltergeist, The Right Stuff, Terms of Endearment, Sixteen Candles, and Footloose.

http://videoeta.com/news/2791/pg-13-is-now-25-years-old-a-look-back/

Not sure if these need to be included in the article or not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.100.141.9 ( talk) 13:22, 2 August 2015 (UTC) reply

  • They don't. (See [1] where that article has since been posted.) I was around when PG-13 was introduced and followed that story closely, as well as researching it again in later years. Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom and Gremlins were mentioned frequently in the media as inspiring the creation of the PG-13 rating; no other films were mentioned nearly as much. In particular, a film such as Terms of Endearment did not have significant appeal to children in the first place and so there would have been little reason for parents to object to a PG rating being given to a film that their children were unlikely to watch. The fact that most or all of those films would have been given a PG-13 rating had that rating existed when they were originally released doesn't mean that they influenced the establishment of the PG-13 rating. -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 08:40, 2 June 2021 (UTC) reply

Hollywood Reporter article

Thanks, Erik ( talk |  contrib) ( ping me) 14:20, 29 October 2018 (UTC) reply

    • This is true, but one should also consider that many of the R-rated films went straight to video or cable with no theatrical release, or a minimal theatrical release. If one looked at the percentage of theaters playing R-rated films in an average week compared to those playing films with other ratings, the ratio would probably be less skewed in favor of R-rated films. -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 08:26, 2 June 2021 (UTC) reply

NC-17 edits

The NC-17 rating was introduced in 1990, prohibiting anyone under the age of 17. The wording read as follows:

No children under 17 admitted.

In 1996, the age restriction was raised to 18, meaning no-one aged under 18 would be admitted:

No One 17 and Under Admitted

The result of this alteration was that the age restriction was raised by 1 year, from 17 to 18. If people aged "17 and under" are not admitted, this is semantically identical to saying that people aged "under 18" are not admitted. If the lower age limit for doing something is 18, then those aged 17 and under are prohibited from doing it. I honestly cannot explain this in more basic terms.

All of this is clearly sourced sourced and explained in the article.

However, the article has been subject to disruptive editing by Sup34cj:

At first, I was willing to assume good faith and accept the initial edit was a simple misunderstanding. However, I can only conclude the most recent edit is basic vandalism because I find it difficult to believe that somebody could be, frankly, this thick. However if these edits continue I will report them as vandalism and seek a block for the editor. Betty Logan ( talk) 22:43, 20 January 2021 (UTC) reply

Umm if NC-17 is 18 and older then it would say NC-18 No one Under 18 is allowed. Sup34cj ( talk) 22:44, 20 January 2021 (UTC) reply

Betty is right. See another source here. Erik ( talk |  contrib) ( ping me) 00:30, 21 January 2021 (UTC) reply

Some amount of confusion is understandable simply because the MPA was inconsistent with wording when PG-13 and NC-17 were added. People 17 and older CAN see an R rated film. People 17 and under CANNOT see an NC-17 rated film. Inclusive vs exclusive description. Children under 13 are "cautioned" against PG-13 rated films. The *number* in PG-13 is inclusive (13=yes) but the *words* are exclusive (not for under 13). The *number* in NC-17 is exclusive (17=no) and the words use inclusive phrasing to say the same thing (no one 17 AND under). It's grammatical inconsistency. Since the 3 ratings were created at 3 different times, it's not surprising, but uniformity would simplify things if the MPA ever restructures the ratings. MandieJ1975 ( talk) 15:38, 28 July 2022 (UTC) reply

Image updates

I updated the symbol images with the block examples provided by the MPAA. Initially I uploaded them with the traditional black on white style, but I also uploaded revisions with the colors from the source PDF document these were acquired from. I'm torn on which I prefer: the pure black variations is what people are used to traditionally seeing, however the colored letter variations are what the source material used and (for the G and R ratings) matches the colors used in the green/red band trailers. Here are the images:

I also uploaded a better version of the redband sample, and also uploaded a greenband sample:

If anyone wants to discuss these files or has any questions, let me know. — Locke Cole • t • c 06:34, 28 September 2021 (UTC) reply

They look ok to me. I don't have any issue with them. Betty Logan ( talk) 15:17, 28 September 2021 (UTC) reply
Added a yellowband example as it's an oddity but historically interesting in the context of the internet still coming-of-age. Sadly, this was the highest quality source I could find as ProRes wasn't really a thing back in the late 2000's like it is today. There's also a brief discussion of yellow band trailers (and the intro cards in general) here. Might be usable as a source, would be helpful to find a definitive source for when these first (and maybe last) came to be used however. — Locke Cole • t • c 05:02, 5 October 2021 (UTC) reply

Purpose of the MPAA movie rating system

The lead-in to this entry states the following: "the American movie rating system is one of various motion picture rating systems used to help parents decide what films are appropriate for their children." It goes much deeper than that. Yes, the MPAA was offering guidance to parents about content inappropriate for their children to see or hear (originally, under the age of 17). However, the film industry and the federal government also attempting to stave off national censorship of films, such as other countries (like Great Britain) had. State and municipal film censorship boards had been censoring or banning films for some time ("Some Like It Hot" in 1959 was banned in Kansas, and "banned in Boston" had become a cliche). President Johnson appointed his aide Jack Valenti to devise a system that allowed for distribution of films with mature content, and prevented national censorship. The rating system (originally G/M/R/X) was the result, going into effect as of November 1, 1968. Even though the rating system was touted as a way to prevent film censorship, it soon became clear that the MPAA was indeed censoring films by threatening more severe ratings (an X instead of an R; an R instead of an M, later GP in 1970, later PG in 1972) if content in submitted films was not edited for a "softer" rating. The best book I have found that considers the early MPAA movie rating system is Tom Pollard, "Sex and Violence: The Hollywood Censorship Wars" (Paradigm, 2009). Hifrommike65 ( talk) 07:19, 20 January 2024 (UTC) reply

Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Talk:Motion_Picture_Association_film_rating_system&oldid=1207887139"