Like if someone wanted to make a movie about the destruction of the Minoan civilization by the eruption of Santorini. In the Minoan civilization, women walked around with dresses that exposed their breasts
And if you tried using Godiva hair or convenient hand placement after a while it would look ridiculous. So if someone made a movie about this and had the actresses wear the dresses but there wasn't any sexual content in the film should it still be rated R because of that.
Most Helpful Guy
You should REALLY do some research on the MPAA.
They are a HIGHLY corrupt organization.
Its been shown that they are purposefully stricter with indie films and non big studio films than they are with the major studios.
Why, Well probably because its FUNDED BY THE STUDIOS.
Furthermore, the ratings are EXTREMELY arbitrary,
"he independent film Saints and Soldiers, which contains no nudity, almost no sex (although, there is a scene in which a German soldier is about to rape a French woman), very little profanity, and a minimum of violence, was said to have been rated R for a single clip where a main character is shot and killed, and required modification of just that one scene to receive a PG-13 rating."
Now take a look at Saving Private Ryan, which by all rights SHOULD be NC-17
what is it, R.
The MPAA is fucked the hell up.0
Most Helpful Girl
I don't get why children shouldn't be exposed to bare breasts, it harms no one.1