Now when the Oscar nominations have been announced, I will officially kick off my second annual Oscar Race. I managed to see quite a few of the ‘important’ nominees before last year’s ceremony, but I’m still hoping to beat that number this year. Considering the fact that some films (e.g. Blood Diamond) won’t reach Sweden until soon after the ceremony, I won’t be able to see all the films I want to see, nor will I have the time, but I’ll do my best. Since I’m planning to make a trip soon - not sure where yet - I just might be able to see one or two of those not-yet-arrived-here films then. I know I probably shouldn’t even bother, and I normally hate awards shows (except for the MTV ones, which used to be kinda fun, but lately they’ve all sucked, which makes perfect sense since MTV itself sucks), but I’ve always liked the Oscars for some reason. It’s a fun show, and it’s even more fun when you’ve seen most of the big films and get all those puns. By the way, I have no idea who’s the host this year. Someone new again?
Here are this year’s nominees, listed in alphabetical order. The ones I’ve already seen have titles in bold and are followed by my rating. As for the rest, I’m going to prioritise watching films with nominations in the heavier categories first. This post will remain my one Oscar Race entry, so the list below will be updated as I see more films. I will also comment on the films in separate entries though.
After the Wedding (3)
Apocalypto
Babel (4)
The Black Dahlia
Blood Diamond (3 ½)
Borat
Cars (3)
Children of Men (4)
Click (2)
Curse of the Golden Flower
The Departed (2 ½)
The Devil Wears Prada (2 ½)
Dreamgirls
Flags of Our Fathers
The Good German
The Good Shepherd
Half Nelson (4)
Happy Feet (2)
The Illusionist
Indigènes (Days of Glory) (4)
The Last King of Scotland (3 ½)
Letters From Iwo Jima
Little Children (2 ½)
Little Miss Sunshine (4)
The Lives of Others (4 ½)
Marie Antoinette
Monster House (3 ½)
Notes on a Scandal
Pan’s Labyrinth (5)
Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest (3)
Poseidon (1)
The Prestige (3)
The Pursuit of Happyness (3)
The Queen (4)
Superman Returns (2)
United 93
Venus (1)
Volver (3)
Water
Documentaries:
Deliver Us From Evil
An Inconvenient Truth
Iraq in Fragments
Jesus Camp
My Country, My Country
Last updated: 25 Feb 2007
As the film makes clear, the MPAA has some serious issues regarding sex and sexuality. This is hardly a surprise, considering the general taboo surrounding this subject in American media and society, but what’s really interesting is how they distinguish between different aspects and forms of sexuality. It’s painfully obvious that the MPAA not only is uncomfortable with homosexuality, but with female sexuality in general. A fully clothed girl masturbating caused a film to be rated NC-17, while American Pie, which came out just before and featured the main character fucking an apple pie on the kitchen table, his naked ass fully visible, received the lower R rating. Doesn’t make much sense, does it? Kimberly Peirce, the director of Boys Don’t Cry, explains how her film received an NC-17 rating not because of the scene where Brandon is shot in the head and blood sprays on the wall, but because of an orally induced female orgasm lasting too long (camera strictly on face), Hilary Swank wiping her mouth afterwards, and an anal rape scene. Ok for the rape scene, but the others? No reasons were ever given, other than the scenes being “offensive”. Offensive to whom, I wonder. And that’s just the thing; the MPAA refuses to reveal the identities of their rating board members. Thanks to the private investigator Dick hired to lurk outside the MPAA building, though, we now know that they’re not at all who they’re supposed to be. Jack Valenti, creator of the rating system, has claimed that all the board members are parents of children between the ages of 5 to 17, but as it turns out, that description only fits a couple of the board members. Why is this relevant? Well, one might wonder why a bunch of old, filthy rich Republicans should be the only ones deciding what’s appropriate for today’s kids to watch. The point of the ratings is to serve as guidelines to parents regarding what’s appropriate for their children to see. Now, can somebody please tell me why it’s more damaging for a kid to see a woman’s pubic hair for a fraction of a second and hear some foul language (as in what forced The Cooler to be re-edited to avoid the NC-17 rating) than it is to see a bunch of people getting brutally tortured and murdered (as in R rated horror films like Hostel)? If you think that films can influence your kids’ behaviour, what would be the worst scenario; that they have sex or that they kill somebody? Kevin Smith makes an excellent point, as well, when he argues that the kind of realistic violence seen in films such as Saving Private Ryan should be rated lower than the bloodless, no-consequences violence from most action films - not the other way around, as is the case today. The documentary also points out some interesting (and scary) things about war movies and the way they are likely to have shaped public opinion in the US throughout the past half-century. It was certainly news to me that in order to allow use of military assets for such films, the Pentagon demands to read the scripts and takes out anything that could possibly make the military look bad. A representative of the Pentagon is also present during the production to make sure everything is done the way they agreed. No wonder all American war films are so intolerably patriotic. The critical ones are never made, because they’re not allowed to be. So, finally, why do I care about all this? Well, it’s pretty obvious that these ratings often affect the content of the films being released, and I’m not amused by the way they interact with economic interests. In order to have the biggest potential audience, a film should have a PG-13 rating, so many films are edited down to be suitable for young teens, or, which is worse, they’re made with this in mind from the beginning, thus leaving out anything potentially challenging. The result is that we end up with most big films being unnecessarily bland and uninteresting. Moreover, since the MPAA doesn’t like “deviant sexual behaviour”, the only gay characters young audiences ever get to see are either asexual or being made fun of. What exactly is it about Brokeback Mountain that warrants an R rating? For the sake of comparison, the recommended age to see this film in Sweden is seven (or any age when accompanied by a parent). Not only do the ratings influence what films look like, they can also decide what kinds of films are made in the first place. I bet it happens every day that studios reject good scripts merely for concerns about marketability. In the documentary, Ms Pierce claims that the studio wouldn’t release Boys Don’t Cry with an NC-17 rating, so she was forced to re-edit it in order for it to be released at all. For us over here in small European countries with a more limited number of cinemas, a high rating can indirectly decide whether or not a film makes its way here. A high rating means it’s harder to market and gets a narrower release, resulting in it being more likely to be overlooked by foreign distributors. Nowadays, these films usually appear as straight-to-DVD releases after a while, but most of them pass by pretty much unnoticed. I can only wonder how many good independent films I’ve missed over the years because of this. Because it’s always the independent films that get the worst treatment by the MPAA, the reason for which is pretty obvious when it’s revealed who the secret members of the appeals board are. Now, I should better finish this long and probably tedious rant here. If you’re the least bit interested in film, I’d highly recommend you watch this documentary. And if you’ve seen it already, I’d love to hear your thoughts. Perhaps you disagree with all this?![]()

I don’t really believe in reviewing documentaries, so this post is more of a personal discussion of the subject matter of this film. Now, you’d think a person living in Sweden wouldn’t care much about how films are rated in the US, but to tell you the truth, I’ve been annoyed with this for quite some time. I’ll explain why later on, but first I’d like to say something about the things Kirby Dick brings up in his documentary.











