LGBT
Related: About this forumBully Documentary Given R Rating, Can't Be Shown in Schools
The Weinstein Company has lost an appeal to have the rating of its documentary Bully, a harrowing examination of the bullying epidemic in America, changed to PG-13 from R, which will prevent it from reaching its targeted adolescent audience.
The documentary, which will be released March 9 and follows five bullied kids during the school year, received the R rating due to language used by children in the film. The decision to uphold the initial R rating follows a plea made yesterday by Alex Libby (pictured), one of the children in the documentary, before the MPAAs Classification and Rating Appeals Board. Libby stated that an R rating would prevent the film from reaching the adolescent audience that would most benefit from watching it.
Harvey Weinstein, cochairman of the company, released a statement, that read:"I have been through many of these appeals, but this one vote loss is a huge blow to me personally. Alex Libby gave an impassioned plea and eloquently defended the need for kids to be able to see this movie on their own, not with their parents, because that is the only way to truly make a change.
With school-age children of my own, I know this is a crucial issue and school districts across the U.S. have responded in kind. The Cincinnati school district signed on to bus 40,000 of their students to the movie but because the appeals board retained the R rating, the school district will have to cancel those plans.
http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2012/02/24/Bully_Doc_Given_R_Rating_Cant_Be_Shown_in_Schools/
Bullying in schools allowed, showing a film about bullying in schools not allowed to be shown in schools. How appropriate.
Angry Dragon
(36,693 posts)have a parental release slip
xchrom
(108,903 posts)What are they afraid of?
That it might slow the bullying down?
MarkCharles
(2,261 posts)Can't they simply block out the naughty words?
I know, the impact will change slightly, but the message would get across just about as well.
Or am I being too technical (or something) about this? This is what we should be distributing, and not allowing the MPAA or anyone else to stop the message from getting through, in my opinion, no matter what it takes.
William769
(55,147 posts)Having to watch grotesque films on the consequences drinking & driving. These films made modern day horror films tame. They showed them not even a permissions slip needed to watch them. Grant you I saw the necessity for the films just as I see the necessity for this film.
Trillo
(9,154 posts)However, he would not make any money from that course of action.
dsc
(52,166 posts)which is the point being made here.
Trillo
(9,154 posts)Google Search Appliance?
dsc
(52,166 posts)Ruby the Liberal
(26,219 posts)it is that the MPAA's decision has brought a level of controversy, and controversy is an attention getter. This may end up bringing more attention to the film than it would have received, and could even pique the interest of kids that may not have been interested before. I was such a child.
If I had kiddos in their teens, I would take them to see it in a heartbeat, along with as many friends as they wanted to bring with them - but alone. Kids should see this in peer groups, IMO.
Jamastiene
(38,187 posts)Simple child psychology will make quite a few kids want to watch it now that they have been told that they cannot. I know when I was a kid, nothing made me want to see a movie or listen to a band more than being told I cannot or should not do it.
And controversy can sometimes be even better advertising than the regular advertising route.
It is very sad that the MPAA cannot see the hypocrisy in their decision. Do they really think that by giving the movie an R rating that they are really protecting children from language they already hear every weekday in school from other kids?
Creideiki
(2,567 posts)+1 level for not treating gay people as pariahs to be mocked, hated, and/or pitied.
None of this really made sense until I saw, "This Film has not been Rated".
Fearless
(18,421 posts)Of course, those that should won't and those that don't need to will. But then again that was what would happen regardless of its rating.
Ruby the Liberal
(26,219 posts)but couldn't the school send home permission slips or something and let the parents sign off on allowing their kid to attend the showing? Is that even done?
Fearless
(18,421 posts)Yes, I've seen permission slips sent home. I've also seen notes sent home saying that we'll be watching XYZ in our class. It is "Rated R". We believe it is valuable because of XYZ. However, if you would like your student not to see it, please return this form and we will find them an alternate activity.
I honestly don't think most parents have issues with Rated R movies. They show on broadcast tv frequently. And the movie is always pertaining to the class some how and definitely has educational value of some sort.
Most frequently though, I've seen teachers just show the movie and perhaps stop and fast forward issue scenes (perhaps because of nudity).
Ruby the Liberal
(26,219 posts)or perhaps a better analogy would be lemons and lemonade.
If that is something that has been done in the past, then why not take advantage of the controversy over the rating to get the kids to WANT to see it and do the permission slip thing? Rhetorical, as I know each district/school will be different, but seems a natural leadin to get this to be more widely seen.
I know if the issue comes up here locally in my district, I will be sure to put in my $0.02 that I think there is a lot of value in it.
Fearless
(18,421 posts)No need to sugar coat the bullying issue either... The film may HELP a lot of students too.