Wednesday, 26 July 2000

RANTING & RAVING

I don't know how obvious it's been in the column, but I have had children for the last week. My sister's children, Charles (11) and Alli (9), have been here on vacation, foot loose and mom-free. For their trouble, they have suffered a middle-of-the-night ride back to L.A. from San Diego because Uncle Dave didn't make a hotel reservation. But I think that's been balanced out with a lot of rides, candy and late night calls to Kozmo.com to rent Billy Madison and Spaceballs. (Dear God!)

Anyway, the kids have forced me to, once again, look into the gaping maw that is the MPAA. Since the kids arrived, the whine has been, "I wanna see Scary Movie!!!!" Not Pokémon 2000. Nor The Kid. Not even The Klumps. The kids want to see the dirty comedy. The alternative title is Me, Myself & Irene. Great! I still haven't let my nephew Charlie see South Park: Bigger, Longer & Uncut.

But before I go on, let's have a pop quiz: Which of the following movies is rated R?

The Perfect Storm
The Patriot
Mission: Impossible 2
X-Men
Shaft
Me, Myself & Irene
What Lies Beneath
Gone in 60 Seconds
Gladiator

I had to check a few of these myself. Shaft had enough MFs to sink a boat of nuns and Irene is and is being sold as a raunch fest. But how does one distinguish the rest? (The Patriot and Gladiator are the only two other R rated films.)

So, what's the problem? When I look at the newspaper, I see a melange of ratings that have little to do with what these two middle-kid-aged kids should see. There are the obvious brain damage issues. I don't want them seeing the PG-13 rated The In Crowd or Loser. About the last thing I need is an 11-year-old boy given the idea that date raping can be funny and consequence-free. And I don't want to give a 9-year-old girl any more breast implant parades than she already gets from Britney Spears.

But getting to the Rs, there is a world of difference between The Patriot and Scary Movie. Or so I've been told. I don't want to see Scary Movie censored, but I don't really want to take the kids to a movie that I have heard features penis jokes, complete with penises and ejaculatory fluids, and to decide what to cover their eyes for on the fly. If the MPAA was okay with kids seeing There's Something About Mary, with ear semen, f-ly of penis (that's a filet joke, if you are trying to figure out how to read it) and bouncing elderly breasts, where is the distinction that makes Me, Myself & Irene an R? A dildo? And how do I explain that subtlety to the kids?

Shaft is a language R, but there nothing in the movie that they haven't heard on the cable TV en mass. Despite all the misogyny and gunplay, there is actually less in that R-rated movie that I would have to explain to the kids than there is in the PG-13 rated Big Momma's House ("Is that another flashlight?") or in the PG-13 rated What Lies Beneath, with the vigorous married sex life of Ford & Pfeiffer.

Was Gladiator or The Patriot really more violent than Mission: Impossible 2 or X-Men? A cannonball taking a guy's head off? Despite Roland Emmerich's intentions, it's cartoon violence. X-Men was, for me, more violent than The Patriot. But I don't object to X-Men's PG-13. And I wouldn't object to the kids seeing The Patriot. Or Gladiator. Or M: I-2, which also comes as close to showing cunnilingus in a dry tub as any mainstream movie in a long time…at least they won't really get that.

But will I take the kids to Hollow Man? No. There is a fairly brutal rape sequence in the beginning of the second act that I don't want to explain to kids who don't need to know about rape as part of an entertainment experience. And knowing Verhoeven, who knows what will be in the movie? But if I weren't in the job that I have, I wouldn't know that. And how do I distinguish that R from the R for The Patriot? What makes me assume that it's THAT much worse than What Lies Beneath?

We live in a time where kids have a lot more access than ever before. And parents have a much wider range of ideas of what is appropriate than ever before. The MPAA has extended their range as well. A couple of "dirty" words no longer guarantee a R. Nor does a breast or two. But the range just above that is still loaded with question marks. I consider the glamorized self-love of The In Crowd to be far more dangerous to my young family members than the moral message of The Patriot. I consider Gone in 60 Seconds much more influential in the wrong way than Shaft. But each of us can make these decisions for ourselves. Or can we?

Oddly, I would welcome a toned-down R version of a movie like Me, Myself & Irene that was a few steps less raw. The kids could handle a movie like that, sans dildo. Eliminate some of the sex acts between the Devil and Saddam Hussein and South Park: Bigger, Longer & Uncut becomes a possible for my 11-year-old. Same with Irene and the personal appliance.

But why should I be in the business of cutting hard Rs into soft Rs or guessing which is which?

Once again, an NC-17 that actually allowed commercial viability would help. Even a list of distinguishing characteristics within the R would help. "Okay kids, you can see an R-L (for language), but no R-S (for sex) and R-Vs (for violence) I need to see it or check it out very carefully first. But if it's an R-V-S, as I assume Hollow Man would be, forget it."

In this era, the kids are negotiating and the MPAA is a tool that doesn't really work.

READER OF THE DAY: BM writes: "Anyone can be a critic. In fact, everyone is. Not everyone can be a cop or a fireman or a doctor or other professionals that make your life possible. The cops in Philadelphia were wrong. They weren't acting like professionals, but getting revenge. But they shouldn't be severely punished unless they have made a habit of this behavior in the past or continue to act in this way in the future. Cut these cops a break. Anyone can make a mistake, except the Coen brothers."

But this perspective from, well, I'll let him intro himself: "Bruno Cat here. My two cents on the oversensitive police folk we have these days: I'm sick and tired of them moaning about how nobody appreciates them. From the Bruce Springsteen controversy to Rodney King to Abner Louima to Amadou Diallo to Me, Myself and Irene it seems like we have a group of people desperately in need of some therapy. I'm also pretty sick of the way police funerals get turned into high drama: if you saw the front page of the New York Times a few days ago, you know what I mean. Strap it on, boys (and it's always the male policemen doing the complaining) and just do your job: protecting all the 'pukes' and 'faggots' you seem to loathe so much."

And the AN Man writes: "Do trailers make an impact? Absolutely. Just think back to late '98 and the ruckus over the teaser to The Phantom Menace. Or to '96 and how ID4's trailer really sold that movie. (Of course, both of those trailers focused more on the visuals and the sfx, than on the plots. Coincidence?) However, we cannot just say that great trailers lead to great movies. M: I-2's trailers were great, but the movie was a disappointment for me. (Yes, I know it's a hit, but I blame John Woo for that). On the other hand, X-Men's trailers were really terrible, but the movie was great.

Still, the biggest problem with many trailers isn't that they reveal too much. It's that they sometimes appear too soon. For example, the trailer for Gone in 60 Seconds was first released with The Green Mile--way back in December. Upon first seeing it, I must admit I was jazzed and thrilled and wanted to see it. But the more they played it in front of every movie from December till June, the more my excitement waned and I finally chose not to go see it. Marketing people must have known that the movie was not going to be released for several months, yet they chose to release their trailer that early. (Of course, sometimes movies get pushed back and the trailer is suddenly left to play for several more weeks. Example: Bedazzled. I'm sure by the time it is finally released, I'll be tired of the jokes and not care whether or not to see it. And I wanted to go see it)."

E ME Can anyone REALLY be a critic? Shouldn't we have some qualifications? Like distinguishing an R from a PG-13?