Search

Human rights is a topic of high importance in Western societies, and discrimination has been noted as a determining force in their violations. Films depicting human rights issues have been discussed as instrumental in bringing these matters to the attention of the general public and students. Their exposure is dependent largely on their age-classifications by movie advisory boards which determine who can watch them. Two studies were conducted to assess how films depicting human rights issues and held exemplary by the Political Film Society (PFS) are evaluated by movie advisory boards, providing justifications for their age-classifications. Study 1 found that the boards in the US and the UK identify these movies as suitable mainly for adults, while in Australia, in most cases, moviegoers are to decide their appropriateness. Each board stresses different contents as their main concerns, yet none mention discrimination. Study 2, assessing Netherland's NICAM evaluations, revealed that these movies are considered suitable mainly for adults, primarily because they are heavy with violence and fear arousing contents, with only some noted to include discriminatory contents. Thus, in these liberal-democratic societies, human rights movies considered of high value, in most cases are removed from the educational arena.

Benigni's Life is Beautiful gained a controversial reputation, yet managed to locate itself as one of the main pillars of Holocaust cinema of the recent decades. Prior studies had addressed the movie's reception among academics, professional movie critics, and to lesser extent, university students. Here, the perspectives of North American non-professional online movie reviewers were assessed, as this group gains an increasing role in shaping the ways consumers of goods, including cultural goods, relate to various products. These reviewers were found to be very favorite of the movie, and especially emphasized its' emotional appeal and capability to bring viewers to experience deep reflective processes, and point these characteristics to be the most crucial elements of the movie which should bring potential consumers to watch it. Future studies are needed to find how non-professional online movie reviewers of other nationalities react to the movie, as well to other Italian films reaching the global audience.

Many multicultural education classes include popular movies in their study material. Here were examined the age-classifications and their justifications for movies recommended by the American organization Teachers Against Prejudice (TAP) to be shown during high school multicultural classes, as assigned by the American, British, Australian movie advisory boards. Findings indicate that some of the movies chosen by TAP are deemed suitable only for adult moviegoers, most notably by the American and the British boards, and that these movies are loaded with profanity and violence.

Films depicting individuals dealing with mental health have not been discussed from the viewpoint of movie advisory boards, the entities informing moviegoers of potential inappropriate contents included in films. Movies considered best by the Center for Mental Health Services were investigated for age-classifications and their justifications. All of the boards investigated, chosen as they provide some sort of justification for the age-decisions, cited profanity as their main concern. In the US, the UK, Ireland, Hong Kong and Singapore, these movies are mainly considered suitable for adult moviegoers, while the Australian and Dutch boards are far more lenient.