The MPAA has a board of raters, who watch movies that are submitted to the MPAA then they are discussed among the group of raters. Then they each give a rating, and write up the reasons why.

The ratings are as followed:
G — General Audiences. All Ages Admitted. A G-rated motion picture contains nothing in theme, language, nudity, sex, violence or other matters that, in the view of the Rating Board, would offend parents whose younger children view the motion picture. The G rating is not a "certificate of approval," nor does it signify a "children’s" motion picture. Some snippets of language may go beyond polite conversation but they are common everyday expressions. No stronger words are present in G-rated motion pictures. Depictions of violence are minimal. No nudity, sex scenes or drug use are present in the motion picture.

PG — Parental Guidance Suggested. Some Material May Not Be Suitable For Children. A PG-rated motion picture should be investigated by parents before they let their younger children attend. The PG rating indicates, in the view of the Rating Board, that parents may consider some material unsuitable for their children, and parents should make that decision. The more mature themes in some PG-rated motion pictures may call for parental guidance. There may be some profanity and some depictions of violence or brief nudity. But these elements are not deemed so intense as to require that parents be strongly cautioned beyond the suggestion of parental guidance. There is no drug use content in a PG-rated motion picture.

PG-13 — Parents Strongly Cautioned. Some Material May Be Inappropriate For Children Under 13. A PG-13 rating is a sterner warning by the Rating Board to parents to determine whether their children under age 13 should view the motion picture, as some material might not be suited for them. A PG-13 motion picture may go beyond the PG rating in theme, violence, nudity, sensuality, language, adult activities or other elements, but does not reach the restricted R category. The theme of the motion picture by itself will not result in a rating greater than PG-13, although depictions of activities related to a mature theme may result in a restricted rating for the motion picture. Any drug use will initially require at least a PG-13 rating. More than brief nudity will require at least a PG-13 rating, but such nudity in a PG-13 rated motion picture generally will not be sexually oriented. There may be depictions of violence in a PG-13 movie, but generally not both realistic and extreme or persistent violence. A motion picture’s single use of one of the harsher sexually-derived words, though only as an expletive, initially requires at least a PG-13 rating. More than one such expletive requires an R rating, as must even one of those words used in a sexual context. The Rating Board nevertheless may rate such a motion picture PG-13 if, based on a special vote by a two-thirds majority, the Raters feel that most American parents would believe that a PG-13 rating is appropriate because of the context or manner in which the words are used or because the use of those words in the motion picture is inconspicuous.

R — Restricted. Children Under 17 Require Accompanying Parent or Adult Guardian. An R-rated motion picture, in the view of the Rating Board, contains some adult material. An R-rated motion picture may include adult themes, adult activity, hard language, intense or persistent violence, sexually-oriented nudity, drug abuse or other elements, so that parents are counseled to take this rating very seriously. Children under 17 are not allowed to attend R-rated motion pictures unaccompanied by a parent or adult guardian. Parents are strongly urged to find out more about R-rated motion pictures in determining their suitability for their children. Generally, it is not appropriate for parents to bring their young children with them to R-rated motion pictures.

NC-17 — No One 17 and Under Admitted. An NC-17 rated motion picture is one that, in the view of the Rating Board, most parents would consider patently too adult for their children 17 and under. No children will be admitted. NC-17 does not mean "obscene" or "pornographic" in the common or legal meaning of those words, and should not be construed as a negative judgment in any sense. The rating simply signals that the content is appropriate only for an adult audience. An NC-17 rating can be based on violence, sex, aberrational behavior, drug abuse or any other element that most parents would consider too strong and therefore off-limits for viewing by their children.



Despite what the MPAA says about NC-17 ratings, the vast majority of NC-17 movies are rated that because of sexual content.
The line is often blurred when it comes to R and NC-17 ratings. If one thing is in your movie that makes a board of "parents" uncomfortable, your movie could be rated NC-17, which the issue with that is that a lot of production companies will not put out your movie, and a lot of theaters will not play your movie. Therefore, the movie will not only, not be seen by many people, but it will also make hardly any money.
My personal issue with American ratings is that violence seems to be just fine, however something that's natural and a part of life seems to be something some Americans are afraid of. Sex, and homosexuality.

There have been a lot of movies that were rated NC-17 but, were changed and edited to get an R. The only upside is that now, a lot of times when you buy or rent a movie on DVD you can also get the unrated version which is the original cut.
However, that's only been going on for a few years.
Personally, a lot of my favorite movies had to be edited to get an R, are rated NC-17, or they aren't rated.
To avoid censorship issues and the like, all movies do not have to be rated. However, like how it is with NC-17, a lot of places will not produce it, play it, or sell it.

The X-rating. It's a non trademarked rating, that was used for movies that were not suitable for children, movies that included things like sexual content, extreme violence, drugs.. etc. When the MPAA rating system started, they did use the X-rating, for movies that didn't fit any other rating. However, because of the fact it was not trademarked many films started to use it. Including pornographic movies. Then they started using the multiple X's.. to show that the movie had more explicit material in it then a regular X-rated film. However anything more than a singular x rated movie was never recognized by the MPAA. Because of the over-use of x-rated most places wouldn't play because they associated the rating with porn. Eventually the MPAA came out with the NC-17 rating that is trademarked. Which to me personally has done more harm then good.

The rating system was started by Jack Valenti, who was said to have stopped censorship with his rating system. For those who do not know who Jack Valenti was, he was a lobbyist, CEO, and president of the MPAA for 38 years. He's lobbied against such things as: Cable tv, VHS, and piracy.
So in another words.. Jack Valenti was the king of hypocrisy. Am I the only one that finds it ridiculous that the same person who created a rating system for movies so they could be more readily available was the same man that started lobbying against piracy. The same man who had NC-17 slapped on movies so they were NOT made readily available to people, and pretty much monopolized ratings to the point where before.. piracy was pretty much the only way you could see NC-17 and non rated movies. Capitalism at it's finest.

The members of the MPAA rating system were anonymous, until Kirby Dick's documentary "This Film Is Not Yet Rated." They listed all the names of both the raters and the members of appeal board, which included two members of the clergy. Rather or not they still remain raters and members of the appeal board is unknown. They were supposed to be remained anonymous so they wouldn't have to deal with pressure and hounding from the "people", the press, and film makers.

Now, I must say this. I'm not totally against a rating system. I think that's it's good for a parent to know if a film is appropriate for a child or not, but I do have severe issues with A.) The people they pick to rate the movies. They are supposedly parents of children ages 1-17 when in fact most of them have children over the age of 18. B.) Because rating a movie that is not in any way appropriate for children is not at all readily available for adults. C.) Because filmmakers are CENSORED. A lot of them have to make changes and cuts to a movie, to make it R so that it's played in almost all movie theaters. D.) Because, violence and even nudity that isn't sexually related seems to be just fine to play in movies, but if it contains, sex or homosexual sex too vividly it is censored or made to where it's extremely hard to get a hold of.
Now, I'm not saying that there aren't movies that are rated NC-17 because of violence, gore, etc. I'm talking about the majority.
My other issue is that indie film makers that choose to not get their film rated because of money issues, hardly make any money from the film because they couldn't afford the rating in the first place. (Apparently getting a movie rated cost quite a bit of money.)

In other words.. I find the MPAA rating system to be a load of hypocritical shi*.

People still go to the movies? I stopped when you had to start taking out a small loan to go. Thank goodness for Netflix!

Haha yeah I never buy popcorn or anything like that. There is a movie theater 15 minutes from me that is 1 dollar but is shows movies from like six months ago. Still the only place I would go to.

If a movie is 6 months old and I haven't seen it then its still new to me

You might be right for example, they tried to make Clerks NC-17, but for some reason changed it to R.

It was worse with Clerks 2. They had to cut a lot to make it R. I need to watch the unrated version.

"For those who do not know who Jack Valenti was, he was a lobbyist, CEO, and president of the MPAA for 38 years."

He was also appointed as the first special assistant to LBJ and actually lived in the White House for a few months..

He is in the LBJ Air Force One swearing in ceremony picture..

Growing up when I did, you could go to the movies, take a friend ( ) buy popcorn, candy and drinks, all for around $3..... that's the FED at work, destroying the value of the dollar and the quality and quantity of what you receive for it....

We used to skip school (high school...73-77) fill the gas tank, spend the day at the beach, buy a case of beer ($4.40 for a case, $2.20 for a short), a carton of cigs ($1.50) and visit the sites, all for under $2 each.... anyone got a time machine handy?....

My 1st apt rented for $85.....

Pre-code Movies!

I know, however that was beside my point.

I was simply putting an emphasis on his political connections and ability to use those connections to get what he wanted.

If that isn't relevant I digress..

Touche'. You do have a point. I hadn't really thought of that.

I love Netflix, myself. However they have less obscure movies than they used to.

This is true.....

The MPAA hurt a lot of horror films in the 80's when they decided to crack down on the gore, fortunately some horror films have been released in their uncut forms on DVD.

The MPAA is a joke, in the documentary "This Film Is Not Yet Rated" you can see the silly decisions they make when rating a film.

It's fun listening to some of the directors on their DVD commentaries talk about how they fooled the MPAA, put in fake scenes that they knew the MPAA would make them cut, and the film makers were able to keep the scenes that were originally intended. Another director said the MPAA sent him back notes of what they wanted removed, he sent the film back untouched and they let it pass.

I don't remember the film they were talking about but on "This Film Is Not Yet Rated" the MPAA allowed a scene with someone shooting themselves in the head, but wanted a scene of a woman having an orgasm(I think you only saw her face) cut down.

Yeah, I saw it some time ago, then watched it again and it's what made me go off on a diatribe about the MPAA.

I don't remember what movie that was either.
I also remember when the American remake of Darkwater came out there was an uproar with the MPAA over the ending. Apparently it was appealed and passed. Which I find hilarious, since apparently there were two members of the clergy on the appeal board.

With the guy into bestiality. That movie should of been NC-17. Other than that scene it was hilarious.