Original subtitles

The head of the Motion Picture Association of America, Jack Valenti,

said today in New-York that the film industry

plans to set up a voluntary rating system,

designed to keep youngsters from seeing undesirable films.

10 years ago, on this very day, November the 1st of 1968

the film industry stopped censoring and started a rating system.

The system has since been praised, but also condemned.

For 30 years, the MPAA

has been helping parents decide

what movies they should let their children see.

But lately, their decisions've come under fire.

Encino, California.

Inside the headquarters of the MPAA,

an anonymous group of parents gathers to rate films

G, PG, PG-13, R and NC-17, formerly X.

But the MPAA won't let anyone inside to see who these people are,

or how they make their decisions.

And among their most controversial decisions

are the films they rate NC-17.

My film was very autobiographical.

It was very reflective of many of the girls that I knew in downtown NY

who were passing as men.

So, I was in the editing room, and I got a call from my producer, and he said:

"We have some bad news. You got an NC-17".

And I was like: "That's great!"

Oh, NC-17! All the films that I love have it...

Well, it used to be an X.

They said: "It's not good", and I said: "Why?"

They said: "Well, the studio won't release your movie if it has an NC-17."

I was so floored...

To have worked so hard, against all the obstacles of no money

and with people saying: "You can't make that movie. It makes no sense",

getting the audiences to love it, at that point...

And then, they have this unknown board - that was apparently

doing it for the filmmaker... 'cause that's kind of the whole mantra -

saying I couldn't have my meaning.

It was like being shut up, and I was like:

"Wait! Let me talk to you.

"You can't make... This isn't right."

So, I said to my lawyer "What were the counts... the problems?"

There were three.

After Brandon goes down on Lana,

he comes up, and wipes the cum off his mouth.

We had to strike on that.

I said: "Okay, what's the problem?"

"Well, we don't really know, but that's really offensive."

And I said: "So, I shoot Brandon in the head,

"and I do all these things... And that's fondamentaly okay,

"- but there is a problem here. - Yes.

"- Can somebody explain? - No

"- Anybody I can call? - No.

"Okay, what's the second one?"

"The anal rape. They want to cut it out."

I said: "No, I'm not cutting that. It's inherent to the movie.

"What's the 3rd thing?

"Well, Lana's orgasm is too long."

And I was like:

"Who's ever been hurt by an orgasm that was too long?

"Well, it's offensive." And I was like: "That's outrageous."

So, when I looked at her orgasm, I was like:

"This is totally about Lana's pleasure.

"So, there's something about that that's scaring them, unnerving them."

Why do you think they had a problem with...

- With female pleasure? - Yeah.

Well, in a construct where most movies are written by men, directed by men,

they're most for the male experience.

So I think that... even in sex scenes,

it's from a male perspective.

So I don't think that the focus is female pleasure.

I think that female pleasure is unnatural, scary.

In that kind of narrative setting.

So I think that if you are a woman who understands female pleasure,

and understands it from the woman's perspective,

you're probably going into a terrain that's unfamiliar.

And I think generally, unfamiliar is what breeds the NC-17.

I definitely felt censored and I felt discriminated against

for making a gay film.

We were told anything with a dildo would have to be removed.

Give me the physical frame: where exactly do we go from a PG to an R?

You're given a list in the beginning with everything that can't be on screen.

I had to cut one shot where you just infer...

that one of the girls is going towards the crotch of the other girl.

There was some pressure from the studio to cut a part of it.

And in the end, they cut 3 seconds. I think it was...

And the MPAA members'd tell you: "You don't have to accept the ratings.

"It's not mandatory." That's bullshit!

Why should that film get an R?

And why, for seeing my pubic hair, do we get an NC-17?

It's a terrible situation.

The current rating sytem is a form of censorship

in a kind of fondamental way.

Because it categorizes films in advance of their release

and they're categorized not by the people who make 'em

but by a handful of people

whose names we'll never know.

The rating board members who are parents,

neither gods nor fools,

look at a movie

and try to put a rating on it, that the average parent

would believe to be an accurate depiction of that film.

This mythical american parent is a fiction!

A convenient fiction that somebody has to make up

to come up with what's got to be an arbitrary system.

They're told that they're guardians of morality,

they're told they're the last bar

between what... what you expect what children should see.

With that kind of authority, they felt to take themselves seriously.

And they tend to try and promulgate

some concepts they basically make up.

They try to make up standards.

The critical community has never really taken

the MPAA terribly seriously

or given it a huge amount of respect.

And were often, you know, very puzzled

by some of the decisions they make.

Why this is... Why people can't go see this terrific movie?

Just 'cause, you know... There's this "word" in it!

It just seems so... kinda childish!

Even though it's supposed to protect children,

it's turning us all into children.

What do movie ratings mean?

"G" means "General audiences".

No nudity, no sex, and no drugs.

Violence must be cartoonish and minimal. And there may be language

that goes beyond polite conversation.

"PG" means "Parental guidance".

There may be strong language like "shit" or "ass" and brief nudity

like showing off an ass. Or like violence like "being kicked in the ass".

"PG-13". "Parents are strongly cautionned",

as in "Look out, mum, here come more shits!

"Bullshit, dumbshit, little shit,

"shitfaced, and shithead."

"Fuck" is also allowed, but usually just once.

So filmmakers're urged to choose their "fuck" carefully.

A simple "Fuck you!" is okay. But referring to the sexual act,

as in "May I please fuck you?" or "I enjoy getting fucked!",

is totally unacceptable.

If a character says that, especially while abusing illegal narcotic,

the film is rated "R".

"R" means "Restricted". Nobody 17 or under without parent or guardian.

There may be sexual themes, franc sex talk, sexualized nudity, tough language

and tough violence like 100 handicapped orphans decimated by hell of a gunfire.

But if the film depicts

realistic baby-making in a position other than missionary,

acts involving oral sex with females, anal sex, fetishes, more than 2 humans,

or what the MPAA bills "aberrational behavior",

this film could get slapped with an "NC-17".

"NC-17" means "No children 17 or under". Period!

An NC-17 may range from a senior citizen gang-bang

to a foreign Pedro Almadovar film.

But art films make people feel funny,

especially the ones with "aberrational behavior".

We have censorship board

called the MPAA that looks at your movie and says:

"This is the rating we're gonna give you.

"If you want it to be any more extreme, expect 5 people to see your film."

Then, no advertising budget, no distributor's gonna wanna touch it.

I have Valenti's law which says:

"If you make a movie a lot of people want to see,

"no rating will hurt you.

"If you make a movie few people want to see,

"no rating will help you."

Ratings have nothing to do with box-office.

The difference between an NC-17 and an R rating can be millions of dollars.

It can mean a difference of...

On some films, maybe even tens of millions $.

'Cause it definitely limits your ability to market the film.

If you're limited on that,

people aren't aware of it. They won't even note to see that movie.

And if you choose not to accept the rating,

then your ads don't really run. You can't run TV spots...

If they run a TV spot for a movie that hasn't been rated yet, they say:

"This film's not yet been rated."

But you never see TV spots for like: "This film is unrated."

The worst censorship of all, I believe

is "Wal-Mart", "Blockbuster".

All the big chains - that are probably responsible for

40% of all videos sold, DVDs -

will not carry NC-17.

Jack Valenti's been very good and publicly about

"We serve the public, the parents." It's a crap, they serve the studios!

That's who pays their bills... They are all of the studios.

Does the perennial charge

that the studios will treat it better

than the independants hold true?

I'm sorry, but when I was there

the answer was "Absolutely no!"

When we did "Orgazmo" which was indenpendantly financed,

they gave us an NC-17.

We got a phone call with the MPAA,

and the guy'd basically say:

"It's for the overall sexual content.

"Anything we'd cut out to get an R?

"You're welcome to re-cut it and send it back.

"We'd look at it again."

And their whole position with this film was:

"We don't give specific notes.

"Otherwise, we'd be a censorship organisation.

"We just give you the rating."

Then, cut to 5 years later, we're doing the South Park movie,

and we're working for Paramount...

And we turn in the first cut of the movie.

And we've a phone call: "You got an NC-17.

"You need to cut out this, this. Change this, this..."

It was extremely specific.

This word, this line, this joke.

Our treatment was a completely different experience.

They target independants, because the system is set up

to favor the studios.

And because the independant filmmaker is independant of the studios,

I mean, what's an independant film?

What is it "independant of"?

It is "independant of that big studio culture".

Looking for more freedom.

Looking to be able to operate in a manner

where they can completely express themselves.

Without restriction, and without censorship.

There is a mystery here, though.

Who is controlling this thing, and how are they controlling it?

Because I don't fully understand yet.

- Would you like to know? - Oh, yeah!

We've looked at rating systems accross 30 different countries,

and the MPAA system is the only movie rating system

that doesn't disclose who its rating board members are.

I think that does rankle with a lot of people, and rightly so.

Who are these people who're just sitting in judgement of your movie?

I would like to know.

No one knows. That's the whole point!

That's what's really odd about the whole thing:

in an industry this big and as public as this,

that there is an organisation, supposedly accountable to the public,

that's running in such a shadowy way.

Some of the things we're doing,

is we're hiring a private investigator.

To try to find out who these people are on the board.

Hi, my name is Kirby Dick, and I was interested in

actually hiring a private investigator

for a project I'm about to begin working on.

How hard'll it be, and what methods'd you use to find out

who these people are and where they live.

We'd find out where the screening is.

We'd use surveillance on the building,

get the license plates of the vehicles.

I could get myself employed...

... at a low level position...

... I'm inside where I could find those things out.

What about... can you go through people's trash, stuff like that?

In the city of LA, it's completely legal to do that.

As long as it's on the street.

You do a lot of undercover work?

I... I look like a cop!

I couldn't get away whith any kind of undercover work.

But I know lots of people who don't look like cops.

Being a woman, I get in places that most people don't.

That's one advantage.

Usually, security guards open the door.

I'll smile, they open the door, and go!

I have wigs and hats, and things like that.

When it's necessary.

This is my hooker wig.

But if it came down to where I needed

her or her daughter, I'd bring 'em with me.

But I definitely do everything in my power to get in.

Okay, the MPAA is that pinkish coloured building.

They've got it all towards it's impossible

for you just to walk on the premises.

Here, they have an intercom.

The guardian'll come and ask what you want.

He won't let you come in.

It's all gated in here, locked and secure

so there's no way of going in.

Unless you're invited.

I don't think they're gonna invite us.

So, there's absolutely no way we're gonna get in that building.

It's lunch time. They're gonna start coming out.

We'll take some plates and get some information.

- All right. What are you looking at? - That security guard, over there.

Is he gonna make it harder to do what we have to do?

No, unless he starts looking at us.

There's one moment right back he did look over here.

- Really? Think so? - He just probably glanced.

Okay, Lindsey. We have a black Honda.

Female caucasian.

5XF 3CV

I kinda get a thrill out of knowing I'm watching someone

and they don't know it.

There's something exciting about that.

So, um...

Lindsey, write this down:

4SW F3

Brand new Mercedes.

Very attractive woman whoever she is.

So, it's a slow process.

This could take six months.

And I'm not even sure if it's possible.

This is like saying: "Go into Fort Knox and bring out a few bricks.

"We just want to see what color they are."

I was a full-time motion picture rater.

I was with the MPAA for about four and a half years.

From september of 1995

to march of 2000.

The starting salary at that time

for a full-time rater was 30 000 dollars.

Generally, in the morning, you'd meet and discuss

the movies that you had seen

the previous day.

And so first,

people would kind of talk about 'em as if there was any issue.

That... This... seemed kinda violent,

or there was too much sex, here.

People would sort of give their opinions on...

why they thought it should be one rating or another.

There weren't...

any clear set of standards...

in a sense you...

you were taught, and then had to apply.

There was no kind of rater-training process.

People were hired, they were put in the screening room,

put in the rating chair, and started rating films.

Sometimes they'd show us like an edited version of the movie

after it'd been given like an X or an R, and they want to change it.

And all the board would be very pleased

when they'd throw that re-edited version.

"Oh! This is much better!

"The way that we told them how to re-edit the film.

"It plays much better, now!"

And I found out that to be very offensive.

I'm gonna say the F-word.

You know... I believe it's a facist system.

They have just established themselves,

they have injected themselves

as a vital, necessary entity.

And it isn't.

We have to police these people.

We have to determine that these people have

our best intentions in mind.

And if they don't, then, we'll correct 'em.

You can't talk about the history of film

without talking about the history of censorship.

And most people'd see Will Hays with this sort of first

formal attempt on the part of the industry

as a whole to institute self-regulation.

News on the march!

The Roaring Twenties choke on the exhausted Hollywood scandal.

Chief offender: Fatty Arbuckle.

A comedian turned murder suspect

after a starlett dies at his raunchy Tinseltown party.

Under fire, at "Sin City",

major studios formed a

"Motion Picture Producers and Distributors Association",

hiring post master general Will Hays

to restore decency to the movies,

by implementing a strict production code.

But, in the 1950s, you have a handful of films that...

get released, that...

... challenge the PCA.

The first is "The moon is blue".

You won't mind coming up, will you?

Well, I'm not so sure.

Would you try to seduce me?

And it was clear that for Hollywood not to look sort of

hoplessly antiquated,

they were gonna have to figure out a new way

to bring reality into the movies.

How about "Hump the hostess"? Uh?

How about "Hump the hostess"?

Wanna play "Hump the hostess"?

- Calm down! - You want to wait till later

- off in the bushes. - Hump the hostess!

Shut up, will you?

The language in "Virginia Woolf" was really shocking and new.

And I think it's really what inspired Jack Valenti

to come up with the MPAA rating systems.

No film can ever survive

the blaze and hiss of public scorn.

When Jack Valenti became president of the MPAA,

back in, I guess, 1966,

he came from Washington, he came from the President's office,

where he'd been Lyndon Johnson's man.

And he became the man of Lew Wasserman

and of the other owners of Hollywood.

He came to serve their interest. He came as their lobbyist.

The fact that he did come out of Washington,

I think was, you know...

Hollywood felt comfortable that he could protect them

from the people that he knew back there.

Because he was a Washington insider.

And in Hollywood, when you ask what their economic interest

had to do with ratings...

If there weren't ratings, and there was censorship,

there would be 50 different censor boards.

In my opinion, the MPAA uses the fear of government's censorship

to keep power in control in the...

motion picture industry.

If you look at the Supreme Court decisions, key decisions,

in the 1950s and 1960s,

there is no real threat of governement censorship...

... at the motion picture industry after that time,

except for the area of child pornography.

It'd be better if the goverment came in.

I mean, it's wrong for the government to come in,

but if those were the 2 options, you'd rather have the government in.

Because, whatever the government does,

is subject at least to some kind of judicial review.

The current rating system is unconstitutional.

If somebody wanted to mount a constitutional

case against it...

It's an agreement. An industry agreement.

Now, the industry's never been competitive. It's always been collusive.

Really from the very beginning,

the studios were vertically integrated monopolies.

They controlled development,

production, post-production,

distribution and exhibition.

There were two big strikes.

There was the 1941 Disney strike,

in which labour won sort of a fairly clear victory.

And then, you had the 1945 Warner Brothers strike,

in which you had the battle between the two big industry unions.

And you had the studios hiring scabs,

and you had high-powered water hoses used on picketers.

And one way of dealing with these increasingly powerful unions,

was to make

participation membership in a union dangerous.

Calling the House Un-American Activities Committee to order,

chairman Jay Parnell Thomas, of New Jersey, opens an inquiry

into a possible communist penetration of the Hollywood film industry.

So, during the "Black list",

the two questions that were asked routinely at the hearings were:

Are you a member of the communist party?

And have you ever held any position in the screenwriters guild?

First of all, asking the 2 questions together

suggests there's a connection between the two.

And asking the second question

makes saying "yes" a very dangerous act.

So, to confess seems the wrong word,

but to confess membership in the union

would be tantamount to accepting

a life sentence of "Black list".

People generally associate this with McCarthyism

but it had nothing to do with McCarthy.

Once the MPAA got on board the MPAA did it all themselves.

And the "Black list" was implemented by

the very body that controlled the industry.

There is no subversive propaganda on the american screen,

and there isn't going to be.

Communists hate our films.

Because they show a way of life that they hate.

A life where free men work

and play in the ways of freedom.

The MPAA's always been about public relations,

making sure everybody in America is happy with the movie industry.

Movie industry appears socially responsible,

the movie industry appears to care about everyday americans.

Well, the MPAA is composed of

the seven largest producers of

of film and television in the world, the old great studio names.

And I've been the head of it for 34 years.

My greatest achievement as head of the MPAA is:

I survived.

He's got the whole world in his hands.

He's got the whole world in his hands.

When I left the board, it was brought to my attention I was,

expected to be... remain completely silent about

any of my experiences on the rating board.

I suddendly was offered,

a large increase in my salary.

"But here, sign this", and lo and behold, there was another

"You may not, ever,

"say anything, write anything etc,

"without Jack Valenti's permission."

One thing that I've learned in my long, and some would say checkered career,

is that in Hollywood and Washington, there are no secrets.

If somebody thinks there is a secret, there isn't!

"You shall not, during the term of your employment, or thereafter

"disclose to any other person, firm or corporation,

"nor use in any way confidential information

"related to the MPAA,

"which may cause or be calculated to cause

"injury or loss to any of the above mentionned."

When I asked Joan Graves that they could put in writing

what specific forms of information

they considered confidential,

they refused to do that.

- Really? - Yeah. And they said:

"We deliberately leave the... what's in writing fuzzy

"so that in any time, we can use our discretion as far as...

"suing former employees who disclose

"what we consider to be too much information.

And they indicated that they would not hesitate to sue

if they felt that...

there was injury to their interest.

Thank you for calling the MPAA.

To access our company directory, please press 9.

Please, enter the first three letters of the person's last name.

There are no matches to the 3 letters you entered.

To try another name, enter 1.

Then, another one.

Please, enter the first three letters of the person's last name.

I thought we would get more matches on this.

Here is Mary Ann Constanza, ratings department,

I'm either on another line, or away

If you need immediate assistance, please dial 0 for the operator. Thanks.

The ratings!

This is what I think is a rater.

- That's a camera, right? - Yeah.

It's just something I could put on my shirt?

Could you walk into a restaurant, with it?

What's your range? Your wide range?

- It looks like this. - That's good.

We'll take this one, and the shotgun.

- Okay? - Yeah.

So now, today, you wanna...

You wanna come in, or you wanna...

- Are you very cold? - Yes, she is.

But she is gonna be wearing...

It looks like a button if you're not really...

Show it!

- Look at this. - That's the camera but

- it looks like a little button. - It looks like a button on a scarf.

We did it last night. You wouldn't believe what we were doing.

Let's see the back.

We just had the wire to go in here,

and the reason why I wanted to do it in a scarf is because

if the camera is high or too low, you just pull the scarf up or down.

Everything is hooked up to that camera, inside.

Okay, sounds cool.

Okay, it is 12:30, so...

they're gonna come out before 1:30.

Becky, look !

Oh, okay. We got a car, here.

This is a Honda... 417.

Okay, we got another one. We got someone coming out of the alleyway.

That's Mary Ann Constanza, right there.

They go through that light.

Shit!

They're way ahead of me, now.

Now, I think we lost her.

So I think I'm gonna turn around and go back and try to catch someone else.

A couple of people... 4DON

Oh, lot of peo... lot of women.

We need to go for this one.

There's four women.

Which is even better.

Now, they may not be raters,

but I have a good instinct, and I feel good about it.

Watch them, Lindsey. Keep an eye on 'em.

Can you see 'em?

Right there, at the corner.

They're going to Highlands.

They're parking at the meter.

These are raters. I can feel it.

You're okay, Lindsey?

Okay, we're gonna let them go in before us.

Hold on.

You gotta fix your scarf, Lindsey.

Can you see them behind me?

No, I can't see any one of them.

Maybe you can get a better shot if you move over.

No, I still can't see them.

Maybe you can get them later.

They were talking about editing one of the films.

That they should edit a certain part.

- That's all I could get. - Right.

I was lucky I got that much.

- Did we get the license plates? - Yes, we got that.

So... But we don't know who they are. It's the problem.

No, but you know what? They're so casual.

They were talking... loud. Like... normal!

And then, when they sarted talking about all of that, they got very quiet.

Lindsey, did you get a shot of 'em as you were coming out?

Yeah, I did. You want to take a look? Here, I'll show you.

Oh, good.

This is a good thing.

Only thing is all we're gonna know, is the name

- of the driver. - Right.

But then, they were all like: "They had to get back!"

I heard one of them wondering about what they're gonna see.

How'd you like to "birdie" that hole, huh?

You say the word, she's yours any time. I'll keep a running tab for you.

Nah!

What? She is not your type? Are you kidding me?

I was just going to a meeting, and I got a phone call.

It was the producer of the film saying:

"Guess what, we got an NC-17 from the MPAA."

Oh, sh... And I said: "Was it for that first scene?"

"No, it was because of the glimpse of Mary's pubic hair in the 2nd scene."

I was like: "What?"

Just a couple of months before, I had gone

to see a horror film

that was rated R.

It was a "funny" horror film.

And in the first ten minutes,

a woman gets her fake breast cut out.

And there's blood everywhere... and that's what made me so furious.

To wanna go in and fight for my pubic hair.

I was like:

"Don't tell me! I'm a mother. Why should that movie get an R,

"and why for seeing my pubic hair do we get an NC-17?

"When it was this... a beautiful moment

"between two people that had a lot to do with love?"

By the time we get to the scene they found offensive...

These people are committed to each other!

It's a real love story. It's not promoting promiscuity.

It's about the intimacy of that situation.

And the power of just a camera being on your face, is what I think, caused

the MPAA to give that scene an NC-17.

That because they couldn't reach inside themselves and realize

why it felt so real,

I think the next thing they saw was a glimpse of Mary's pubic hair,

and they got: "Oh! That must be it!"

And I don't feel anybody who saw

the uncut version of that film would've gotten home

and wanted to rape the next woman on the street.

Or feel like they were brain-damaged

from seeing a woman's pubic hair.

I just don't know what the big deal is.

Everybody sees everybody naked in the world.

We are not showing 'em something never seen before!

That's what it looks like?

I guess. What does yours look like?

- Not like that! - Yeah? Let me see.

All right.

They gave us an R on "Jersey Girl".

And it was based on a conversation

that Ben's character and Liv's character

have in a diner, about masturbation.

If it makes you feel any better, I mean, I do it, like, twice a day.

Good God!

What can I tell ya? I get bored easily...

You're gonna get carpal tunnel syndrome!

Don't get all judgmental with me. You're no slouch yourself!

For some reason, I guess it was because

watching the movie, the MPAA was sitting, and going:

"Liv Tyler masturbating on a regular basis? Arwen, the elf?

"Can't have it!" And they gave it an R.

And I actually spoke to Joan Graves,

who's the current head of the MPAA

Where are we going?

To your place. We're gonna have some sex!

And she was saying: "It would just make me uncomfortable thinking about

"my sixteen year old daughter sitting in a movie theater watching that scene."

To which I was like so...

"But, Joan. Do you think your 16 yo daughter

"hasn't masturbated already?

"Do you really think there's anything in that scene

"she hasn't already tried, when the lights go out at night

"or in the bathroom, the tub, or with the showerhead...?

"I'm telling you, I'm not teaching this broad anything new."

Well, first of all, all teenagers, because of the Internet, have seen

more hardocre pornography than their parents have seen.

They've seen the most hideous things you can find on the Internet.

Believe me! What else do you think they're doing?

Do you think they're doing their homework upstairs?

Come on, all kids have searched and gone deep

into web porn sites.

Who wouldn't, as a teenager?

Pretending that it's so damaging and harmful

to their growing psyches,

that we have to stamp something with a rating

that prevents them from seeing it, even with a fucking parent.

We take pools every year by the "Opinion Research Corporation".

2 600 people interviewed nation-wide.

And for the last 20 years, parents,

at about 70% or more, of children under 13,

find this rating system very useful to fairly useful

in helping them guide their children's viewing.

And they have these bullshit statistics that they bring up: "78% of parents

"say they find the ratings very useful."

And I've always felt that because they're the only game in town,

I mean, as compared to nothing at all, they probably are useful.

But it's like that Tide commercial we have.

The sock that's white, and then, the whiter one!

I've always wondered: "Look at their parents!

"There could be a real ratings board.

"Where if you are unhappy with it, there could be

"real transparency, real accountability. If people wouldn't like that more."

Sometimes, it seems quite variable.

You could swear to yourself that you've seen films that were rated R

that had things that were far more...

problematic than what you're asking for an R.

And the irony of it is if it's presented

in a sort of shoulder up sort of way,

it tends to be an R.

And if the camera is further away,

where the perspiration doesn't show, where...

... it's not like right in there with them in the bed...

But if you see a touch of hip...

It's that pelvic thrusting!

Oh, I think there is definitely like a thrust number.

You really could have people counting the amount...

- The amount of... - Of actual thrustings.

I've always been such a fan of the

European filmmakers in the way that they deal with sexuality,

which is real people, and real bodies.

And it's just a part of life

and a part of human nature.

And I find...

... in this country, we have kind of "desexualized" sex.

We've taken it out of...

the realm of a day-to-day function,

and... something that is...

... implicit in just being a human being.

Because we're so afraid of it!

Well, the Europeans have always found America very odd.

Sexual manners...

They've always found us strangely puritanical.

And I remember Stanley Kubrick's "Eyes Wide Shut".

In its R version,

they digitally superimposed

certain bodies or shadows

to cover offending body parts.

But it just seemed

so much ado about nothing.

Frankly, in 1970, you saw

probably more sexual explicitness in a lot of movies than you'd be seeing now.

You know, there's a movie that's been playing on TV quite a bit lately.

It's "Coming Home", the Hal Ashby movie.

And the most amazing scene in the movie is

Jon Voight going down on Jane Fonda.

I mean, here's a guy that's in a wheelchair,

who's getting this woman off.

And she finally experiences

what might have been her first orgasm ever.

I mean, we start to think

that it might be the first time she's ever had an orgasm.

And it does spend a lot of time.

I mean, it's a long scene.

This orgasm lasts a long time, okay?

It's like kind of amazing.

You know, when I see it, I'm kind of like:

"Wow! How did they get by with that in the seventies?"

So, I do think that it's a really good point.

That there is a...

A denial of female pleasure.

A denial of... A denial of pleasure, period!

Male pleasure too. I mean, you can't see...

You know, you can barely see anything of a male body,

on the screen.

So... I think that nobody gets to come, basically.

I think that it's what it is!

There was always a fear

that sex, in some ways,

would dissolve the social bonds.

Sex more than violence.

Un... Unleashed sex,

would take the society apart.

Of course, that focus varies,

now it's unleashed gay sex would take the society apart.

"But I'm a Cheerleader" was a movie about

gay kids who go to a homosexual rehabilitation camp.

It's a comedy, it's a teen movie...

It's all the things I thought kids would like.

And I really wanted teens to see it,

and I feel like the most important teens to see it are in high school.

In Wyoming or wherever.

You know... that are just feeling like they're the only ones.

You know... Especially these kids that are sent to these

homosexual rehabilitation camps. Those camps are very real.

So, I got a call from the ratings board,

and they said: "You got an NC-17."

And I was really angry,

and really devastated. And I didn't understand why.

Because there is no nudity in the sex scene, and they're fully clothed.

It was ridiculous. But, the really offensive thing...

At the time that I submitted it to the ratings board,

"American Pie" had just come out.

I had seen the trailer a million times

of Jason Biggs masturbating in an apple pie, in the trailer!

So, the ratings board then tells me that in order to get an R,

I have to cut one of my girls

masturbating over her underwear, fully clothed.

And you don't see anything.

Basically, you can tell she's masturbating.

Ratings board is populated by

parents, normal human beings, neither gods, nor fools,

who make errors of judgement from time to time.

What's really offensive about that

is for a rater to say:

"We're just gonna rate this film like an average american parent."

Who is that? I'm an american parent.

I'm a lesbian, I live in Los Angeles, I'm a filmmaker,

I have a daughter, I'm a parent. I pay taxes.

Is there anyone on the ratings board who is a parent like me?

I highly doubt it.

Were there any gays or lesbians on the board during your tenure?

Well, you know, to my knowledge...

There weren't any...

... that were

self-proclaimed homosexuals on the board while I was there. No.

You know, if it's the same gender sex,

they seem to often have a bigger problem

than they do if it's a man and a woman.

But, if you are of the majority, then, it's a lot easier

to get the good rating

and throw your movie in the theater.

This whole house is just my savior.

I make my living here, I have my best friend here...

I have all my peace here, and I feel safe.

And you live, you both right here?

- Yeah. - That's nice...

We both got divorced at the same time.

My son was five, her daughter was five.

And we just moved in together, we've been there ever since.

So I always call her daughter my daughter, 'cause I feel like she is.

I raised her when she was five, so...

When I was growing up, the word "lesbian" and "gay" was bad.

It was a sin, it was something you just didn't do.

I always seemed to be more attracted towards women, and...

... girls.

Yes, it was girls, then... 5 VXE

CHE

And then, one day, may aunt said she thought I was a lesbian.

And that just freaked me out.

And that was not gonna be acceptable. I was like: "Oh, my God!"

So, I met Ross a few months later,

and just felt I needed to get married

and do whatever everybody wanted me to do.

And after about 6 years of marriage,

I met a woman on a military base,

and just brought out feelings in me I had never felt in my life.

And, one day, I'm just like:

"How could something that makes me feel so good be wrong?"

And I was just telling Lindsey I love Cheryl

more than I could ever imagine loving anyone in my life.

She is everything to me. She is my best friend.

I just could never imagine being with anybody else.

And if someone told me: "You have to be with a guy. You can't do this."

Then I would rather just be alone than to...

... not have that complete fulfilment.

GNCH

Oh, my God, This one matches up. That one.

- Joan Graves? - Yeah. Joan Graves.

I felt that it's somewhat detrimental to have

a manager who holds hiring and firing power

to be sitting there in judgement

of people's rating decisions.

So, yeah, he could be very

kind of unyielding and intolerant

and really... tried to intimidate us

into sort of going along with what the majority point of view was.

Sometimes, people really inclined to try to pull rank

and that sort of thing is problematic.

How would they pull rank?

Well, just the attitude. In the attitudes.

You know, say:

"That's out of line

"with the way that film should be rated."

Sort of categorically,

you need to get with the group think.

If there was a tie, though, - which I think it could be

because sometimes, we had 8 people, so it could be 4-4 -

and then, the chairman of the board could really...

kind of make... Arbitrarily, he makes the decision!

And usually, when I was on the board, he was gonna make the decision for the

more restrictive rating, the more conservative rating.

- But, he voted? Didn't he... - Yes, yes!

So, he was one of the votes,

and there was no kind of

other method for any kind of tie-breaking.

It was just sort of...

He had the right to do what he wanted, in that case.

And frankly, he had the right to do what he wanted even.

'Cause I was amazed, in one case, that...

it'd been voted

like a five to three in favor of the R

and then, we found out that

the movie was being cut!

So I was like puzzled. I said: "I don't understand that!

"If it already got an R, why is this happening?"

So, one of the board members said: "Well,

"we don't object to cuts to make it a better R."

It's just two puppets in sexual positions.

The whole joke is that. What kids have done for years.

Take your GI Joe, and your Barbie and...

The first thing that came back to Paramount was:

"You can have the missionary, and her on top. That's it."

We were just like: "That's not a joke. That's nothing!

That's 2 positions. You can't make a scene out of it.

But we purposely left in stuff you don't even want in the scene.

'Cause you have to give 'em something to cut so they

feel like they pissed on it, somewhat.

So, we left the sex scene...

We put in basically every second of footage we cut.

Four minute like sex scene. It's just ridiculous.

It's not the way it should've been cut. It was bad.

Wasn't even good for the movie.

We ended up shooting extra shots

we didn't even want to put in there. But we did.

"If you push the line way back so maybe they'll only cut to here" kinda thing.

I also had heard on "A dirty shame", and I have no proof of this,

that there were doctors involved,

and that some of the kinkier terms like "felching" and stuff,

they explained to the MPAA what "Felching" meant.

Now, I would like to have heard that, because,

"felching", no one has ever done "felching".

"Felching" is when you...

fuck someone and suck your own cum out of the very asshole.

I know a lot of perverts,

and I don't know anyone that's done it. And I said that, at my appeal.

No, I didn't say what "Felching" was,

but they supposedly had been told.

And I was gonna say, if they'd come up with what they'd heard about it:

"No that's farting in the bathtub and biting the bubble."

Who can approve what this really is?

So, my contract said it had to be an R rating.

And I said: "Oh, come on! It's a non-explicit american comedy.

"It's a Tracy Ullman, for God's sake!

"This is not a real dirty movie."

So, I sent it. I was a little nervous, I got the call,

and they said: "NC-17." And I said:

"I'm kinda really surprised." The man answered:

"You are surprised?"

And I said: "What can I cut?"

And they said: "Honnestly, we stopped taking notes.

That's when my blood turned to ice, because that's what you fear the most.

When they say: "From overall, that's the reason, which means..."

And they said: "There is a thousand brush strokes in this,

"you can't cut ten."

And, I was very...

I think fair about sexuality. I was responsible.

I made safe sex. It might be perverted,

but it's safe: you can't get pregnant, or get AIDS, what's the matter?

I think, from what I read now,

in 8th grade, girls give blowjobs routinely.

If I was a parent, I hope they were "sploshing" instead of giving blowjobs.

"Sploshing" is the erotic urge to dump food in your private area.

I think you ought to hope your children

are doing perverted sex acts with food.

Now, right when "A dirty shame" was rated, about

a week or two before the Iraq pictures

had been released, from the prison,

nobody was in a great mood about making jokes about weird sexuality.

I think that had something to do with it. It could have been a weird one.

But I think what they'd said to me this time this rating was:

"Not only can't you make a movie where you'd show sex all over,

"you can't even talk about sex all through it."

That's new to me, it seems.

I've been running background checks

on the photo prints for possible raters.

And I don't think they are raters.

I think they're probably working advertising or anti-piracy.

Is the guard gone?

He's using their time to chat on the phone.

Oh, my gosh, there is extensions hanging on the wall.

- What? In his booth? - Are you serious, Becky?

- Yes! You see it? - No.

Okay, you see the phone hanging in the window?

- In his booth? - Yeah, look at the window.

- Okay. - Can you see the phone?

Right above, there is a list.

And it's got names of extensions.

I wonder if I can get it with my camera.

Look, the security guard's leaving. What are the chances of that?

Let's go, Lindsey.

While I'm filming, you watch for me. Make sure nobody's coming.

Check it out. Nobody is here.

- Becky, you got that? - Yes, but not enough.

There are all kinds of stuff, in there.

They have memos, and office extensions.

- But what was on the list? - Everybody's names and extensions.

But I don't know how good of a picture I got.

Hi, good morning. I'm trying to reach Joann Yatabe, and

and I keep getting her voicemail. Is she in a screening, right now?

What time do you think they'll be out?

9:30.

Okay, and they come out for a break? Thank you, bye bye.

It's like a puzzle. You just start with one piece,

and you gradually just slowly put it together

until you come up with the full picture.

- What time is it, now? - 17:39.

17:39? They must have a

a long movie that they're watching.

- Yeah. - Here's somebody.

She has a Jag... There she is!

- Yatabe? - Yeah.

Look at the plates, just to make sure.

I'm sure it's her. She's the only one who has a pink Jag.

I don't wanna get too close to her, but I don't wanna lose her, either.

I need to put on my safety belt.

- She turned. - ...

- Maybe. - This is weird.

Maybe she's driving in to see if we're following her.

Did she seem like she knew she is being followed?

No.

- We should get outta here. - Yeah, but I don't wanna lose her.

I just wanna make sure there's no other way out.

- There she is. - She picked someone up.

She's right there.

Okay, I'm gonna have to stop here.

They went into the "Chicken place".

Well, we're going in, to sit by them,

eat some little, to see what they're talking about.

- And get a shot? - And get a shot.

Hello?

Becky's camera isn't working. I've gotta get that shot.

Kirby, you almost got us caught.

- You serious? - Oh, my God!

- Did you see me go talk to 'em? - What happened?

Because they were going: "Look at that man!

"What's this weirdo? What is he doing? Is he filming us?"

I was like: "My God, what am I gonna do?"

So, I jumped out and go: "Do you know him?

And they're all: "No, do you?" I go: "No!"

And they go: "Only in LA you can find someone that weird."

Is that a gram?

New card. What do you think?

Oh, very nice.

Look at that!

Picked them up from the printer's, yesterday.

- Good coloring. - That's bone.

And the lettering is something called "Silian Rail".

It's very cool, Bateman. But that's nothing.

Look at this!

So, we finished the film, we presented it

and we had a call back that the board objected.

And they wanted to give it an NC-17

as they objected to the entire tone of the film.

We started to laugh, 'cause, you know, how do you change the tone of a movie?

And then... there was, you know...

The ratings board is not a monolith.

There are differing shades of opinion.

There was a lot of back and forth at the discussion.

And then, it came down to really a few things.

Chainsaw scene, which I thought would be an issue,

the axe murder, you know... That was fine.

It was basically just sex.

It was the three-way sex scene.

It was particularly the rear entry sex.

Any unusual forms of sex I think are a problem for the ratings board.

Why do you think they had a problem with these scenes?

I think maybe because porn is very clear.

You absolutely know where you are with porn.

It's a straight, you know...

graphic depiction of sex for a purpose.

And then, you know where you are with entertainment, because it's kind of...

escapist and romanticized.

It takes you into another dream world.

And then, art movies tend to

rub your face in things, they tend to more challenge you or disturb you.

The fact is that this whole controversy is whether or not you can

make a dozen more adult pictures a year...

I don't think many parents are gonna fret because their children

can't see a sex orgy on a screen.

What strikes you immediately about the MPAA,

and I'm sure I am like the 300th person to say this,

is how much more they seem to be concerned about sex

than they are about violence.

Whereas the movie rating systems in Europe

have the exact opposite view.

Much more open about sexual depiction,

much more restrictive about violent depiction than the MPAA.

If you see a movie like "Sin City",

which is R rated and...

it's just full of dismemberments, decapitations,

the most grisly kind of violence.

But that gets an R.

And yet, you see

a film like "The dreamers",

which is sex among three young people

and not even explicit hardcore sex.

And that still is rated NC-17!

The fact is it's not true.

Most pictures that get

an NC-17 rating, the adult rating, have to do with violence.

But it just seems backwards that... to show human sexuality

in pretty much any form...

... is getting to art territory.

While you can shoot as many bodies

as long as there is no blood.

And it's PG-13. I mean, what are we training our kids for?

You're not showing the result of what happens when you fire a gun.

So I think it should be flipped.

If you show violence without blood, it's like fantasy,

and the only people that can handle that, intellectually

are adults.

But if you show violence with blood, it should be a PG-13,

so that people can actually realize the result of what it actually does.

If I were to create a rating system, I'd put...

I wouldn't even put murder right at the top of the chief offences.

I'd put rape at the top of chief offences.

And assault against women. Because it's so

insanely overused and insulting.

How much it's overused in movies as a plot device:

a woman in peril. That, to me, is offensive.

That's shit cakes.

We studied 98 of the 100 top grossing films

from 1994, for this particular study on the ratings system.

And what we discovered was that

they aren't doing a very good job at discriminating for violence.

The film industry is engaged in producing a product

and for very fundamental reasons, violence sells.

Especially to their target demographic.

But... it's not coincidental that that target demographic

is also the most at risks for violence in american society.

You remember Columbine?

As soon as Columbine occured, Jack and the others

circled the wagons, and defended the industry.

And Jack said: "Nobody knows

"what the impact of

"media violence is."

And it's true.

Nobody knows, point by point,

what the relationship is between this act of violence

on the screen, and this act of violence in real life.

Nobody knows cause and effect.

But you can, over a period of time, get the judgements

of the people who deal with the kids

and others who commit violence.

And their judgement, from the first surgeon generals report on

has been almost unanimously

that it's a negative input.

So we think it's not too much to ask

of a group of people who have

embraced the responsability of informing

parents what's going on in films,

to inform themselves about what's going on in the research

regarding this connection.

I'd rather have

the person who went to medical school

tell me something about a medical problem.

This person who studied psychiatry

to tell me what the psychiatrists know about

the impact upon children

of violence, or sexuality or anything.

So, I do want to bring in expert opinion.

Do you want two or three bags?

- Three? - Okay.

It's like a motion sensor, right there.

- Do you want more? - No, that's good.

This usually is the fun thing.

Interesting, a current rating. Let me see...

This is from Macy's, okay?

What's this?

I don't know what it is. It's a kind of a summary.

Name of film. Oh, this is... Wow!

This is...

- This is a... is... - Is that what they write up?

Looks like it. It looks like a blank form, or something. Let's see.

Here we go. This is "Memoirs of a Geisha".

From this, it gets a PG-13. Sex and art nudity, okay.

"Chiyo peeks in on Hatsumoto

"having sex with boyfriend in her room.

"He's on top, gyrating around and stops when he spots Chiyo.

"Mrs. Nitta sticks her hand into Hatsumoto's robe

"and inserts her fingers into her vagina."?

- And that got a PG? - That got a PG-13!

"She removes her hand and shows her wet fingers to prove she's just had sex."

Oh, my God!

OK, and then, look we have "Get Rich or Die Tryin".

That's coming out, I think next week.

Who's making that?

This is R for strong violence, language, some sexuality and nudity.

Okay, sex and art nudity. "Marcus gets up from bed between two women.

"One woman is topless, breasts exposed.

"Inside prison shower, nude prisoners,

"penis and ass cheeks exposed."

- And they rated it what? - R.

- Look at that: language. - Wait...

"Fucks", 20+, "Motherfuckers", 20+.

So, what I don't understand is who's counted the "fucks"?

It's a substantial loss for society

when you think that there are people who can be censors of anything.

And the MPAA is one of the last vestiges

of a censorship system.

After you watched this,

you're gonna go get your pop-corn

out of the microwave, and talk about what I say.

You'll forget me by the end of this.

When we first started shooting "Gunner Palace",

in Baghdad,

the soldiers in the palace, all that they asked

was that I tell it like it is.

You know, "tell the people what our life is like".

Uncensored, unfiltered.

This is their day-to-day, this is their life.

After we finished editing "Gunner Palace",

we submitted it for a rating from the MPAA.

And I think about 6 weeks later, the rating came back and it was an R.

It was for language, and drug use.

I'm gonna fuck those motherfuckers up, man.

That motherfucker almost hit me.

These are soldiers in a war zone! What do you expect?

They're gonna say: "Oh, darn! A mortar almost landed on me!"?

This is not fiction. This is reality.

These are real soldiers. They're living in a war zone.

The language is not gratuitous.

We're not instructing people to bleed off.

These obscenities, this is just their life.

And it's also not scripted.

And Joan Graves' take on this was: "Rules are rules.

"There's no way you're gonna get a PG-13.

"Gentlemen, you're simply... You know... You're wasting our time."

She also pointed out that

if they did rate a film

like ours PG-13,

that they'd hear from pressure groups.

They would start getting calls, letters...

And I found this really revealing.

It didn't seem so much that

it's about...

representing the majority opinion of America.

It seems more about...

kind of bowing to pressure.

The worst thing that could happen...

Well, if you had diarrhoea right now,

that would probably suck pretty fucking bad.

This is the language that's spoken.

Yeah, it's horrible.

Yes, we may not agree with it. We might even be disgusted by it.

But, when the Americans liberated Buchenwald,

and they saw these images, and these heaps of people...

Is that PG, is that PG-13, is that R?

People need to see that.

When the little girl's running down the road,

in South Vietnam,

burnt by napalm, and she's naked...

Is that PG? Is that PG-13?

Is that R?

You can't rate reality.

And if you can't deal with that, then, don't send people to war.

The military and the film studios

have colluded for more than 50 years.

Anytime filmmakers want military assets,

- ships, or tanks, or planes -

they have to give the Pentagon five copies of their script.

And if there's anything negative in the script,

the Pentagon wants them to take it out.

And so, they negotiate, and take out...

any war crimes,

or foul language, or drinking.

Anything that would make the military look bad.

And then, after the agreement is made,

the military send a minder on to the set when the film is being shot

to make sure it's shot the way they agreed.

And then, once the film is completed,

it has to be shown to the Pentagon,

admirals and generals before it's shown to the public.

Dozens of films haven't been made

because they couldn't get military assistance.

So, people have no idea what they're not seeing.

Jack Valenti knew what was going on.

He was complicit, he was part of it.

It's just a subtle form of brainwashing.

I believe that 50 years of the constant drumbeat of

"military's good", "american soldiers are heroic and valiant",

I think has made

the american people more war-like over the last 50 years.

I think we need to step back for a second and wonder

sort of what all this means that 2 or 3 companies

completely control the information

in our country.

And when we think about censorship,

what's being censored are scenes in movies,

which mean nothing to these people.

And of course, what's not being regulated

is the ways in which these corporations control the flow of information.

In the recording industry, the film industry, TV industry, radio,

press, everything.

And by the time it's completed,

we have three, maybe... maybe two

companies that essentially own access to our culture.

It'll be impossible to break up.

Because the political power of those companies

will be so massive,

and they'll be willing to spend extraordinary amounts to protect

their cartel position,

that no government'll be strong enough to stand up to 'em.

I want to pay particular gratitude

to the members of Congress who're here today.

It pleases me greately that you've come

and it pleases me even more

that you've come from both sides of the aisle.

I was struck with Ted Stevens, I'd never heard that before.

But I'd like to claim that Ted when he said he...

has friends on both sides of the aisle, but he doesn't know about an aisle.

I... I like that.

There is no doubt there is a problem with piracy.

But we've got to make sure that we don't spray DDT to kill a gnat.

And I think it's happening.

We're not thinking about the cultural environmental consequences

from this extraordinary war.

A war which Jack Valenti calls his own "terrorist war",

against the "pirates".

Terrorist war? Who are the terrorists, here? Our children!

We're talking about them as terrorists!

The people who... who are...

pirates, at least in the american imaginary, are like 17 year-old boys,

who are clever enough to figure out a way to do it.

They're also Hollywood's best customers.

Still! So, even though they're pirating information,

they're still going to a whole lot of movies,

buying a whole lot of DVDs, soundtracks...

So,

a part of me doesn't feel tremendously sorry for huge corporations

that make ridiculous profits, maybe losing a little bit of profits

to this sort of network that actually ultimately may end up helping 'em.

'Cause it just creates this sort of constant exchange

about their movies that didn't exist before.

The MPAA has a very powerful hold on the culture

and the licensing system, that they have,

the appeals board, the ratings, it's just part of it!

I mean, they are a... group

that ought to have its power withered down.

You are dealing with a very powerful

cultural censorship group,

that doesn't wanna be disempowered.

And if you made those names public, you might disempower them.

Is there any other review group,

that you can think of, in this country,

in any industry, besides the CIA

that is secret, that operates in secrecy?

No! No...

If you're gonna take on that type of a public policy role,

for american culture,

then, I don't think that you should be hiding

in a veil of secrecy.

I know the MPAA said they're afraid that

these people would be under pressure.

But there are many people that

have important judgements about things,

that are under pressure, influence.

Judges or prosecutors, school officials.

But they all operate in the public sphere,

and I think these people should as well.

Hi, my name is Becky and I'm calling to confirm some names with you.

'cause we're gonna be sending a package off to the ratings department.

Yeah, I have Joan, Mary Ann, Cheryl

Joann, Anthony

Mary, Scott

Alex, Howard, Barry, Mathew

Arleen, John and Dannielle.

Is there anyone I'm missing?

Kori Jones?

Okay, great. Thank you so much. Bye bye.

She was so sweet she went to get the list to make sure I had everybody.

Ready, Lindsey?

Wait, she's getting in the 405.

She's going at least 90!

- This one, get him! - I got him!

- He doesn't look happy. - No, he doesn't!

Got a rater!

He looked right at us.

Here we go, Arleen.

She's attractive.

Here he is. Get the best shot, Eddie!

Time to go!

She's walking with the white... Right there!

She looks different in person than in her car.

We have two raters, here.

Here he is. Right there, in front of us.

- Yoga class? - He did?

Yes! Okay, here he comes.

He looks like George Lucas.

Oh, it's Howard! We finally get to see him!

He got a mustache, and a beard

He's cute!

Hi, is this the MPAA?

Could I have the film ratings department?

Yes, yes. I'd like to submit my film for a rating.

It's a documentary. It's about the film business.

This is for the ratings board.

- Is it gonna go up right now? - Yes.

- OK, what's your name? - George.

George, OK, right. Thanks a lot.

How are you feeling?

It's strange, because you're so small, and this organisation is so big.

You are sort of... at the mercy of fate, I guess.

Hello? Hi, how you doing?

That's great. Do you mind if I just ask you...

Would you mind if we record this conversation?

Okay, good, fine. Thank you very much.

So, was everybody able to see the film?

Yeah. I have a rating for you. It's NC-17

for some graphic sexual content.

Okay, so, it's NC-17,

- for graphic sexual content. - "Some" graphic sexual content.

For "some" graphic sexual content. Okay...

Now, because I'm very interested

in this being as accurate as possible,

were there any glaring inaccuracies in it

that you might let me know about? Or...

You know, I'm not gonna comment on the film

in any other aspect than the rating aspect of it.

- Hi. - Hi, how you doing?

You're not taping this conversation, are you?

No, I'm not taping the conversation.

- Are you a parent? - I am a parent.

Do you feel there is material in your film

you wouldn't want your children to see?

It's really all depending on the child,

and the context in which they see it, actually.

I don't think you'd be a very good rater!

You don't think I'm gonna be a good rater myself?

No.

- Do you ever do interviews at all? - No.

But why... I don't understand why the names are anonymous, because...

Their names are kept secret so they can come to work every day

and not feel pressure.

But it seems like the raters you're trying to protect from influence

actually are in direct contact with the people who can influence them.

The senior raters, especially.

They're strong people, and I trust them.

Why can't you have an entire board of those kind of people

and not worry about it, and have it public?

Now that the public will know their names,

will the same raters continue to rate the films?

- I haven't thought about that. - Well, let me ask you this:

- What was the vote of the raters? - We don't disclose that.

Can you tell me if it was close, or not close, anything like that?

It wasn't close.

Could you send out the notes that people take

or whatever ratings that the individuals...

- ... raters do? - No.

Okay. And how many people saw it?

We don't give out that information.

And if I re-submit to try to get an R rating,

and I take out some footage,

how do I know that I won't take out something I didn't need to take out?

I guess you can't know, but if less graphic material is there,

we could help you.

Okay. So, I formally accept the NC-17

and I think I should probably at this point move to the appeal stage.

In your opinion and your experience,

do you think I have a chance to overturn the appeal?

No, I don't think so. But you are welcome to try.

I said: "OK, we're gonna do the appeal." Before I call,

we ask how it works, and they explained the rules

and a woman, who's not the head woman said:

"We serve cookies. Please do not get crumbs on the floor."

Of course, when we lost, I wanted to crush

the crumbs into the rug. But I didn't.

But it's a weird situation, 'cause they don't let you just speak.

They say to you you can not stand up there, and say:

"You know what, in "Basic Instinct",

"Sharon Stone opened her legs, we saw everything, and you gave it an R.

"Never mind, just pubic hair."

And then... It's not like

a legal proceeding where you can quote precedent.

They won't allow you to do that.

That's what I told them: "What other guidelines do I have?"

"I've seen every... I go to the movies all the time,

"with audiences, in Baltimore. Which is real America."

And I think I know, I thought I know

what is allowed in an R rated movie.

I've seen some of these teen comedies,

which I'm fine with, but are really rude!

And what anti-women in my movies, I think?

So, if you can not use your own history with the MPAA,

what can... What are the guidelines?

I only can see everything that comes out and see what you've rated it recently.

And then, there was a quick... tallying of the votes

which... I don't know quite how they tallied the votes.

But then, they said: "You did a great job.

"But we're sorry to say you lost.

"But you just lost by a margin."

I was so devastated, because I had bought in to

the fact that this was a system whereby I could win.

It's kinda like the pat on the back. You know: "Nice try."

And suddendly, the curtain opens, an assistant comes in, and she says:

"It's nine to three."

You could kind of hear the sense of relief,

you know, the sigh of relief from Joan Graves, like...

And the assistant was like: "It's 9 to 3. It's overturned."

And I think what's interesting about our case,

was that it was really a shock to her.

It was like: "Number one, how dare you come in and challenge it?

"And number two, how dare you win?"

Is this suicide doing this? I don't know, because

there is only one. I gotta go back to 'em, next time.

Are you concerned that if they see you in the film,

that they'll look differently at your next film?

Yeah, I don't know...

I don't know what commenting on the very board

that has the power to give you a rating to get out of the culture

is gonna do...

How stringent they'll be on my next film.

I guess I would hope... not!

Hello, this is Kirby.

I want to make sure you're aware of the things that we don't allow.

First, you can't compare scenes in your film

to similar scenes in other films.

Well, let me ask you about that:

can I compare films, as a whole, then?

Compare my film to another film?

No.

Referring to any other film is never allowed.

Can I go ahead and do that? Will anything happen?

I will cut you off.

- You're gonna cut me off? - Yes, I will.

To restrict me in that way is sort of...

I mean, you are part of the MPAA.

They are the people that I'm... It's their organisation that I'm...

sort of up against, here...

And then, you're restricting my opportunity to speak...

It's like I'm going kind of into a stat situation here, in a way.

At least... I'm actually very surprised to hear that I...

couldn't actually... I could actually get cut off!

- I can't even make my point... - It's not like we forbade you to speak,

... but every system has its rules, and you have to follow them.

But, do I like... Do I introduce myself individually to each person,

and they say: "Hi, I'm such or such, from such..."?

No, I'm afraid we don't do that.

Can I have a list of the people that

that are there, so I know who those people are, who made the decision?

No. Absolutely not!

I can't even have a list of the people who made a decision about my film?

No, you don't need to know those names.

Wait a minute... That doesn't seem right, because...

I mean, this is not a secret board.

The ratings board is secret, but this isn't secret.

So why can't I, at least, have a list of those names?

That doesn't... That seems like a sort of a...

a Star Chamber, or something.

They're gone!

Hello?

- Hello? Where'd you go? - I'm here!

- We were just looking at the rules. - I see...

But, nonetheless... Why can't I have that list of those names?

Kirby, we choose not to make those names public.

But it's not a secret board, is it?

I'm not going to tell you their names!

From the very beginning, when we got our NC-17 rating,

there was an undue emphasis put on the fact

that it was not to do with the homosexual content.

And that was repeated, and it made me actually come to understand

that it probably was to do with that.

Fuck, Vince!

We are buddies, we are pals, we are partners, we are a duo!

We love each other, but we don't... fuck!

The lady who was there from the MPAA told me:

"You're so close. If only you could make that scene a bit fuzzier..."

Then, she stopped and said:

"But I'm not an artist, I don't know how you compose that."

And I said: "No, that's brilliant, what you are saying! Keep going!

"Would you like to edit my next film? You're a visionnary!"

This is Denis, from "Screen International".

I can only say I gave it our best shot. We really did!

And, what they were asking us to do...

at this point, would've been completely unacceptable.

So, the film'll go out as it was originally intended.

There is nothing to do. You can't re-appeal.

We re-submitted it in two different versions

and this was the final stage.

In this particular case, it means that people won't be able to see the film...

Theatrically, in many provinces of the country.

Yes, it was very surprising, I must say.

Our FUM today said there were members of the clergy in the room.

They are specifically from two denominations.

Episcopalian and Catholic.

And there is no rotating basis.

It's always going to be Episcopalian and Catholic.

They do not vote, but they are part of the secret discussion

which you are not previewed to.

Who is the person who's usually there from CARA?

It is usually Joan Graves.

But I mean a different person the MPAA actually... runs.

Usually, one of their attorneys.

I see. Do you know their names?

I probably shouldn't... divulge.

Even the chair... That's also secret?

Well, yes. It's probably better if we don't mention names.

These two members of the clergy are there too, right?

- As observers. - Do they ever ask any question?

- No. - No?

They are not permitted, according to the rules.

So they actually are totally mum, they don't speak at all.

So, what do they do, when they're there?

They behave the same way as all of us.

They watch the movie, possibly participate in discussion, they vote.

- They do cast a vote? - Yes!

And there always has been clergy, since the time that you've been there?

What did you think about that?

Since they were only observers, I really didn't give it a second thought.

What is this kind of rationnal... behind having clergy on the board?

I have no idea. I guess they feel maybe they're...

they have a horse in the race, and they should be titled to an opinion.

But I don't know, obviously.

Why are they there?

Frankly, I really haven't thought about that, because I don't

consider them part of the process.

They are just there so... it's sort of the...

... part of the wallpaper.

I'm already divulging a lot here that I probably shouldn't be divulging.

At some point, I think I have to draw a line, and be careful.

This is something that we need you to look into.

This is a really important thing we found out.

We found out that there are two members of the clergy

on the appeals board.

A catholic priest and episcopalian priest.

And this is a backroom deal, and they don't tell anybody about this.

- Is that something you can do? - Absolutely. I'm just curious.

How'd you go about doing that, though?

One, they would be associated with a church.

- OK. - If I run their names,

and if they are ministers, the church is gonna come out.

- Oh, I see. Cool! - OK.

I have been asked by the National Council of Churches

to represent them, protestants.

And join forces if you will with the Catholic office,

and they have representatives in common.

And our role,

is to...

... attend the hearings for appeals.

The relationship between church groups and censorship

is apparent, palpable. It always has been.

Whether be Lenny Bruce, or whether be Comstock...

Valenti, wisely I think, felt

that this should be a transparent process.

But it couldn't be broadcast to the public.

So, he reached the conclusion that

religious representatives in the room...

That would at least indicate to the religious bodies,

and to the public, if they ask

that this is an above board process.

There is a whole moralistic tone to the room.

These are moral censors.

These are people who're making judgements

about other people's morality.

There aren't that many places in the US where you get that.

How is the vote taken?

It's...

What d'you mean, "how is it taken"?

How are the votes cast in the appeal?

Ask Joan that.

Everybody knows who comes to the meetings.

But I don't think that's a question I should answer.

What is your relationship like with Joan Graves?

We're friends, and...

I respect her film knowledge,

and I respect the tough job that she has.

She has the delicate role of trying

to make the filmmaker realize...

"Make your picture, make it work!

"But realize that if you go down this road too far,

"you're cutting off a certain audience. And that's your choice."

We don't want to restrict the film artist.

We want to give the artists the freedom

to make the films they want to make.

But we do not want to make it totally free.

December 21st, 2005, was the day of my appeal.

No cameras or press were permitted inside the building.

And there was no written record of the proceedings.

The chair was Greg Goeckner, the attorney for the MPAA.

Everyone was given a badge, with only a number on it.

My number was twenty-two.

After introducing myself,

I asked for the names of the people on the appeals board.

The chair refused my request.

I then asked for the name of the member of clergy present.

That name was also refused.

When I turned to the board and asked if anyone of them'd identify themselves,

there was complete silence.

The chair suggested that if I had a problem with the system,

I should send a letter to the MPAA.

I countered that it was the basic right of any appellant

to know the people deciding his appeal.

A board member yelled out that I was confused about the rules.

Another shouted that I was wasting their time.

The NC-17 rating was upheld by a ten to zero vote.

I later learned the MPAA was

so afraid of exposing the names of the appeals board members

that Joan Graves made a special arrangement for them

to meet first, and then, she transported them all

in and out of the building, in a black van, with tinted windows.

But what they didn't know is that 3 months earlier,

on the date of another appeal,

Becky was outside of that same building.

Okay, Lindsey.

4 VAP 038

Yeah, this is really good.

2 CA 619

I dunno what's gonna be on my tombstone, Harry, but I'd like to write it,

and say that the modest legacy

Jack Valenti left the movie industry was:

"He freed the screen from all artificial barrier."