When adapting the 2019 LGBTQ romantic novel Red, White & Royal Blue for the screen, Matthew Lopez was careful to circumvent an R-rating. The film has a handful of sex scenes that stop short of full-frontal nudity — there’s some bare butts and, naturally, shirtless men.
But it wasn’t enough. Red, White & Royal Blue was rated R, meaning people under 17 would need to be accompanied by a parent or guardian to see it.
Another recent film with LGBTQ leads, the French romantic drama Passages, received an even harsher NC-17 rating, which would restrict people under 18 from seeing the film at all, and also keep it from playing in certain theatres.
Part of society’s implicit notion that LGBTQ is inherently sexual in a way that heterosexuality (or being cis) isn’t. Telling kids that some kids have A mommy and a daddy is fine, two daddies is a kink that shouldn’t be mentioned. Ok well it’s either all inherently sexual or none of it is.
Well said.
It’s the same how many conservatives couldn’t care less if their kid sees a pg-13 level of a hookup in a movie, but cries if there’s a gay couple in a pixar KID movie.
Trust us, we’re aware of the hypocrisy.
Abolish ratings boards
I think there is a reasonable argument for “appropriate for young children,” “appropriate for older children” and “appropriate for adults” as ratings. They don’t have to be adhered to strictly or anything, but having had a young child, knowing if a film is G or PG can make a difference, not to mention PG or R.
It’s all well and good until the rating board is populated with pearl-clutching prudes who think that LGBT is inherently adult content.
I’m not saying it’s a perfect solution and I agree with you, I’m just saying we need a way for parents to know if their 6-year-old is going to be seeing people fucking and chopping each other’s heads off before showing them to the movie.
Films should be thought provoking at times. “Whats that daddy/mommy?” Should often be a question asked after the movie ends. But it’s gotta be in doses, you can’t show a 6y/o kid all of the reasons a film is rated R all at once and expect them to process it enough to ask questions
they mention a long track record of harsher treatment of queer content but I wish they linked to that data or mentioned a couple comparisons for context.
A quick search finds this … which states
The MPAA argues the constituency for its ratings system is parents in traditional families who may find queer themes inappropriate for their children. Paradoxically, a number of organizations serving adolescents identifying as LGBTQ or as questioning their sexualities have created lists of recommended films, many of whose MPAA ratings make them virtually off-limits to teens unless their parents approve.
edit to add link
If someone has institutional access to the research article linked pls share the info!
Thank you for this. :)
Is there not a rigid criteria for this sort of thing?
There’s guidelines, and according to the text above, the first movie followed them.
But someone has to apply the guidelines, and also what’s fine or not changes over time. Something being rated R is ultimately an opinion.
It’d be cool if there were actual standards, or at least an appeals process so a movie isn’t limited to just the first review if they feel it’s not accurate.
according to the text above, the first movie followed them.
It sounds like there’s a lot of gray area in there. That’s where discrimination lives.
Films can be resubmitted, the South Park movie was submitted 6 times before the rating was dropped from NC-17 to R.
Oh, cool. Good to know.
There’s a whole film about how arbitrary the MPAA rulings are called This Film Is Not Yet Rated, check it out
Yeah, the MPAA is a bunch of fundies.
Removed by mod
