Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Voice of Sanity from the Film Industry? Or a Cop-Out?
Imagine an actor allowing for racist themes in movies and television! An actor from the UK, Idris Elba, thinks that racist viewpoints should be included in films as long as they are included in the rating systems that we have already accepted. He thinks that censorship is not necessary:
Out of respect for the time and the movement, commissioners and archive-holders pulling things they think are exceptionally tone-deaf at this time—fair enough and good for you. But I think, moving forward, people should know that freedom of speech is accepted, but the audience should know what they’re getting into.
I wonder how long it will take for him to get blowback? I haven’t seen any yet.
Then again, I’m not on Twitter or Facebook.
What do you think about having a “racist warning” in the movie rating system?
Published in Culture
Meh. “Racism” is in the eye of the beholder, and there are a lot of aggressively sensitive beholders.
Also, it infantilizes the moviegoing public, who are capable of figuring out for themselves whether a film is objectionable to them.
That said, Idris is at least on the right track.
I agree, @GrannyDude, with your entire comment. I just think it’s interesting that no one is attacking him for allowing for “racism” in any form.
First, give them time. Second, he is black so he can speak when others can’t/won’t (sigh). Third, he is one fine looking man (sigh in a different way from before 😊).
I thought about his being a black man, @colleenb, but there was no mercy for Kanye West.
Acknowledge my lived experience of discrimination puny mortals.
You beat me to it. Idris can say whatever he wants **fans self**.
So he’s saying that we need warnings on To Kill a Mockingbird? And Huckleberry Finn? And a million other movies? I think he would be getting praises for that from the woke cancel culture types.
The first black James Bond speaks. I’m good with his thoughts, provided he gets the cadence in “Bond . . . James Bond” down.
I think a more useful warning would be: “Not historically accurate” and “May Offend Your Worldview”. But I would prefer Idris’ approach to censorship.
The disclaimer should be “culturally sensitive material.”
I don’t know if I want the rating system to reflect it. Note that Dreamworks’ Prince of Egypt included such a disclaimer. As do some of the Assassin’s Creed games.
They already include “not historically accurate.”
Well, a watered-down version that simply is intended to protect themselves from lawsuits. And it happens in the credits not on the medallion on the front of the story. When people read it, it’s yada yada yada. But seriously, children need to learn that entertainment is to truth what cartoon death is to real death.
We’ve already inserted so much PC into our movies–like no cigarettes, or making sure that parts are racially–appropriate representatives–black playing black, native American playing native American–. I can’t imagine that people are going to give this man a pass, but then what do I know?
There is already some subjectivity to rating systems and always has been.
I learned yesterday that the movie Constantine was designed according to PG-13 guidelines but received an R rating anyway because of the demonic theme. The film makers were surprised because that isn’t explicitly listed in the rules.
No one in the cast or media demonstrated any understanding. Even a non-Christian is capable of understanding that demons are not imaginary creatures in the Christian worldview. Writing a plot around them is like writing a plot around any other pure evil, like Hitler or serial killers. I don’t know any PG-13 movies about such evils.
Anyway, I’m willing to grant rating boards flexibility so long as R-rated films and M-rated games remain easily accessible to audiences. It’s when ratings are used to ban products from sale — like games are often banned from Australia and Germany — that rating systems become problematic.
One might argue that ratings can prejudice audiences against products. But look at Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic. So long as professional reviews are distinguished from consumer reviews and the latter have wide latitude, consumers can recognize when professional reviews are colored by politics.
Yeah, who turned up the thermostat in here?
I would tweak it slightly Rodin. I would make it ‘historical’ whatever as they do with ‘historical smoking.’ Nah. Probably end up with a disclaimer longer than the original film if it was made more than 48 Hours ago.
@aaronmiller, I don’t quite understand your concern. (I can’t disagree with it because I’m not clear!) Do you believe that giving the film an R rating was appropriate because demons do exist, and people who are not Christian should know that is the belief of the Christian world? Since Christians believe in demons, film-makers should take that into account when designing their movies and realize that will affect the film’s rating? I’m not well-versed on the definitions of PG and R ratings, so I’m at a disadvantage here.
@colleenb and @charlotte, someone is going to call you out for being sexist. Don’t look at me!
Generally I find such warnings offensive. If reviewers put such warnings in their reviews, that’s different.
Maybe if they warned people that they will be exposed to leftwing ideology, that would be OK. It’s true about 99.99 percent of the time.
The rating system exists to inform audiences. Half the movie’s sales were outside the US. But our rating system is for the US market, which at the time of the film’s release remained mostly Christian. Thus, the Christian worldview is relevant. Many non-Christians, like Hindus and even Shintoists, believe in similar evil spirits.
Granted, modern Westerners claiming Christian affiliation are greatly divided and many now reject traditional beliefs in angels and demons. In areas like Hollywood, film makers might rarely meet anyone who treats such beings different than cartoon heroes and villains.
But the context matters. Constantine adopts a semi-Catholic understanding of demons. They are malicious creatures of visceral horror who delight in pain, death, and corruption. They are not presented as cartoon characters. It’s mature subject matter.
Many parents let their young teenagers watch movies about serial killers and other horrors despite R ratings. Demons are equivalent (unless the term is applied to something different, as sometimes happens). The rating doesn’t prevent viewing.
By the way, the film director and producer said they would have designed it for an R rating, had they known it would be rated R anyway. I think it’s a good example of a story which benefited from limits. Instead of gore, we got clever presentations. Instead of cussing, we got wit and meaningful dialogue.
What do you think about having a “racist warning” in the movie rating system?
@susanquinn, I believe it is another device to separate we the people. There seems to be a concerted effort to separate us into “tribes,” each with our own particular set of grievances, seeking our own benefit at the expense of the whole. Completely at odds with the founding principals of this nation.
It will be taken that way. I’d be fine informing people that this or that movie will have the n-word used but we know that such a rating system will be coopted by the extreme left and become anti-American.
Thanks for clarifying, @aaronmiller. Your points make sense.
The name Henry Castaigne itself should be a warning for bad puns and obscure nerd references.
I love Idris’ work, including as Heimdall in the MCU, but casting a black as a Norse God never made sense. As if Odin has an EEOC he is responsible to. (Although I can see Odin getting some hot brown sugar on the side and voila.)
We already have woke press to tell us how utterly racist everything is. A rating would be redundant.
There are racists, a rainbow of them, and it would probably be market suicide to go down that road in a contemporary context.
Basically he appears to be arguing that all movies should be re-rated according to today’s standards rather than keeping the rating they received when they were first released.
If you follow this idea to its logical conclusion, a whole lot of PG-rated movies would be reclassified with R-ratings. For example, Indiana Jones And The Temple Of Doom would have to be given an R rating due to the heart-torture scene.
Also, how often would movies have to be re-rated? MPAA standards change all the time. Would all movies have to be resubmitted on an annual basis? There’s no way the MPAA would be able to handle that volume of work.
Just think of the thousands of new jobs we could create. Mis. We’ll just call them “re-raters”! Special training included!
They already exist. ratings for parents, ratings for Christians, etcetera. I’m sure Satanist ratings are available somewhere.
Those have way more integrity than the MPAA.