MPAA: Deciders Of What We Watch At The Movies.

Earlier this week, I read on Mania.com that the upcoming Sylvester Stallone action epic "The Expendables" will have two versions: its original R rated version and a teenybopper friendly PG 13 version. Both will be tested on audences as soon as its good to go, and whichever works best will be unleashed into theaters. This is one of the most stupid things I have ever read.

Studios are pressuring screenwriters and producers to appease the Motion Picture Association of America and aim for PG 13 ratings or less. The MPAA, has successfully brainwashed major studios with the premise that PG 13 rated films and family oriented films are more lucrative than R films, since they draw the most diverse audiences. In my opinion, it is an untrue statement in America, and it is a device for moralizers to control what Americans see at the theaters and /or on DVD.

The fact that Rated R films draw less audiences than kiddie films is a false statement. Kids, may go see a Rated R film as long as he/she is accompanied by an adult. When I went to see "Watchmen", there were a great number of teens at the theater under 15, who enjoyed the film without a doubt. I doubt they left the theater traumatized after seing nudity and bone crunching violence. Most seemed to have loved the film, or hated it because they did not understand it.

There are rated R films that teens could and probably should see. If I had a teenage kid, I would have taken him/her to see "Slumdog Millionaire". This film shows children in these parts of the world how blessed they are. When I went to see this film, it was as packed as when I went to see Wall E.

I hope a screenwriter, film director, or studio exceutive reads this one paragraph. Do not fear the R or NC 17 Rating for films distributed in America. In other parts of the world, film rating systems are much more strict and can actually really hurt a film's profitability. In my home country of Venezuela, the rating system actually prevents children and even teens from gaining admission to films with adult content deemed unappropriate for minors. In Venezuela, kids under 12 were not admitted to see "The Dark Knight" at movie theaters, those under 16 were not admitted to "Watchmen". I lived there during my teens. I was 16 when "Pulp Fiction" came out, and I could not see it in Venezuelan movie theaters because it was rated for 18 and over. England and many other countries adopt such rigid ratings for films. The irony is that despite those ratings, films geared toward adults are still as profitable as a Disney film would be in those countries. I guess the entertainment attitudes are different in other parts of the world, where if adults want a night out, they will leave the children with their nanny, or close relatives, and head for the theaters. When kiddie films arrive in theaters, they will take the kids to the movies. Also, adults will go to the movie for its artistic value, as well as, for the entertainment value.

Here in America, most families are used to taking their kids wherever they go, and spending as much time possible with them. Parents are hesitant to leave kids with a nanny for nights out, and also, not many parents have close relatives living close, with whom they can leave their kids to go see a movie. This is probably the reason parents choose to go see family oriented films, so they can go with their children to the movies, as they seek to merge their entertainment desires with those of their kids. That is completely fine, and that is the prime market for PG and PG 13 films. But then again, there are two factors screenwriters, and film excecutives must consider:

-Not everyone in America is has small children.
-Single adults also like to go to the movies.

Those are the people who will go watch rated R films.

I encourage every movie fan to watch the documentary "This Film is Not Yet Rated", which shows the MPAA as the moralizing force in American culture. The MPAA, according to the film and also in my opinion seeks to establish the idea that films with non conservative themes, like sexuality, protagonists who are gay, or who do not want to form families, characters who smoke, anti war views, etc, are deemed disruptive to american family values. Under these views, they punish film makers for expressing their own view of life into film, thus killing the artistic value of our most beloved medium.

I strongly encourage you to watch the 2006 documentary "This Film is Not Yet Rated" by Kirby Dick. This documentary asserts the true moralizing nature of the MPAA and its exteremely conservative board, which includes a number of people who think just like Bill O'Reilly and Anne Coulter.

Filmmakers must fight back and realize that the R and NC 17 ratings are not an obstacle to profitability. If the film is great, word of mouth will prevail over critics and media marketing, and ultimatly people will see the film and make it profitable in the long run. Please realize that the American population is not comprised only of parents with children...and not all parents have small kids. Teens, with the proper guidance and advice by their parent/guardian, can watch an R rated movie, and come to terms with its content.

Ultimately, parents should decide what kids watch at the movies. We should decide what we watch at the movies. Not the MPAA.

Ten It Is!!!! The Academy Awards Will Now Nominate 10 films For Best Picture.

For the next Academy Awards show, we will now see 10 films nominated for best movie. Great news, as now I can see the upcoming "Public Enemies" take one of those spots. Had they done that this year, probably The Dark Knight would have been nominated for best film. Wall-E would have also been nominated. As per Yahoo.com/movies, this is a return to the nominee lists of the 1930's and 1940's when the 10 best films were nominated for best movie.

Its a great move by the Academy who has recently lost their mojo, nominating films like "The Curious case of Benjamin Button" which was a dissapointment to me, and one of the most boring flicks I've seen. The Academy needs to be much more focused in nominating box office hits that were also critically acclaimed. Did anyone really saw "Driving Miss Daisy back in 1989"? or "Crash in 2005"? in 2007, people went to see "No Country for Old Men" and "There Will Be Blood" because they were realesed close to the Academy Awards show, and since they were nominated almost right after their release, audiences were curious. The Academy needs to look back at 1998, when the show had probably the biggest ratings, and that's when "Titanic" swept most of the nominations.

I'm not a movie expert and I'm not a professional critic. If The Academy of Arts wants to keep this pop culture tradition alaive, it needs to risk a bit more, annd celebrate those worthy films that most people liked. They need to do what was done in the 70's and early 80's. Nominate bluckbusters, like Star Wars in 1977, The Raiders of The Losta Ark in 1981, ET in 1982, The Silence of The Lambs and Disney's The Beauty and The Beast in 1992.

The Academy needs to nominate films we love and give them the baldie. Period.

Late Review: Fanboys

The best movie I watched these last few days was not at the movies, or on DVD. It was on my laptop, as I downloaded Fanboys from a rental site.

This movie is already on DVD, and unfortunately I didn't have the opportunity to see it at the theaters, since many indie, low budget and foreign films do not make to the movie screens in South Florida as family films have priority to the silver screens.

Synopsis

Its late 1998. Linus, Erick, Windows, Hutch and Zoe, five childhood friends, are reunited at a party. They've always shared one thing in common: Their passion for all things Star Wars. They are eagerly counting down the hours until Star Wars: The Phantom Menace arrives in theaters for the summer of 1999. When they learn that one of them is diagnosed with terminal cancer, they create a plot to break into George Lucas' Skywalker Ranch to steal a copy of the new Star Wars film and make their friend's dream come true before his passing.

Comments

This movie is hillarious, raunchy and even sweet. Comedy overshadows the predicament of Linus (Christopher Marquette), who is dying of cancer. Before this movie was released, I read in Mania.com, that at one point, there was another version, where the cancer subplot was omitted, in order to make the movie funnier. But the theme of Linus' illness prevailed in the final cut. George Lucas loved the movie, gave his "Stamp of Approval" and authorized sounds from the original Star Wars trilogy to be sampled for Fanboys.

The situations are hillarious as our heroes drive from Ohio to San Francisco, with a scheduled stop to meet Window's(Jay Baruchel) online love interest, who promises to provide the crew with Skywalker Ranch's blueprints and passwords to help them break in, ultimately, this does not turn out well, but they still earn the right to meet a mistery guy, who will provide them with the needed items to enter Lucas' ranch. Through out their trip, our heroes get out of their way to pick on a bunch of Trekkies led by a guy played Seth Rogen(under a fake nose and buck teeth), who later chase them cross country, in thirst for vengeance. Cameos from Billy Dee Williams, Carrie Fisher and even William Shatner, are featured.

This movie is a love letter to Star Wars, and how it has affected the lives of so many Genxers. The motivation for the four protagonists is not really to be the first to watch the upcoming Star Wars Film, but give their friend, who is set to pass away before the film' premiere, the excitement and euphoria that many Genxers like myself, felt as May 1999 approached, when we would finally see the most awaited film in history. Weather The Phantom Menace, and its sucessors was loved or hated, the anticipation felt during the weeks, days and hours before the arrival of this film was one of the most memorable experiences all Star Wars fans have had in their life time. This film clearly captures and even sort of brings back that feeling of excitement.

I loved this film despite the critics, which were mostly negative. Fanboys ranks at about 32% on Rotten Tomatoes.

If you have not seen it, it is worth checking Fanboys out, even if you don't like Star Wars, as the universal theme of friendship and sacrifice is still resounding.

Weekend Review: Year One.

Synopsis

Zed and Oh (Jack Black and Michael Cera) are two prehistoric dudes, who can't hunt or gather berries and constantly fail to get attention from their respective love interests. They soon are vanished from their tribe after eating from the tree of knowledge, and embark on an existential quest, where they will encounter biblical characters such as Cain (David Cross) and Abel (Paul Rudd), Isaac (Christopher Mintz Plasse) and Abraham (Hank Azaria).

My Comments

Year One starts out like a parody of last year's "10,000 B.C." and gradually evolves into the kind of comedy closer to "Monty Python's The Life of Brian". Our protagonists speak in current slang while dressed in long fur tunics and sandals. At first, the pace is slow and the script resorts to excremental jokes for laugh and fails. For me the film picks up after Zed and Oh witness Cain murder his brother, and they run away along with Cain. The story made some sense, after Cain betrays our naive heroes, and they face the consequences of their clumsiness that made them get expelled from their tribe.

The story makes fun at the harsh civility of biblical times with jokes about circumcision, castrations and sodomy. "Year One" maintains its existential context, as our main characters question the existence of God and faith in the fellow men. However this spiritual theme does not produce any effect, as the story tries hard to be funny. To gain our interest in this story, expect a "ladies in distress" plot, where most of the jokes are effective.


Michael Cera is funny as the "sort of effeminate but straight" dude. Jack Black does not really bring anything new to the table in this film. He plays the wannabe smart-ass, rebel type guy from "The School of Rock", sans the Heavy Metal fanatism.

I would recomend you skip this one, and wait for its DVD release, so you can rent it for $3.99 on a rainy Sunday night when there's nothing better on TV.