Debating the Rating

When it comes to filtering what is deemed acceptable in film, how much responsibility should to be placed on the viewer? Now I am not talking about the film buffs who can argue the merits of Spielberg and Kurosawa, I mean the average filmgoer. The person who helps Jackass 3D make 50 million dollars instead of supporting an independent or foreign film being shown in the same theatre. Currently the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) is the governing body that determines what rating a film will get. They are the ones who decide that Toy Story receives a G rating while Inglourious Basterds receives an R rating. When it comes to the MPAA, Alan Moore’s famous line “Who watches the Watchmen?” is often quoted. Yet I think the phrase “Who profits from the Watchmen?” is more appropriate.

This question has been on my mind for a few weeks now since I first heard that the MPAA had given the movie Blue Valentine an NC-17 rating. Giving a film an NC-17 rating is essentially the kiss of death for any film. Besides the fact that it restricts anyone under the age of seventeen from accessing the film, it also gives the stigma that the film is as offensive as pornography. After seening Blue Valentine at this year’s TIFF, I was stunned that the film received such a harsh rating. According to Deadline , the film received the rating for a scene “in which the characters played by Gosling and Williams try to save their crumbling marriage by spending a night away in a hotel. They get drunk and their problems intensify when he wants to have sex and she doesn’t, but will to get him off her back. That hurts his pride and the result is an upsetting scene that makes you squirm”

Having sat through the infamous scene in question, I can say, without spoiling the film, that there is no violence in the scene and things do not unfold they way you initially think it will. The scene is actually one of my favourite moments in the film for reasons which I will elaborate more on when I post my review. Still, the fact that a film can get such a harsh rating for simply making the viewer squirm raises concern over whose interest are the MPAA really serving?

Now this is by no means a rant for the abolishment of the MPAA, unlike most film lovers I actually believe the MPAA can be a useful organization. I just think that they have lost their way in regards to ratings. Instead of taxing big budget studio films that will be seen in 2000 plus theatres, the MPAA seems to more often than not punish the films that the average filmgoer would not be seeing in the first place. With the exception of Showgirls, which is a teenage boy's wet dream of a movie, how many of the following NC-17 rated films were the average underage person really eager to see: Crash (Cronenberg’s version)? Bad Lieutenant? Requiem for a Dream? Mysterious Skin? Lust, Caution;? Chances are good these films would not have played to a wide audience even if they had received an R rating. So why do these films get the NC-17 rating while other films like Inglourious Basterds, Predators, The Expendables, Splice and the Jackass movies are allowed to play in close to 3000 theatres?

Some may argue that it is an issue of escapist fare versus more realistic themes. How then do you explain Oscar nominated films like Precious? The main character in that film is repeatedly raped, has a television thrown at her, etc. While I really enjoyed Precious, it was just as, if not more, unsettling as Blue Valentine, yet no controversy at all. I wonder if Tyler Perry and Oprah had not produced the film if the ratings would be different. It is time for the MPAA to really look at the big budget studio fair with the same fine toothed comb it looks at the smaller independent films. There should be no reason that you can watch people die on screen in gruesome ways, yet intimate character studies, that would play primarily independent, get penalized so savagely.

Again, I am not calling for the disbanding the MPAA, they are an important organization to have around. Their intentions are valid, it just that their systems for ratings films needs to be updated and clarified. The easiest and most effect solution would be to first do market research on the films that the general public are most likely to see. The research should cover everything from age, types of movies the person regularly watches, the theatres they most often go to etc. Then, based on the overall feedback, the MPAA should adjust their overall standards accordingly. There is no reason small films that skew to a more adult audience, such as Blue Valentine, get slapped with NC-17 ratings while you can go into any multiplex and watch films like Machete, or The Town without even a second thought.

The Blind Side of Racism

The Blind Side


The one question that kept running through my head when I was watching The Blind Side was whose story is this film really telling?

The Blind Side is based on the true-life story of Michael Oher's (Quinton Aaron) journey from homeless teen to professional NFL player. Hailing from the Memphis projects, Michael spent a good portion of his time moving from foster home to foster home after the state took him away from his crack addicted mother. It is only when Michael is accepted into a Christian private high school, mainly on the basis that his size may help the school's sports teams, that his life begins to change for the better. Michael he meets Leigh Anne and Sean Tuohy (Sandra Bullock and Tim McGraw), a wealthy Republican couple who offers him a place to stay. Over time, the relationship between Michael and Tuohys proves mutually beneficial. Michael's grades improve and the chances of getting a college football scholarship become a reality; while the Tuohys, by embracing Michael, realize that they should not take their life for granted.

The Tuohys should be commended for their act of generosity. It is heartwarming to know that there are still people in this world who genuinely go out of their way to help those in need. Unfortunately, the way that the story is portrayed on film is just downright insulting to all parties involved.

The Blind Side should really be about Michael's rise to the top with the assistance of the Tuohy family. Instead the film is about Tuohy family opening their doors to Michael. What is the difference you ask? Well it is all in the details. Let us use another Oscar nominated movie, Precious, as an example. What is the most compelling aspect of that film? Precious' life or the teacher who helps Precious see her potential? Obviously that film would not have had the same impact it did if director Lee Daniel's had approached the story from the teachers point of view. Which is exactly why The Blind Side is so offensive.

In The Blind Side, Michael's story is only told in spurts. We get brief flashbacks to the most traumatic event in Michael's life but it is not truly explained until near the end of the picture. Come to think of if, every aspect of Michael's life prior to meeting the Tuohys is reduced to mere footnotes. Let's see... Mother? A drug addict. Siblings? Out there somewhere. Kid who got accepted at private school along with Michael? Gang member. Etc. Heck, we do not even get Michael's perspective on the Tuohy family themselves. The only thing The Blind Side director, John Lee Hancock, offers up from Michael is a few lines such as "I thought I was already part of the family." Though we hear a lot in the film about what the family thinks of Michael.

This is further evident when you think about the adjustment Michael would have had to make. We are rarely shown what Michael had to endure living in an all white community. We see brief scenes of Michael sitting by himself in study hall, and racist remarks being hurled at the football game, but at no point does Michael comment on any of it, or express how he copes on a daily basis. Instead we must watch Leigh Anne's plight as the members of her country club start to question her actions. Even when the film takes a turn at the end, and Michael's future is in jeopardy, we are still shown the Tuohy's discussing the issue rather than Michael.

Not only is Oher's life story secondary to Leigh Anne Tuohy and her family's but, to add further insult, Michael is portrayed as borderline autistic for the majority of the film. Yes Michael may not have the best reading skills but, as Ms. Boswell (Kim Dickens) points out on numerous occasions, Michael is smarter than everyone thinks he is. Not only is he a writer but he can retain a ton of information that is given to him orally. Yet, despite all of this, we are shown scenes of Michael being mesmerized by balloons in the sky, the Forrest Gump-like scenes where he only stopped running once the whistle was blown, etc. Heck, there is even a scene where Leigh Anne needs to point out the art of buying clothes...as if Michael has never been in a store before! The kid may be poor, but he is not the simple-minded Neanderthal that the film makes him out to be.

I cannot help but wonder if Michael would have been portrayed the same way if the racial lines were reversed? Would Michael's history be told in brief flashbacks had he been white and taken in by a well-to-do black family? Would the actor still portray Michael as borderline autistic? Would the film even be told from the families point of view? Or would it be an underdog rag-to-riches tale like Eminem's 8 Mile?

I know some, my fiancée included, thought that Tuohy's tale was worthy of being on film. Again, I have nothing against what Leigh Anne Tuohy and her family did. As I mentioned above, I think they did a wonderful thing. I might have been a little easier on the film had both sides of the story been told in an even manner. Yet, as it stands, I found The Blind Side, as a movie, to be both insulting and extremely offensive.

Delicate Hands Needed for This Precious Item

The Full List of Big Thoughts From A Small Mind's 2009 Reviews.

This review was originally posted in my 2009 Toronto Film Festival Recap. The review has been re-posted as the film will finally be released in select cinemas today

Precious: Based on the Novel “Push” by Sapphire

Winner of the 2009 Toronto International Film Festival's top prize, The Peoples Choice Award, Precious is a film that packs a very heavy punch. It is 1987 in Harlem and Claireece “Precious” Jones (Gabourey Sidibe) is barely sixteen and already pregnant with her second child. Living with her emotionally and physically abusive mother (Mo’Nique), Precious constantly dreams of a better life. Unable to neither read nor write, and facing expulsion from school, Precious is forced to attend the Each One/Teach One alternative school. Can this school provide Precious with a way out of her miserable life? Or was she merely cursed from birth?

I am hesitant to heap too much praise on this film for I fear that adding to the buzz Precious has already generated might only speed up the backlash towards the film. Still, I cannot deny that Precious finally cements Lee Daniel’s as a director. He skillfully blends the dark themes with the more accessible moments far better here than he did in either The Woodsman or Shadowboxer. This is not to say that Precious is an easy film to watch. On the contrary, the film is extremely bleak and unrelenting. No matter how many times you tell yourself “her life cannot get any worse…” it does. Daniels smartly incorporates just the right amount of fantasy sequences in the film. This allows him to pull Precious, and the viewer, out of the sewage long enough to take a quick gasp of air before being submerged again. Daniels is wise not to overplay these moments as he keeps the dream sequences somewhat grounded.

Regardless of how you feel about the subject matter, there is no denying that the Precious features two of the finest female performances you will see all year. Mo’Nique is simply brilliant as Precious’ abusive mother. She brings so much intensity and emotion to the role that, even though you despise her, you fully understand her motivations. While Mo’Nique is already generating a lot of award buzz, and rightfully so, newcomer Gabourey Sidibe deserves some as well. Due to the nature of the subject matter, the film really lives and dies on Sidibe’s performance. Thankfully Gabourey rises above the extremely high bar that both Daniels and Mo’Nique have set. Gabourey Sidibe does such a wonderful job finding that dark uncomfortable place for Precious that you barely notice some of the more well-known cast members in supporting roles (e.g Paula Patton, Mariah Carey, Lenny Kravitz, etc). While I highly recommend Precious, you should try and see the film before the hype gets out of control. Precious: Based on the Novel “Push” by Sapphire works best if you go in without too many preconceived notions.