Harvey Weinstein is a hypocritical bully and a f***ing a**hole. Now that publicity has subsided, Weinstein to cut Bully down to a PG-13 after all.

When the manufactured outrage over the MPAA handing Bully an R-rating for its six F-bombs, I politely suggested that Weinstein should just do what Morgan Spurlock did with Super Size Me and cut and alternate, 'educational version' of the documentary so that it could be viewed in schools and other public places.  But over the last two months, Harvey Weinstein and his band of Karl Rove/Lee Atwater-ish bullies have ginned up the media, getting publicity-friendly movie stars and righteously indignant pundits to hem and howl at the MPAA because they had the gall not to give Weinstein's film preferential treatment.  After all, an R-rating was going to keep kids from seeing Bully in a theater!  LIE (any kid of any age can see an R-rated film with a parent/guardian over 18).  And NATO's statement to the Weinstein Company that releasing the film unrated would possibly cause theaters to treat it like an NC-17 film was EXACTLY like threatening to give the film an NC-17 as retaliation for raising a ruckus!  LIE.  If the MPAA didn't give in and give the film a PG-13, the film wouldn't reach the kids that it needed to reach!  LIE (DVDs, Blu-Ray, Video On Demand, Netflix... pick one!).  The film was so singularly awesome and important that it had the unimpeachable power to save kids' lives and that denying this film its rightful PG-13 was tantamount to murdering at-risk bullied youth.  Well, I haven't seen the film, but I'm guessing that's a LIE too.

It's not the rating, it's the implementation: Random thoughts on the Blue Valentine MPAA mess, as the film wins an R rating on appeal.

So, first off, the good news. After about a month of appeals, the Weinstein Company drama Blue Valentine has won its appeal and received an R rating. As most of you probably know, the Ryan Gosling/Michelle Williams marital drama had original received an NC-17 primarily for a scene involving oral sex between the emotionally damaged married couple. Much of the discussion over the last month has centered on the usual canards: that the MPAA treats mainstream fare lighter than big studio fare, that sex is treated harsher than violence, and that sex presented in a serious context is treated harsher than sex treated as comedic or overtly prurient in nature. All of these clichés seem to apply in this particular case. But the problem is not the rating system. The problem is how said system is implemented.