R-16 is the new film rating!

Once more I must laud the dynamism of the current MTRCB as it is composed and led. Of course this is at the risk of being suspected of simply kissing ass, excuse me, or at the very least, of partial self-promotion, since I remain a member of the board.

It’s been more than a decade of membership, in fact, broken only by a year’s leave when President GMA saw to my replacement at the start of the electoral campaign season of 2010. I heard it was because it became obvious that I was rooting, and maybe even working for (not true), her eventual successor. And so I’ve served under three successive Offices of the President, and directly under six successive chairpersons.

Every now and then, during those different terms of leadership, board discussions would focus on the probable need to establish yet another classification rating that would help bridge the rather large gap between R-13 (viewership restricted to 13 years old and above) and RT-18 (18 years old and above).

But the give-and-take of views and insights on that major question never quite got off the ground, although as the years went on, the need for that in-between rating seemed to become increasingly urgent. 

“Contemporary Filipino values” or “contemporary community standards” always served as key phrases throughout any process of evaluation of a Filipino movie in terms of proper classification. As with any standards, they evolve and change, come up to speed occasionally.

It was often argued, for instance, that battle scenes showing robots indulging in fantastical mayhem soon had generations of kids getting inured to the graphic if non-realistic violence. What may have been proper to classify as R-13 a decade ago may already warrant a more “liberal” rating after a long and steady familiarization route that even begins with daily television fare.

This isn’t saying of course that any form of graphic scene eventually mellows everyone into outright jadedness. While there was a time when the MTRCB leadership curiously set the margin of allowance for female nakedness at one breast, this yardstick turned pliant to allow two or more — after Merryl Streep’s double-breast exposure in Bridges of Madison County and the pitiful procession (towards gas chambers) of emaciated women in full exposure in Schindler’s List.

It will take a long time, however, before simulated penetration followed by full pumping in an extended erotic scene would escape the label of soft porn thus an X rating.

Still, suffice it to say that contemporary community standards do march on and naturally leave conservatism farther and farther behind.           

Gradations of “objectionable” features become more acute with the increasing number of film productions and attendant cinematic styles. As with universal randomization, 50 shades of gray can become a hundred in maybe half a decade.

In effect, too, the five-year span between an adolescent 13 and a legally mature 18 also began to represent a wide gamut and plenitude of variables.

In the past, our discussions on bridging that gap would always be shelved for a future time, for a variety of reasons, one of which was simply not to rock the boat. Well, mid-2012 appears to have urged a tipping point — without the Mayan doomsday calendar appearing to have been a factor.

Simply put, the current MTRCB led by chair Grace Poe Llamanzares bravely bit the bullet and approved Memorandum Circular No. 08-2012 with the subject of “Revised Classification Rating for Films,” adding the new “Restricted-16 (R-16).”

Quite a milestone, no matter how you “view” it.

“G” is still for “General Audience.” This is followed by “PG” or “Parental Guidance” — “Viewers below thirteen (13) years old must be accompanied by a parent or supervising adult when admitted…” Next is “Restricted-13 (R-13)” — meaning that “Only viewers who are thirteen (13) years old and above can be admitted…”

Then comes, before the customary last classification of “R-18” (beyond which an “X” gives the producer the last resort of “elevating” the matter to a special preview committee whose membership is named by His Excellency the President himself) … TAN-TA-RA-RAN … the new, fresh (sudsier, bubblier) “R-16”!

“Restricted-16 (R-16) — Only viewers as well as the viewers themselves who are sixteen (16) years old and above can be admitted into an ‘R-16’ film. An ‘R-16’ classification advises parents and supervising adults that the film may contain any of the following: themes, language, violence, nudity, sex, horror, and drugs that may not be suitable for children below sixteen (16) years of age.

“A film classified as ‘R-16’ must, in the judgment of the board, meet the following criteria.

“1. Theme — There are no restrictions on themes; provided that the treatment is appropriate for viewers who are at least sixteen (16) years of age.

“2. Language — The film may use any kind of language; provided that such use is justified by context, narrative, or character development; and taking into account the contemporary values and understanding of a Filipino viewer who is at least sixteen (16) years of age.

“3. Nudity — The film may contain natural and sexually-oriented nudity; provided that it is discreet and its depiction is not gratuitous and is justified by the context, narrative, or character development; and is taking into account the contemporary values and understanding of a Filipino viewer who is at least sixteen (16) years of age. 

“4. Sex — Sexual activity may be depicted; provided any depiction does not contain graphic detail, and such depiction is not gratuitous and is justified by…

Ditto “taking into account…” etc. as in the preceding criteria; so too for the rest that are “Violence,” “Horror,” and “Drugs” — the seventh and last criterion, with the stressed, unique, final statement: “The movie shall not in any case promote, condone, and encourage drug use.”

One might say that these are all but words and combinations of words that are still to be interpreted by laymen and lawyers alike, thus occasioning, most possibly, conflicts of views, from the yet ultra-conservative to the libertine. Oops, make that liberal. As maybe fellow board member and fellow Philippine STAR writer Mario Hernando and I are often “classified” to be. Smiley.

But hey, it’s still a triumph of progress and evolution and science (that of appreciating the special needs of sweet sixteen-ers who may now not cavil that they fall two years short of maturity to be able to watch a movie that is not shown at SM cinema houses — of a particularly autonomous fiefdom, it seems.) Make that kingdom.

Hooray then for us who make up the present Board that classifies movies for public screening, to protect kids and sectors, as well as come up with the guidelines for that purpose.

As Chair Grace Poe Llamanzares articulated in our last Board meeting last week, “We cannot be complacent with whatever is the situation, while giving the Filipino audience more options, and we should be prepared to work more …”

The Memorandum Circular will be published in newspapers, after which it will go into effect by mid-August.

Meanwhile, the Board has also been working more, indeed, in terms of forming committees that undertake seminars on a host of other essential matters, such as taking up the cudgels for “gender sensitivity.” Etc. 

It’s a harmonious family — we are — that even attend en banc meetings in the same color of outfits, such as white or black, to show our solidarity. Of course the films we preview and classify, not censor, mind you, are in full color, with infinite shades of gray depending on the pixels and pixies involved.