A new documentary about bullying, appropriated titled “Bully,” is currently
rated R by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA). However, the people behind the film, as well as thousands of others around the country, are calling for the rating to be changed to PG-13 in order to make it more accessible to young people.
The MPAA decided to give “Bully” the R mark primarily because of a scene where a bully describes what he will do to a victim using variations of the F-word. Use of the F-word more than once, or only once when used to describe sexual intercourse, almost always results in an automatic R rating.
Last month, The Weinstein Company, which created the film, petitioned to have the rating changed to
PG-13. TWC Co-Chairman Harvey Weinstein and Alex Libby, one of the bullied children in the film, argued that the R rating would prevent the film from reaching young audiences. In particular, the R rating prevents the documentary from being shown in schools. (The studio was planning on screening the film at various middle and high schools.) Additionally, many teens prefer to go to the movies with their friends instead of their parents, but you must be at least 17 years old to see an R-rated film without a parent or guardian.
The Weinstein Company lost their appeal. They were one vote short of the two-thirds required to overturn an MPAA rating. However, a ratings change doesn’t seem to be completely off the table. On Thursday, MPAA and Weinstein will be hosting an invitation only screening and panel event for Washington D.C. educators, to discuss “the challenges educators face in dealing with
bullying in the classroom.” However, it seems likely that the rating itself will also be a topic of discussion.
What do you think SodaHeads? “Bully” is currently rated R, but should it be changed to PG-13?
Most everything I want to say has been said already, but I will say this: having "Bully" be rated R allows the movie to miss its target audience, especially when the target audience is why this movie had to be made in the first place.
That's pathetic.
It should be mandatory viewing for all students entering middle school.
And a poor one at that.
You're true colors are showing (bully much?).
In response, you're not open minded because I've presented a reasonable argument, and you've told me that that makes me a "biotch". I am open to other opinions, just that in this instance it is a fact; the rating is because of cuss words, and you wrote something that was wrong; that it was because of the content. Then I present reasons that would be enough to show you where the truth lies, and you immediately revert back to yourself. You're not open minded, or at least refuse to be in this instance. You can have your own opinion, but here you are disputing FACTS. You can decide when you're offended; point is that I did not deliberately set out to offend you, and what I said, unless you are extremely sensitive, could not be construed as offensive.
A movie that was made for teenager, planned to be shown in middle and high schools nationwide, specifically to challenge the namby pamby "everything's fine" attitude was censored for the reasons it was created? Seems unlikely, especially with the other films based on controversy and touchy subjects that are not rated.
I am only 15; that doesn't stop me having a reasoned and mature mindset. I'm not pushy, stubborn maybe, pushy... only when it's necessary. And you know what? People love me for it.
Oh, and I may be 15; at least I'm not immature enough to block the other from replying just because I'm not happy with what they say.