Wednesday, June 23, 2004

Moore Loses Ratings Fight

So "Farenheit 9/11" keeps its "R" rating. I don't really know why Moore and his distribution cronies are so fussed about it. Consider the following:

For years, Hollywood appears to have gone out of its way to produce graphically violent, sexual, amoral, and even down-right evil films and market them to the youngest audiences they can legally target. In point of fact, most films that garner the "R" seem to wear it as a badge of honor, if my unscientific poll of local theaters is any indication. In any given week, I can drive by the several cinemas in my local area and find that no fewer than 75% of the screens are showing "R" rated garbage.

The disturbing part of this is the excited chatter among the younger set detailing exactly how many of these shows they plan to see, some of them multiple times. Me, I take my kids to see Harry Potter and cover their eyes (and even their ears at times) during the scarier parts.

The truth is, most youth today are already too jaded to let a little thing like an "R" rating stop them from seeing any film if they really want to. They'll finagle Mom and Dad somehow, or pass themselves off as being old enough. Have you ever seen a theater check IDs for "R" films? Me, either.

Tom Ortenberg, president of Lions Gate Films states that it's perfectly acceptable for 15 and 16 year-olds to see films about war (and, of course, graphic portrayals of the horrors of same) since they one day may be asked to fight one for us. The problem is, Moore's slant is to make war so terrifying, or our leadership so hypocritical, that no one, eventually, will accept a call to serve. Follow that through to its logical conclusion: If he achieved his ultimate goal, how would this country defend itself in a conflict that more people believed in? How would his thinking have affected, say, our participation in World War II?

The bottom line here is that Moore and his ilk want to peddle their particular political agenda and make money doing it. To make money in Hollywood, you have to target the kids. There is no other way. The fight over the rating will only make it that much more tantalizing to the very kids the "R" rating is supposed to protect. I'm sure that's crossed their minds.


Anonymous said...

"To make money in Hollywood, you have to target the kids," you stated in the final paragraph.

I'll take it a step further; Moore is in search of an audience that will not question the validity or accuracy of his drivel.

There are no Republicans or Democrats...there are only the informed and the misinformed (and a small subset in the latter, which is the "informed but corrupt").

The poor kids are subjected to a liberal-laden education system, then go to the movies to find...what?

Woody said...

Actually, I rather suspect that this movie will not change more than a handful of opinions one way or another. The weekend numbers are already being compiled and it looks like he's coming in at Number One, so he's already won the PR game. Where it counts, however, in how he may or may not have raised public consciousness remains to be seen. The only ones who will come out of that film and say, "Oh, wow. What a dummy Bush is!" are the ones who would have said that eventually anyway.

By the way, the only statement of Moore's with which I've agreed so far is where he takes umbridge at having this work called a "documentary." Too true. Real documentaries are supposed, at their heart, to at least attempt some objectivity.

Woody said...

I meant, of course, to say, "umbrage" rather than "umbridge." Oy. Never mix Harry Potter with blogging late on a Sunday eve...