I'm not against ratings per se. I think more information is always good. But I certainly don't think the government has to step in and set guidelines for how shows should be rated.
Attempting to define science fiction is an undertaking almost as difficult, though not so popular, as trying to define pornography... In both pornography and SF, the problem lies in knowing exactly where to draw the line.
I had the X rating on my films. Now they do as much on The Simpsons as I got an X rating for Fritz the Cat.
They've also, the government's decided now, what sexual content is.
I don't call four hours a miniseries.
You need an R rating because without one, you can't advertise and the film won't get shown.
Genre labels are useful only insofar as they help you find an audience.
I don't think that a film that has children in it necessarily needs to be a children's film.
If a film is suitable for family viewing, it should remain so, and if a film has some adult content, it should remain so, and these genres should never be mixed and spoil the vision of the story teller.
Oh, I get it, it's simple. PG means the hero gets the girl, 15 means that the villain gets the girl, and 18 means everybody gets the girl.
But I don't sit down and think: this is meant for children.
Loopy as the Motion Picture Association of America's ratings system is, it's better than what you'd probably get by putting such decisions in the federal government hands.
There is something spurious about the very term 'a movie made for TV,' because what you make for TV is a TV program.
