Entertainment desk
< May 23	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	Current desk >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Entertainment Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

May 24

Movie rating system

Transferred from Humanities desk

Why is there inconsistent terminology in the movie rating system of the United States?? That is, under 13 and under 17 for the PG-13 and R ratings but the NC-17 rating uses 17 and under rather than the consistent under 18?? Georgia guy (talk) 19:18, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There's no explanation I can see in [1] but one thing to consider is that some of the individual ratings were created at different points in time. <-Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots-> 22:57, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

When the system was first unveiled by the MPAA in the late 1960s, there were "G", "M", "R", "X" and that's it. "M" was soon renamed to "PG". Notoriously, "PG-13" was created after numerous complaints about "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom". "NC-17" was created so that there could be some method of advertising movies not suitable for adolescents without invoking the porny connotations of "X"... AnonMoos (talk) 01:02, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AnonMoos, that response says nothing about the terminology of the ratings; it just talks about the ratings themselves. Georgia guy (talk) 11:47, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It tells you that the ones with numbers came later, and were not part of the system as originally planned. AnonMoos (talk) 21:30, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Somewhere here, we have a book on movie ratings and censorship that noted "XXX" is not a rating at all. It was used by the pornography industry to claim that a movie was more than just "X", it was "XX". Then, to be more than "XX", it was "XXX". For some unknown reason, "XXXX" never became popular. 97.82.165.112 (talk) 12:13, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I think it's quite popular down under Chuntuk (talk) 15:21, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is not necessarily any reason. Sometimes, things happen in a certain way, and no one planned it out like that. --Jayron 32 15:08, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Part of the reason it seems odd for it to be different is that you've only quoted bits of the rules. Our article says that the descriptor for R is "Under 17 requires accompanying parent or adult guardian." while NC-17's is "No one 17 and under admitted." I think Jayron is probably correct that it's largely happenstance, but starting the rule with a big "No" helps emphasize the restrictedness of the rating. From there, the minor word changes just make it flow a bit easier. Matt Deres (talk) 15:39, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
NC-17, at the time of inception, meant that no one under 17 (<17) was permitted admission. In 1995-96 (can't remember exactly when) the rating was changed to mean that no one 17 and under (<18) was permitted admission. They kept it NC-17 instead of changing it to NC-18 or something similar presumably because it was logistically simpler. Cessaune [talk] 04:11, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Name for a film technique

What's the name for the technique where you have a sequence of static shots of an object, each more zoomed out than the last? Sort of like a jump cut, but for spatial perspective rather than time. I've noticed it in two Nicholas Meyer films – The Wrath of Khan just before the Reliant blows up, and The Day After just before the first nuke goes off – and I'd almost want to call it an "explosion setup" for the spring-like sense of anticipation it produces. Lazar Taxon (talk) 22:43, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you are referring to an axial cut. 97.82.165.112 (talk) 12:06, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that's it. Lazar Taxon (talk) 16:15, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]