|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: "Not Rated" films
|
|
|
|
|
James R. Hammonds, Jr
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 931
From: Houston, TX, USA
Registered: Nov 2000
|
posted 05-20-2001 03:41 AM
Thats a good question. The only non-rated film I can remember playing at an AMC in Houston was KIDS at the Meyer Park 14. In the paper it said it was NC-17.I dontk now if any AMCs are playing Center of the World, so I cant answer that question. What I would do is find out if there was anything objectionable for children and make my decision based on that. ok for children = anyone can see it.
objectionable material = 17& up...period
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ky Boyd
Hey I'm #23
Posts: 314
From: Santa Rosa, CA, USA
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 05-21-2001 02:24 AM
If a film is "not-rated" it simply means that the film did not get a rating from the MPAA. While some films such as CENTER OF THE WORLD and REQUIEM FOR A DREAM are not rated due to graphic content others are not rated simply because the distributor didn't submit the to the MPAA for a rating. Each studio that is a member of the MPAA, which is all the big studios, is required to submit its films to the MPAA for ratings. Studios/Distributors that are not MPAA members (also known as signatories) are not required to submit their films to the MPAA. Some do and get a rating and then return the certificate of rating if they decide not to go with the rating, which is I believe what happened with Center of the World and Requiem for a Dream. A bit of history - prior to being bought by Disney, Miramax used to release many of its films without ratings. However, once they were purchased by Disney all Miramax films became required to carry ratings. Because Miramax did not want Larry Clark's film KIDS to carry a rating and they couldn't release it unrated, the Weinstiens set up a separate, non-Disney owned distributor (Excalibur) to release the film. As an art house we treat every unrated film individually. If the distributor requests no one under 17 admitted as Artisan did with Center for the World and Requiem for a Dream, we enforce that policy. However, restricting admission on all unrated films is not, in my opinion, prudent policy. Why would anyone want to restrict anyone from seeing THE LIFE AND TIMES OF HANK GREENBERG, which was an unrated documentary about baseball great Hank Greenberg. There may still be some newspapers out there that won't accept advertising for unrated films and its probably highly possilbe that some mall theatres (those few that are left) still have covenants restricting the playing of unrated films, but I believe they are getting rarer.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
on the very first day.
Printer-friendly view of this topic