Ratings & the Code

Any modern filmgoer is familiar with the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) film ratings. Designed not so much to censor filmmakers, but rather to alert viewers to content that might be inappropriate, ratings are simply a tool to help audiences find their films. When we see a G, PG, PG-13, R, or NC-17 rating on a film, we get some general guidance about what we're likely to encounter if we watch it.

There are distinct drawbacks to having a single letter code which lumps all problematic content into one designation based primarily on the expected age of the appropriate audience. (Witness The Kings' Speech which received an R for its strong language, though was otherwise as benign as most PG movies, whereas much more jarring, violent and explicit movies are routinely stamped with PG-13). Some have attempted "better" systems, notably Kids In Mind with a scale from 1-10 in three separate content categories (nudity/sex, violence, and profanity). But, ultimately, love them or hate them, MPAA  ratings are dominant and firmly entrenched in our viewing experience and our self-selection of titles.

But it wasn't always that way. Take a walk down memory lane with me. . .

When film was in its infancy, especially before the turn of the century, it might be thought of as somewhat akin to the early, 1990s era, internet. What got filmed in those early years was pretty much a function of whatever anyone who knew what they were doing was able to get filmed. If you knew how to do it, then you did what you wanted.  What got shown and seen was some subset of the above. And what can still be found preserved today is some smaller slice still -- an odd eclectic mix of stuff. Any parent who thinks that because a movie is very old, it ought to be safe for kids is heartily mistaken. Some of the earliest things ever filmed feature full nudity. Many early Silents have disturbing themes, are horror films, or feature themes that exploit the seediest side of humanity: cruelty, illegal activity and shock value. For parents trying to pluck out good viewing experiences for their families, the earliest period of film is one of the most difficult to navigate.

To understand why this was, it is important to think about not just how film was made, but how it was viewed way back then. Before the dominance of powerful studios that created just a few channels to major commercial release, there were tons of small, independent movie companies. The industry was comparatively unregulated and the audience was small and amorphous, existing in discrete little pockets around the country. People could watch films at Nickelodians, at special temporary traveling projection booths, or in small theaters. There were not large-scale movie houses as we know them today, to which big audiences are drawn for mainstream entertainment. At the turn of the century, the film audience was something more akin to what might be found at todays coffee houses, tattoo parlors or circuses. Odd and eclectic indeed.

The 1910s, however, was a huge decade of change and consolidation in the movies. Big budget films were starting to get made. Larger production companies were being formed. The locus of the industry was moving from New York to Hollywood. By the mid-1910s, larger movie palaces were being built and guilds of various film trades starting to organize. Very quickly the movies had become big business and were getting big attention from the public and the government. And what people saw when they went to the movies -- now that the mainstream public had started to pay attention -- did not always go over well. By the time the 19teens melted into the 1920s, perceptions of wild raucous behavior of the stars and disapproval of immoral behavior portrayed in films began to catch up with the movie industry. Theater owners as well as state and local governments began to get involved in the "morality question" and began to censure or regulate what they would allow to be shown. This small-scale/local censorship was the first step on the path that led to today's ratings.

In 1922, in response to public fallout and perception of immorality in Hollywood, especially in the wake of the Fatty Arbuckle scandal, the Motion Picture Producers and Distributers of America (MPPDA), the forerunner of today's MPAA, was founded. They got a man named William Hays -- who was like the Elliot Ness of the film industry -- on board to help Hollywood self-regulate. His job was to clean up  Hollywood from the inside out and try to get state and local governments to lay off banning specific pictures.

By 1929, Hays and the association had developed guidelines that were meant to establish good taste and eliminate certain categories of immoral content. Pointed profanity, mention of drugs, the depiction of licentious or suggestive nudity and a host of other categories were banned outright. Special care was to be taken with respect to the flag, international relations, arson, firearms, smuggling, murder, a woman's virtue, and many many other categories.

It is important to note that these attempts to standardize what could be shown or made reference to, were not government censorship. The MPAA was a voluntarily-joined body and its members subjected themselves to its standards. Obviously, the system of opt-in regulation might not have been as powerful had most movies still been made by small independent producers with no wish to make large scale commercial film. But now, because most film was mainstream and commercially focused, the MPAA had great potential power. In point of fact, due its ubiquitous reach, ultimately the production code worked enough like censorship that there may have been little real difference between its proscriptions and government action.

In its first five years of being, however, the Code was suggested but not enforced. It was not until 1934, that movies were required to comply with the standards of morality as addressed in the Code if they wanted the MPAA stamp of approval on their film. And they definitely wanted that stamp of approval if they wanted their film seen broadly. So compliance with the Code became the order of the day for Hollywood movie makers.

Although the "censorship" of films during this era is often criticized, it had several wonderful effects. The first is a great one for families. Almost any film made between 1934 and 1954 or so is going to be basically palatable for general viewing! Of course, there will be films you will not want your kids to see for a whole host of reasons, but you can put almost any film of this period in the player and watch with a fair amount of certainty that body parts, blood, profanity and sex aren't going to start flying across the screen without reason. Its a great feeling.

The second, almost cooler, result of the Code is that it required directors to be smarter and more subtle than they had heretofore needed to be. Films still carry the full range of content - it just needed to be done with more innuendo and style. This makes for wonderfully intelligent handling of delicate themes. And, again, as a parent, this has the added benefit that when sensitive topics are handled with innuendo, those who are ready to see the innuendo see it, and those who are not, miss it entirely. Thus, everyone can get something out of a movie, but those who are most mature might get more.

By the late 1950s, with the advent of TV as a competing medium as well as the changing cultural acceptance of previously taboo subjects, the Code ceased to be enforced. Some films blatantly thwarted the Code and were released without MPAA approval (notably, Some Like it Hot in 1959) and did well at the box office anyway.

And, thus, Hollywood entered another period of laissez faire.  Films made between about 1954 (when the Code lost its force) and 1968 (when the ratings system was developed) are tricky waters for parents to navigate (just as the pre-1934 era is), and may require a bit more homework to decide what is suitable given your family's values.  Although most films are still probably very wholesome by today's standards, sexuality, violence, and language are all beginning to creep in to mainstream film.

In an obvious response to this murky uncharted territory. which made it hard for consumers to select appropriate films to watch, the MPAA developed a ratings system in 1968. It differed from the earlier "Code" in that it was not a scheme for telling studios what they could or couldn't show, but one for advising the viewer about problematic content they might encounter and for what audience a given film was intended.

The first ratings categories featured "G" for general audiences. I have to pause here and think about what that "G" really meant, in context. As conceived, these were not intended to be movies for children, but rather, ones that didn't have any particular content about which a warning was warranted. It was probably assumed that many/most films would continue to be made for "general audiences." How different things are today!  Under this early scheme, an "M" rating was designated for those films intended for mature audiences. And there were also "R" and "X" ratings, the rough equivalents of today's "R" (restricted) and "NC-17" films.  The "M" label was quickly renamed "PG" over confusion about whether "R" or "M" was the rating designated for films with more intense content. "G" and "PG", of course, persist to today, but it is remarkable that at their inception, they meant something quite distinct from what has come to pass.

In 1984, the intense graphic violence that was being depicted in a variety of movies intended for young teens (mostly huge blockbusters made by Steven Spielberg) prompted the addition of a new rating: PG-13. While it certainly seems like an intelligent move, as it made sense not to try and group all children from age 6 to 17 as if they have the same tolerances, it came with its own problems. The fallout is that it further entrenched us in a system based on appropriateness due to age, and a ratcheting up of intense content. I believe this move ultimately cemented the coffin of the "general audience," as filmmakers have incentive to up their objectionable content to court a particular rating (usually PG-13 or R) in order to get their films seen. Because of this, we rarely see a G rating on something other than a film for small children/family viewing. Similarly, while PG used to be the rating that meant a film was for "mature," it is now the label we give to most kids' movies. Like it or not, we have morphed into a system where violence, language or suggestive content is almost necessary to ensure a wide audience!

I do find it sad that there is no longer such a thing as a general audience of the kind that would have enjoyed Casablanca, Bringing Up Baby, or It Happened One Night: movies that are wholly intelligent, excellent and non-objectionable.  For these reasons, I truly do "miss" the 1930s and 40s, when all movies were, in a sense, G-rated, but very much intended to be seen by everyone.


Brief timeline of movie ratings:
<1922 - local governments attempted to control what was seen, but no standardized controls in place.
1922 - forerunner of the MPAA was formed, with William Hays as its President
1929 - film standards (often referred to as censorship) were devised by Hays
1934 - the Hays Code began to be enforced, through the certificate of approval process
1954 - the Hays Code stopped being widely enforced
1968 - an MPAA ratings system was devised and implemented
1984 - PG-13 rating was added