Jim On Film
Page 3 of 3
Somehow, we don’t follow this logic through in filmed entertainment. People forget that the MPAA ratings system rates potentially objectionable content for parents. It is not a measure of the maturity of a film. For example, The Rookie, Disney’s G-rated film about baseball pitcher Jim Morris, has little, if any, objectionable content for parents. Most people would probably agree that younger children would find themselves bored at the film. Compare that to The Time Machine, which is the PG-13-rated sci-fi time-traveling film. The Time Machine has plenty of gory images and monsters as well as scenes of murder and mass destruction. Which film is more mature? By rating, most would say The Time Machine. But for those who saw both films, most would say The Rookie.
Even in comparison to quality films, such as The Joy Luck Club, which is rated R, Smoke Signals, which is rated PG-13, or The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Rings, which is rated PG-13, many Disney live-action films and most of Disney’s animated films are comparable in measure of maturity. It’s just that the Disney films, such as Bambi, A Bug’s Life, and The Princess Diaries, have a different rating.
The Hollywood community regards MPAA ratings very highly because the American movie-going public tends to equate them with an age group. Films that are given either G or PG ratings are generally considered kids’ films, and films that are rated PG-13 or R are generally considered films for teenagers and adults. Because of this, studios target their films for specific audiences, making sure to include enough potentially objectionable content to warrant a desired rating. Quiz Show could have easily been given a G-rating if it hadn’t been filled with profanity. Its profanity did nothing for the quality of the film except widen its potential audience base. Legally Blonde, Miss Congeniality, The American President, and scores of other popular films could also easily have been G or PG-rated films except that studios play into the ratings game instead of challenging it.
This said, for some Disney live-action films (particularly the classic ones) and theatrically-released animated films, what really sets them apart from other films is the content. Content is not a measure of maturity, only a measure of for whom the film is suitable. The Princess Diaries is a hilarious movie, but despite the fact that it is probably funnier than Legally Blonde, it will be forever labeled a kids’ movie because of its rating.
If an adult laughs at it, its not a kids’ movie. Try to watch Hercules and not laugh.
If it moves an adult, its not a kids’ movie. Try to watch Bambi and not be moved.
If it makes an adult care about the characters, its not a kids’ movie. Try to watch Wild Hearts Can’t Be Broken and not care.
One of my favorite stories on this subject happened when I was having lunch with some friends. On the subject of movies, I said that I had seen Snow Dogs. Now granted, Snow Dogs is no great film, but as a Disney fan, I felt obligated to see it despite the ridiculous advertisements. It really wasn’t the worst movie ever, and I must admit there were enough hearty laughs to make it worthwhile.
"You actually saw that movie," one friend said with amused disbelief in his voice.
Minutes later--if even that long--the subject of the film Tomcats came up. Now, not to insult those who liked the movie, but I felt like I was losing brain cells just seeing the commercials on television.
This friend, the same friend who jokingly mocked me, said he saw that film.
Though he didn’t like it, the only difference in the stupidity of the commercials for each film was the rating and the Disney name.
At least I didn’t walk out of the theater for my movie feeling cheated.
If this all still seems confusing to you, just remember that though I may be the only Disney collector you know, I’m not the only one there is. There’s a reason Disney releases collector’s editions of The Emperor’s New Groove and Atlantis: The Lost Empire, coffee table books upwards of $40, and special collectable statues that cost over $200. It’s not kids saving their allowance to get this stuff!
Your Friend,
a Disney fan
Discuss It!
Related Links
-- Jim Miles
Jim On Film is published every other Thursday.
The opinions expressed by our guest columnists, and all of our columnists, do not necessarily represent the feelings of LaughingPlace.com or any of its employees or advertisers. All speculation and rumors about the future of Disneyland and the Walt Disney Company are just that - speculation and rumors - and should be treated as such.
-- Posted July 11, 2002
Copyright Jim Miles. Licensed to LaughingPlace.com.