In a move to modernize the age-rating system for movies in Ontario, Canada, the provincial government recently proposed the 'Film Content Information Act 2020' as part of the Budget Bill that does away with General, Parental Guidance, 14 Accompaniment, 18 Accompaniment and Restricted age ratings. The new act would replace the Film Classification Act, 2005 .
In recent years, the Ontario Film Review Board (OFRB) -- a film classification body run by the Ontario Film Authority, a nonprofit organization, appears to have fallen behind in assigning the mandatory age-ratings to movies released in the province. This created a problem since films could only be screened by distributors and theatres once they had been assigned an official rating issued by the province. The absence of a rating affected new releases.
There are cases where popular movies like "Roma" were not rated in time for its release. The acronym STC or Subject to Classification started appearing more frequently. Besides the delays, there is also the issue of inconsistent ratings. Films are sometimes assigned higher ratings and, upon further review, re-rated. The OFRB website's rating database is also outdated.
To bring more efficiency and adapt to the rapidly shifting landscape toward digital platforms and streaming services, the provincial government dissolved the Ontario Film Authority on September 27, 2019 and took control of classifying movies in the province. The government assumed this role until it held consultations with the public and industry in the fall of 2019. The objective was to modernize film classification in Ontario while at the same time continuing to maintain consumer protection. In addition to reducing regulatory requirements, this move will also help the film industry save up to $1.5 million per year on film rating and licensing costs.
The outcome of this consultation with all stakeholders is the proposed new 'Film Content Information Act, 2020' that is formulated to replace what the government considers outdated requirements with information that assists the general public in making informed viewing decisions. The Act, if passed into law, would completely abolish the need for film exhibitors, retailers, and distributors to meet the film classification and licensing requirements. However, adult movies with explicit sexual content and video games will continue to be regulated as per the existing rules and regulations.
In contrast to traditional age-ratings, exhibitors are required to provide comprehensive descriptors about the film which could include violence, nudity, profanity, drug use, sexual scenes and more. A suggested age-rating could also be provided but this would only serve as a recommendation and not a rule. To receive feedback about the exhibitor provided ratings and to ensure audience complaints are attended to, contact details will be provided.
It remains to be seen if this proposed new act will provide more content information than traditional age-ratings and influence viewing choices of the audiences. However, in the rapidly changing environment of proliferating media content from both traditional and OTT players, self-regulation appears to be one of the most efficient methods to keep up with content.
OTT Platforms Challenging Ideologies in India
Russian writer Yevgeny Zamyatin published "We" in 1921. The story follows the totalitarian society, One State, its architecture is made-up almost entirely of glass. The citizens are under mass surveillance and society functions strictly by logic and reasoning which justify the common law . The book is as contentious now as it was when it was released. The fallout after the novel circulated forced Zamyatin to move to Paris as his career in Russia was declared dead. He was blacklisted in his homeland. Though he eventually died penniless and in poverty, "We" is considered one of the greatest Dystopian masterpieces.
So, what is it about Dystopia that makes people-particularly those in power-so uncomfortable? In many ways, Dystopian stories are political satires that explore possibilities of what can go wrong in that environment.
In 2019, Netflix India released "Leila," based on the book of the same name by Indian journalist and novelist, Prayaag Akbar. The story follows a woman named Shalini in her quest to find her daughter, Leila, kidnapped by a totalitarian regime. The regime known as Aryavarta is controlled by supreme leader, Doctor Joshi, who rules with an iron fist. People are segregated based on their religion and forbidden to mate beyond the confines of it. Those who do not obey the law are punished and children of those unions are forcefully taken away. The series contains considerable imagery and symbolism derived from Hinduism.
So, it was not unexpected when far-right Indian organizations started striking out at the series, calling it 'Anti-Hindu' and accusing it of spreading #Hinduphobia, which went on to become a Twitter trend.
"Leila" dares to ask uncomfortable questions.
Netflix India's horror offering, "Ghoul" released in 2018, follows characters in a not too distant future overtaken by sectarianism. In this story, words like 'anti-national' are used openly to label anyone daring to challenge the State's authority. While the central plot focuses on the dark mysteries of one detention facility inmate, the sharp political jabs asserted throughout hit their mark. The world of "Ghoul" is one where intellectuals are routinely rounded-up, heckled and profiled. A time where literature is contraband and book burning the norm; a grim projection of what can be.
The need for Dystopian content is now. When Yevgeny Zamyatin wrote "We," sealing his own fate, he bravely set out to question Stalin and his policies. When objections are raised about a fictious regime in "Leila," citizens ought to question why.
