iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app

'Bully' Documentary Controversy: Weinstein Protests R Rating

JAKE COYLE   03/ 2/12 07:25 PM ET  AP

Bully Project

NEW YORK — Fresh off his Oscar glory with "The Artist," there's no silence for Harvey Weinstein when it comes to his next film.

The famously bellicose producer is protesting the R rating received by a documentary his Weinstein Co. is releasing. "Bully," directed by Lee Hirsch, is an examination of school bullying that follows five kids and families over the course of a school year.

It received the rating, which restricts kids under the age of 17 from seeing it without an accompanying adult, because of six expletives. Weinstein claims such a rating restricts the very audience the film can most benefit: high school teens.

The Weinstein Co. appealed the decision, but the Motion Picture Association of America, which oversees movie ratings, declined to lower the rating to a PG-13.

"I find it outrageous," says Weinstein, who has long been renowned for his combativeness. "This is, on a personal level because of my own temper, a redemptive act for me."

"We're hoping that smart people come to their senses," he adds.

Weinstein has threatened to withdraw his future films from the MPAA rating system. But John Fithian, president of the National Association of Theatre Owners, has reminded him that such a tactic would result in theaters treating unrated films as NC-17 movies, which can kill a film's artistic or commercial success.

"As a father of a 9-year-old child, I am personally grateful that (the Weinstein Co.) has addressed the important issue of bullying in such a powerful documentary," Fithian wrote in a letter to Weinstein. "Yet were the MPAA and NATO to waive the ratings rules whenever we believed that a particular movie had merit, or was somehow more important than other movies, we would no longer be neutral parties applying consistent standards, but rather censors of content based on personal mores."

That leaves the makers of "Bully" with the question of whether to edit or bleep the expletives, which are part of the antagonistic behavior documented between kids in the film. Right now, Hirsch is declining to do that, and has the backing of Weinstein. The director says such editing would minimize the harsh realities of bullying.

"To cut around it or bleep it out, it really absolutely does lessen the impact and takes away from what the honest moment was, and what a terrifying feeling it can be (to be bullied)," says Hirsch. "I feel a responsibility as a filmmaker, as the person entrusted to tell (these kids') stories, to not water them down."

Weinstein has feuded with the MPAA and NATO before, notably over the NC-17 rating of the 2010 drama "Blue Valentine" and the R given to the 2011 best picture winner "The King's Speech" – which was recut and briefly released again in a PG-13 version.

Some believe Weinstein is using this ratings squabble to help promote "Bully" ahead of its March 23 release. "This is not publicity," Weinstein counters. "This is ridiculous."

He claims there is precedent for degrading a film's rating when it serves a greater good. Though the 2004 documentary "Gunner Palace" contains dozens of expletives, its R rating was changed to PG-13 on appeal because of its worthy subject matter: the experiences and stories of American soldiers in Baghdad during the Iraq War.

Joan Graves, head of the Classification and Ratings Administration for the MPAA, calls that decision "an anomaly" made in "a different time and a different appeals board." Graves says the lesson of that ruling was that the MPAA shouldn't wade into territory where it's deciding ratings based on merit and subject material.

"The danger of our switching our criteria for what we perceive to be good films is that, one day, you and I are not going to agree on what's good and what's bad," says Graves, who added that she does consider "Bully" a good film. "Our system has always been built on giving the level of content and letting parents make the decision."

Many are rallying behind a rating change for "Bully," including American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten.

"Films like Lee Hirsch's `Bully' are critical in illustrating to students the painful consequences of bullying on their classmates and our communities," Weingarten said in a statement. "Unfortunately, because of the film's R rating, students will be shut out and discouraged from viewing this film. By giving it a PG-13 rating, the MPAA can take a stand against bullying and ensure this powerful film reaches children across the country."

Katy Butler, a 17-year-old Michigan high school student, has gotten more than 185,000 signatures for an online petition to change the rating.

Of course, an R rating doesn't prohibit young people from seeing "Bully," it just means they can't attend on their own. Weinstein, who has four daughters, calls having to see a film with your parents a "kiss of death" for the experience.

"I want to sell `Bully' like it's cool to see the movie," says the producer. "And then I want these kids to walk out of the movie theater and say, `Wait, this is wrong.' ... When your children make the decision, it's so much stronger."

___

Online:

http://www.mpaa.org/

http://thebullyproject.com/

http://www.change.org/petitions/mpaa-dont-let-the-bullies-win-give-bully-a-pg-13-instead-of-an-r-rating

FOLLOW HUFFPOST TEEN

Filed by Elizabeth Perle  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 65
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
05:51 PM on 03/07/2012
It is a joke to see that one of the biggest bullies in Hollywood is actually behind the new movie, "Bully"! Talk to the people who work with him. Talk to the women who leave his employ. Talk to his ex-wife. I am sure it is a movie worth seeing. It is just so ironic that of all people, he would deign to represent this film. But then that is what bullies do best - they build a firewall around them that few dare to penetrate. Well, we are watching you Harvey! And we are a large group of women!!
10:27 AM on 03/07/2012
Here is a great blog piece about the subject http://filmcycle.wordpress.com/2012/03/07/about-this-bully-situation/
11:36 AM on 03/06/2012
Why not not find a way to silently bleep out the curses. There has got to be a way to get around this as the whole doc should be geared for younger kids to see, I mean it will touch the heart of anyone who sees it but it should definitely be showed to our youth who bully the heck out of the weak in the school systems...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Andrea J Petro
08:39 AM on 03/05/2012
Bleep out the bad words. bottom line any kid in 7th grade of over most likely has heard bad words before and if they rate it R most kids wont be able to see it and the younger ones are the kids that need to learn about the damage bullies can do to a person. Great post dumbfish!
photo
MikeDu
Both salubrious and lugubrious concurrently.
08:44 PM on 03/03/2012
If Conan the Barbarian slices off a man's arm with a boradsword and is covered in his victim's blood the film will get a PG-13 rating. There is something really sick and skewed about this private unelected agenda-driven ratings board.
07:02 PM on 03/03/2012
1) This is a publicity stunt, if you really cared you would have just removed the expletives;

2) Because high school teens don't get into R rated movies all the time.... if they want to see it, they will find a way; if they don't they probably wouldn't have taken the time to go anyway.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:26 PM on 03/03/2012
"This is not publicity," Weinstein counters. "This is ridiculous."

It is publicity Mr. Weinstein by definition alone, People in Hollywood understand that better than most.

Bullying is an action that; threatens ,intimidates, belittles, degrades, offends.etc etc.
The bullyer is seeking to raise his[her] self worth by lessening anothers, all to often with the support of the bullyers peers.
The bullied is shamed and humiliated, lessening self worth. This is cruel unequal and vicious.
It happens, It sucks. Any Adult ever never witnessed it in their schooldays?....

Cruel bullying attacks injure with words and convictions. Yes swear words are 'convenient tools often used to achieve this. the devastation occurs from the INTENT not the letters of the words.

..'YOU GUYS' are smart enough to create the true devastation and tragedy of bullying, without littering the events with F-bombs. The reality of the results occur because of intent...not the letters in the words.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Andrea J Petro
08:40 AM on 03/05/2012
awesome post
photo
MorpheusXNYC
Artist, web designer, writer, rationalist
11:46 AM on 03/03/2012
The rating system is secretive, absolutely arbitrary with no guidelines or rules for film makers to follow and the secret panel is made up of conservatives and clergy.

The system needs massive overhaul, oversight and daylight. The members need to be experts in their fields, not Catholic priests, conservative activists and the elderly as it currently comprised of.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dusty Ray
Learn To Swim
11:21 AM on 03/03/2012
The ratings system is a joke. Fill a movie full of violence, no nudity, but a heaping spoon of sexual innuendo and its a PG-13. Fill it with bad words or nudity and its a guaranteed R. Which one is more detrimental to society?
Catch a PG-13 film from the 80's and there is plenty of nudity and expletives.
So the ratings system has gotten more restrictive instead of less.
Funny how free societies and censorship work, always changing the parameters.
11:10 AM on 03/03/2012
(Part A) The 210 R-rated movies of 2011 generated 23% of ticket sales while the 142 PG-13 movies garnered 52% (http://www.the-numbers.com/market/2011.php). Kids like to watch movies without their parents and parents like being able to drop them off. However, parents have at least a vague idea, through the MPAA ratings, of what their children might see.

From www.mpaa.org -- PG-13 — Parents Strongly Cautioned. ... 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 MPAA didn't pick on 'Bully' -- "six expletives" exceeds what a PG-13 label conveys. Demanding an exception because of the movie's value would unstandardize the standard, forcing parents to decide whether to even let their children go to movies on their own. "Yes, I'll drive you to the movies tonight to be with your friends, but the ratings don't mean anything and so I'll still have to go in with you. As a responsible parent, that's my job." 142 times over in 2011.
11:10 AM on 03/03/2012
(Part B) Perhaps the standard is misguided. It's a cruel twist that the language itself is part of bullying, and its "unspeakable"ness gives it the cover of an R rating which restricts its ability to be heard. Such language seems so pervasive that having a standard seems like a joke. And yet we are one country, needing a system that parents everywhere can live with. As they sort through crates of DVDs at the super center. For what it's worth, such standards draw the line between what can and can not be shown in schools.

Bleeping out words may diminish the message but it won't destroy it. Firing the imagination rather than showing/talking explicitly has provided powerful story-telling for thousands of years. If anything, the movie's value seems destroyed by the pissing contest the director/producer is waging. "My artistic vision is so important that I'll take hostages (deny viewership to kids) to make the MPAA back off their stupid standard."

Why not apply the bleeps and get the PG-13, but also deliver the art by releasing the unedited R version simultaneously? The audacity and publicity might cause many to see both versions. Or maybe the bleeped version would have made its point?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Andrea J Petro
08:41 AM on 03/05/2012
THANK YOU for you post it was great
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Michael Gene Sullivan
The Republic is endangered... by Republicans.
11:10 AM on 03/03/2012
If they simply replaced each cuss word with a scene of someone shooting a kid they'd get the PG 13 rating they want.
photo
Shadow Diver
When The Going Gets Weird, The Weird Turn Pro
10:47 AM on 03/03/2012
We don't need the MPAA. Isn't this what the GOTP calls goevernment intrusion?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
The Dude67
Question the official narrative
10:38 AM on 03/03/2012
An R rating over foul language is ridiculous.  I have had a policy to allow my 6 & 7 year old daughters to cuss at home, in front of immediate family only.  This has worked beautifully.  They learn that f***, s***, JC!, G dammit, etc are just words.  Some words are polite, others aren't and context matters.

They rarely cuss - even though they free to do so.  Also, we have never had a single incident of them slipping up at school or in front of friends or the grandparents.  

Finally, PG-13 movies - some of them - have content I would not be comfortable with them interacting with yet.  

Peace.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Candide33
I heart Bernie Sanders
10:06 AM on 03/03/2012
Since when do teenagers go see documentaries?