> Screen-It? I think I'll check that out.
> Sometimes I wonder why they need a rating system any way. Couldn't they just list what is in the movie? I see an R rating and I don't know if it's for violence, foul language, s&x, nudity or what. Some of these things offend me greatly, some only a little, and some not at all. The R rating doesn't really tell me anything.

Unfortunately, it doesn't tell anyone anything anymore. You can get an R-rating for having three or four usages of the 'f' word. You can also have an R-rating for 300+ uses, pervasive violence, gore, sex, and drug use. It's an even more uselessly wide rating than PG-13, which is broad enough to include the pervasive sexual and scatalogical humor found in "Nutty Professor II" and "extreme weather" in "Twister."

I'm aching to write a tirade about this in At-A-Glance Film Reviews; the only thing making me hesitate is that many others have done it better. It's a stupid, ridiculous system that is not only useless to parents but frequently effectively amounts to censorship. The link below, provided to me by Ellmyruh some time ago, is an excellent analysis of the problem and why I have absolutely no respect whatsoever for schmuck Jack Valenti, head of MPAA, whose solution to the many varied, grave, and crippling problems in the MPAA rating system is to bury his head in the sand and scream repetitions of irrelevant and outright untrue mantras.