The Power of Ratinglessness

"Bully" is a new documentary sweeping the nation by storm. Directed by Lee Hirsch, the audience follows the stories of several young teenagers, as well as parents and friends, who are affected by bullying in their classrooms and school buses on a daily basis. The film doesn't relent to showing the harsh treatment of physical bullying, and is able to capture the raw proof of emotional bullying as well.

Logically, this film should be shown in all schools, elementary through upperclassmen. The violence, the beatings, can at times been excruciating to watch, but it is necessary for all students, bullied and bullying alike, to understand the impact that their words and actions have on those that surround them.

However, the MPAA (Motion Picture Association of America) did not give this film a PG-13 rating, allowing younger viewers the important opportunity to hear the message of "Bully."

Instead, the MPAA wanted to rate the film R, making it virtually impossible for the targeted audience to have a chance to see it.
http://www.usatoday.com/life/movies/reviews/story/2012-03-30/bully-documentary/53874516/1
However, AMC theaters have taken the film under their wing and are showing it to the public in their theaters with the tag that, "This Film Has Not Yet Been Rated." AMC has set up a website through their own site promoting the film, and providing a permission slip for viewers under seventeen. So long as they have the signature of a parent, they are able to see the film for themselves, and forever have their outlook on bullying changed.

So, what gives? In terms of the MPAA's rating decision, it seems as though logos plays no part. Why would the group rate such a crucial film for young teens with a rating which bans them from viewing it?

Is the violence involved so difficult to witness that it can't be shown in theatres with a PG-13? If this is the case, then why is such violence allowed in our own school systems?

Perhaps the MPAA doesn't realize that their already diminished ethos has shrunk even more under the scrutiny of the public eye. Drawing on the reactions from parents and families around the country, whose pathos has been tugged by the release of such a harrowing documentary, many are unhappy with the conclusion of the MPAA. Had they been considering all outcomes, the MPAA should have realized that not only would giving the film an accurate rating be beneficial to school-age children everywhere, it would also boost their barely-there ethos.

I suppose the only good outcome of this complicated twist of politics and decision-making is that the film has the support of AMC theaters, and it finally does have the chance to reach those viewers who need it most — with no help at all from the MPAA.