Бейінделмеген фильм: АҚШ кино жүйесінің сыры

2006 documentary film by Kirby Dick

This Film Is Not Yet Rated is a 2006 American documentary film about the Motion Picture Association of America's rating system and its effect on American culture, directed by Kirby Dick and produced by Eddie Schmidt. It premiered at the 2006 Sundance Film Festival and received a limited theatrical release on September 1, 2006. IFC, the film's distributor, aired the film later that year. The film discusses a number of alleged disparities in the ratings the MPAA gives films and the feedback it gives filmmakers based on whether the project is a studio or independent film, whether the questionable content is violent or sexual in nature, and whether sexual content is heterosexual or homosexual and it centers on male or female pleasure. The film includes numerous clips from films rated NC 17 to illustrate content that had garnered the rating. Therefore, the MPAA rated an early version of the film NC 17 due to "some graphic sexual content". Dick appealed this rating so he could chronicle both the rating and appeals process of the early version of the film in the final version, which, true to the title, is not rated.

This Film Is Not Yet Rated incorporates clips from a number of films to illustrate its criticisms of the MPAA rating board. Dick had originally planned to license the clips from their owners, but discovered that studio licensing agreements would have prohibited him from using this material to criticize the entertainment industry. This prompted him, alongside prominent copyright attorney Michael C. Donaldson, to invoke the fair use doctrine, which permits limited use of copyrighted material to provide analysis and criticism of published works. The film's success using this tactic spurred interest in fair use, especially among documentary filmmakers.

Before Dick sent the film to the MPAA to receive a rating, he was assured that the tape he submitted would not be viewed for any purpose other than rating and that no copies would be made or distributed, but, on January 24, 2006, the MPAA admitted to making duplicates of the film contrary to Dick's wishes. However, they contended that doing so did not constitute copyright infringement or a violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, and said the privacy of the raters themselves might have been violated by Dick in the course of making the film, but no complaint had been filed against him. The DVD release of the film contains deleted scenes that show phone calls where Dick was assured by representatives of the MPAA that no copy would be made, as well as the one during which he found out that a copy had indeed been created.

On review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes, the film has an approval rating of 85% based on 117 reviews, and an average rating of 7.20; the critics consensus calls it: "A fascinating and entertaining film that will open many eyes to the often questioned tactics of the MPAA and their ratings system." On Metacritic the film has a score of 75 based on reviews from 33 critics. The film received a wave of favorable coverage by major publications. The magazines Rolling Stone ("terrific indispensable"), Entertainment Weekly ("irresistible"), and USA Today ("rated R for raves"), as well as critics such as Roger Ebert ("devastating") and Slates Dana Stevens ("matter of factly presented, and thoroughly entertaining") praised the film for its novel techniques and unprecedented revelations that dispute longstanding MPAA statements about the ratings system. Some critics disliked the film. David Poland of Movie City News wrote: "Even though it speaks to a subject I think is very important—the failures of the rating system and, specifically the NC 17—the tough, smart research just isn't in the film."