7.5/10
25,736
108 user 131 critic

This Film Is Not Yet Rated (2006)

NC-17 | | Documentary | 1 September 2006 (UK)
Kirby Dick's exposé about the American movie ratings board.

Director:

3 wins & 3 nominations. See more awards »

Videos

Photos

Edit

Cast

Cast overview, first billed only:
...
Herself - Director of 'Boys Don't Cry'
Jon Lewis ...
Himself - Author of 'Hollywood v. Hardcore'
...
Himself - Film Critic at 'Newsweek'
Martin Garbus ...
Himself - First Amendment Attorney and Filmmakers Representative at Appeals
...
Himself - Director of 'The Cooler'
Paul Dergarabedian ...
Himself - Box Office Analyst
...
Himself - Director of 'Clerks' and 'Jersey Girl'
...
Himself - Director of 'A Dirty Shame'
...
Himself - Producer of 'South Park' and 'Team America'
Richard Heffner ...
Himself - Former Rating Board Chairman
...
Himself - Co-Founder of October Films
Joel Federman ...
Himself - Author of 'Media Ratings'
...
Himself - Filmmaker and Interviewer
...
Himself - Private Investigator (as Jay)
Paul Huebl ...
Himself - Private Investigator (as Paul)
Edit

Storyline

In a rare and refreshing reversal of roles, filmmakers put the powerful Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA for short) under the microscope for inspection in Academy Award-nominated director Kirby Dick's incisive look at stateside cinema's most notorious non-censoring censors. Compelled by the staggering amount of power that the MPAA ratings board wields, the filmmaker seeks out the true identities of the anonymous elite who control what films make it to the multiplex. He even goes so far as to hire a private investigator to stake out MPAA headquarters and expose Hollywood's best-kept secret. Along the way, Dick speaks with numerous filmmakers whose careers have been affected by the seemingly random and sexual-content obsessed judgments of the MPAA, including John Waters, Mary Harron, Darren Aronofsky, Kevin Smith, Matt Stone, and Atom Egoyan. Written by Anonymous

Plot Summary | Plot Synopsis

Taglines:

censorship, uncensored.

Genres:

Documentary

Motion Picture Rating (MPAA)

Rated NC-17 for some graphic sexual content | See all certifications »

Parents Guide:

 »
Edit

Details

Country:

|

Language:

Release Date:

1 September 2006 (UK)  »

Also Known As:

Afti i tainia einai akatallili  »

Filming Locations:

 »

Box Office

Opening Weekend:

$37,785 (USA) (1 September 2006)

Gross:

$302,179 (USA) (15 December 2006)
 »

Company Credits

Show detailed on  »

Technical Specs

Runtime:

Sound Mix:

Color:

Aspect Ratio:

1.85 : 1
See  »
Edit

Did You Know?

Trivia

Michael Cuesta, Gina Prince-Bythewood and Terilyn A. Shropshire were also interviewed for this film. Their footage is featured as supplemental material on the DVD. See more »

Quotes

Joan Graves: We don't give out that information.
See more »

Crazy Credits

The producers wish to thank "everyone at the IFC Center," "all the filmmakers with the balls to be in this film". See more »

Connections

References The Mummy (1999) See more »

Soundtracks

Neal's Mood
Written by Tom Noble
Performed by Tom Noble and Neal Sugarman
Courtesy of Tom Noble
See more »

Frequently Asked Questions

This FAQ is empty. Add the first question.

User Reviews

 
perhaps not the 'best', but surely my favorite documentary of the year thus far
2 September 2006 | by (United States) – See all my reviews

Kirby Dick is a filmmaker I wasn't aware of before This Film is Noy Yet Rated, but now he is assuredly on my radar, if only for the determination in pulling off his main idea. Like Super Size Me, this documentary has a near-gimmick to it; Dick hires a private investigator in order to track down the anonymous "parents" who decide why a movie will be rated R over PG-13, and NC-17 instead of R. This even leads- more intriguingly- into the more deceptive group of appellant board members of the MPAA. So on the one hand the filmmaker has this extremely entertaining, guerrilla-style aspect to his film, with a hand-held camera in one moment in a fast-food place that draws attention to him, and detectives who will go to any length to get results. On the other hand he gets great interviews and clips and history about the film industry in the US and the near fascist style of the MPAA in relation to the several (corporite) studios.

As a film buff this film already had my interest long before I saw it. For too long the topic of film ratings have both infuriated and fascinated me. Much of what ends up going on with filmmakers's battles with the MPAA to get their R (and indeed the difference between millions of dollars in grosses) instead of an NC-17 is staggering. That Kirby Dick get such insight out of the insiders (two of which former MPAA people, and two who kept anonymous), filmmakers, business people, and other types within the industry, is a good help to add to the basic argument that there is some inherent problems with the current ratings system in the country. This is accentuated in comparisons between NC-17 and R rated sex scenes from other movies, and clips from films that received the NC-17- or close to it- and the inanities and problems filmmakers have to get their whole vision against people who, of course, are not that creative. There are issues of gay sex in movies, how violence is vs. sex in allowance in ratings, and in the end how big business (and religion) are behind the scenes if not pulling strings then giving complete influence.

All of this as a documentary ends up being pulled fantastically off, as it does at the core what a documentary mostly should- stir up conversation about the topic(s), and at the same time still being entertained to an extent. And Kirby Dick even has a slight Michael Moore tinge to him as he goes full-on after his subjects; one of which reminded me of Moore's own confrontation with Charleton Heston, as Dick puts himself in split screen with animated caricatures of his callers. But Dick also is smart enough to put such subject matter with good doses of humor. I loved the little animated explanation as to what each rating means (including dead orphan and Almodovar jokes), and as he revealed with a near relish the full facts on every member (most shockingly the appellate members). Even if you just have a casual interest in movies it should be worth your while, and especially if you're a parent- and try not to let the NC-17 rating deter you as it's in part just in spite of the mirror put up to the ratings board itself- it's especially prudent to see. It's got both tongue-in-cheek and dead-serious aspirations, and all the while making Jack Valenti look worse and worse. It's biased, to be sure, but for the right reasons.


88 of 97 people found this review helpful.  Was this review helpful to you?

Contribute to This Page