January 13, 2005
Rate this R for Reality
I didn't think I'd be posting here until we begin sneak previews in Seattle on the 24th, but here I am. To prepare for our nation-wide theatrical release, we submitted the film to the MPAA for rating. The rating came back last week as a "hard" "R" for language. We've decided to appeal based on the simple concept of context.
I had hoped that the MPAA would be able to make a distinction between reality and fiction, more, I thought that an association tasked with reflecting the opinion of American parents, would be able to see that the majority of Americans support the individual soldier in Iraq and know that soldiers are living in, and responding to, a very violent reality.
Is there profanity in the film? Yes. Is it worse than anything on the latest RIAA rated CD or what is heard in the hallways of American high schools? No. The soldiers in the film are simply reacting to the violence and intensity they live in. Writing about the American soldier, Oliver North said that after a few months in combat they can, "take profanity to the level of a new art form."
According to the MPAA guidelines more than two uses of a "F" word is an automatic "R" rating. Profanity, like it or not, is the language of combat. General Norman Schwarzkopf is quoted as saying, "War is a profanity because, let's face it, you've got two opposing sides trying to settle their differences by killing as many of each other as they can."
I think the MPAA is out of touch with America.
When I went to Baghdad to make this film, all the soldiers asked is that I "tell it like is"--the good and the bad. That's what I did and I think that their voices need to be heard without undue restriction.
As a soldier says in the film, "No need to like this, but please respect it. This is life"
Jack Valenti, the former head of the MPAA and WWII vet, recently wrote an op-ed for Variety entitled "Moral values in times of war." Mr. Valenti makes an excellent argument for context, which I quote below.
Valenti writes:
"There is a serious disconnect in the value system of this country that needs to be confronted.Some local TV stations throughout the land refused last week to exhibit 'Saving Private Ryan' because of some language which they feared would bring on their heads the wrath of the Federal Communications Commission. The exquisite irony is that the FCC stood by without sanctions some time ago when this film was first aired by the ABC network.
Yes, there is some language in the movie that may cause dismay to some. But this is not just another movie. There is something larger here.
Steven Spielberg's 'Saving Private Ryan' is in the judgment of many (including me) the finest epic of war and valor ever filmed. If one word can describe it, that word would be 'sacrifice.'
Problem is, 'sacrifice' is today a word used easily in conversation but seldom confronted in reality, except to families whose sons and daughters, husbands and wives are enrolled in the armed forces."
He concludes his piece with:
"This is what Spielberg's movie is all about. It cries out to be seen by every young boy and girl in the land so they can understand what sacrifice, duty, honor, service, valor truly mean, for these simple words, these old words, are the real 'moral values' of this free and loving land.So I say to the TV stations of America who turned their backs on the film, you should have exhibited 'Saving Private Ryan' with pride, and most of all with gratitude to young boys who lie in foreign fields, who sacrificed their lives in compliance with their duty to their country."
I could not have said it better myself.
