The Ratings Game

One of the key aspirations for humans worldwide is to gain control. Often that word “control” translates to power. Industry leaders seek control of aspects of their business and sometimes this control extends beyond their own power base. The studios have always sought to exert control of all aspects of the movie business. Some of their attempts have been found to be overtly illegal while others are just painfully self-serving.

??In 1922, the business of the movies was hit by scandal after scandal. Often the morality that was seen on screen flew in the face of religious and political power bases. A group of scandals erupted involving Hollywood players. The movie industry was deeply concerned about the threat of external control and the application of government censorship and a tsunami of bad press. At that time, the Catholic League of Decency was putting a great deal of pressure on the studios, and they even went so far as to boycott movies in Philadelphia. The Hays Office headed by Will Hays, a former Postmaster general, had established himself as a key political operative. In 1930, Hays developed the Production Code, which provided specifics on what was allowable on screen.

The Motion Picture Association (MPA), originally called the Motion Picture Association of America, is a non-profit group based in the United States. Its members are the "big six" ? major Hollywood studios: Amazon MGM Studios, Netflix, Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures Sony Pictures, Paramount Global, Universal Studios/ Comcast, and Warner Bros.? In 2019 Netflix became the first streaming service to become a member of the MPA, at the time much to the chagrin of the majority of the movies business.

After a stint in the Johnson Whitehouse political operative Jack Valenti was looking for something to do. The world had changed, with the advance of Vatican II the Catholic Church has loosened the grip of public perceptions . After the theatricality of the Johnson administration, Valenti naturally lobbied for and received the lead position with the MPAA. He immediately went to work.

The modern movie rating system was decisively established in 1968, driven by the no questioned leadership of MPAA chairman Jack Valenti.? Since the MPAA was the invention of the studios they took back control of the ratings away from a third party and firmly placed it under their control. Valenti replaced the somewhat draconian Hays Code with a parent centered rating system. No longer were movies subject to a strict guideline of a moral review by viewership but was supposedly dictated to by parents. The truth of the matter is that the ratings systems placed power in the laps of the studios in order to aid marketing and as well act as a gatekeeper on what was shown or not shown in theaters.

?The MPAA and now the MPA used the rating system to exert control after control over the business of motion pictures. It was in fact another tool for controlling access to a theatrical environment. Traditionally the rating system guided and shaped movie attendance. Any movie that received the dreaded NC17 would expect a reduction in box office revenue. If the movie did not have a rating there was a good chance that theaters would not book the movie.

?When streamers came on the scene, they more or less started to ignore the ratings system established by Mr. Valenti. It began with the cable service developing their own television ratings systems and later this transposed itself in the world of streaming. The classical rating system, once the starting point for any theatrical release, began to quickly lose relevance.

?Jack Valenti’s funeral at St. Matthew’s Cathedral in 2007 could be perceived as the beginning of the acceleration of the slow decline of the studios.

?At one point theaters would never give a theatrical wide release to an unrated movie. Because of the deeply unsettled nature of the business of exhibition when the movie Terrifier 34 was presented to the exhibitors they were reluctant to turn down the booking. The movie had no rating. While the producers Cineverse had the opportunity to have the movie rated, they chose not to. This is crucial because it indicates the impending and slow demise of the rating regime. Most exhibitors saw this as a movie that appealed to a demographic they wanted. They wanted to drag younger moviegeors back to the silver screen, and they thought Terrifier 3 could do it. They were right.

?Now it is interesting that Cineverse, the company once known as Cinedigm had laid its foundation on the digital conversion of the theaters and claimed its greatest assets, its alliance with the studio were not flying in the face of the ratings system. Many have commented that in regards to “Terrifier 3” if it had obtained a rating, it would be NC17 traditionally a block on theatrical access.

Terrifier 3 has become the second unrated movie to enter the market at number one, the other being “Renaissance: A Movie by Beyoncé”, which opened in December of 2023 and opened with a respectable $22 million and totaled $34 million. “ Renaissance” was a concert film so references to nudity, gore, and extreme violence were irrelevant. The release of “Terrifier 3” is a further erosion of the power once held by the studios. This is historical.

?Times had indeed changed. “Terrifier 3” opened on 2500 screens and grabbed the number one spot for the week.? The major circuits are imposing their own rating on “Terrifier 3”? and are treating it like an “R” Picture. This will of course tempt exhibitors to define their own ratings system much like the cable channels.

?Another brick in the wall of Fortress Hollywood falls, as we move towards a new world and a new vision for the theaters. Domenico Del Priore Rob Arthur Laura Peralta-Jones John Sullivan Gianluca Chakra Kevin Mitchell Chuck Goldwater Jason Brenek Steve Winn Shawn Dawes Tony Franks Patrick von Sychowski