I’m a screenwriter first and an anarchist, second. I am plagued with a weather-beaten, but firmly standing optimism and a slight, but not infirm, delusion of grandeur that leads me to hope that upon reading my manifestos, the public will awaken to what can be produced with a few twists of my fingertips and take me up on my offer when I say I have an idea for a film. (And hopefully, it doesn't mean what you dirty, filthily-minded bastards think it means.) Heed, however, that my writing style on Steemit, and my screenwriting style are vastly different, as if they were written by two different men. (That should exacerbate any speculations you might have, after reading my “delusion of grandeur” comment, that I have schizophrenia.) There is far more swearing and not as much Victorianism, the impetus being the need to draw in a crowd, a crowd I’ve projected who would make up my crowd, but after working so hard on my scripts, nothing frightens me more than the reality that any one of them may meet the Theseusian fate of revision beyond recognition, because I know I won’t be the only who wants to make money.
Jack Valenti, former head of the Motion Picture Association of America, had this to say about the ratings:
If you make a movie that a lot of people wanna see, no rating will hurt you. If you make a movie that few people want to see, no rating will help you.
This is quite a profound statement, and I can’t help but partially agree with it.
Here’s why I don’t.
The Motion Picture Association of America has a method of rating films that would be unconventional, if not for two factors: Many theaters and theatrical chains have policies whereby they refuse to exhibit movies that have not been rated by them, and the director or source material simply wasn’t kooky enough. In any other environment - say, REAL LIFE - it would be absurd for one to have a 13-year-old leave the room because the word “fuck” has been used more than once or in reference to copulation, despite mature subject matter that led to its usage molding the entire conversation; to believe that a child would only be traumatized after witnessing a murder if the blood was minimal; or to awkwardly exclaim, “Whoops! Pardon me,” while a rape is taking place and leave the door ajar, but childproof the lock after witnessing a couple making love. The MPAA’s standards are strange and at times, inconsistent, and yet, their ratings system is not only accepted as the norm, but an almost universally mandatory prerequisite.
The quote myself from earlier, almost no film sees theatrical release without a rating from the MPAA, and the loyalty to such an imperious and particular system has become so recalcitrant that it has negatively affected production. Many filmmakers and editors have had to trim their content, or add to it, to make it sufficient for a projected audience or demographic, which has a negative impact on some actors who have little or no appearance in the film because their scenes were cut, or sever ties with producers who would be distraught that a film was edited to PG-13 material and performed poorly at the box-office.
Given my aggressive tone, the MPAA rating system is a puritanical system that offers no one ability to succeed without prior consultation with itself.
..But Is It Wrong For It To Exist?
From a general anarchist’s viewpoint, a monopoly of any form is inherently unjust and must not exist in a free society. The right anarchist, at first glance, would see the MPAA as a simulacrum of state regulation, but upon further delving, would discover that it is a private organization and that the regulations theater chains impose upon themselves is, well, voluntary.
In fact, the motion picture industry is an immaculate epitome of, and argument for, laissez-faire capitalism and a self-sufficient market. Due to freedom of the press, the government has very little say in what content private film corporations produce and how they distribute it. Firms and small businesses enact regulation on what is sold on their premises so they aren’t asked for refunds by dissatisfied customers, so in order for their product to be sold there, production companies have to obtain membership with the MPAA and their membership fees vary according to the budget and length of the project.
Monopolistic, though it may seem, to my knowledge, the MPAA is the only one of its kind. What competition does it have?
