|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ASSIGNED NUMBERS |
|
|
Unlike the MPAA we do not assign one inscrutable rating based on age, but 3 objective ratings for SEX/NUDITY, VIOLENCE/GORE and PROFANITY on a scale of 0 to 10, from lowest to highest, depending on quantity and context. |
|
[more »] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our Mission |
|
The purpose of kids-in-mind.com is to provide parents and other adults with objective and complete information about a film's content so that they can decide, based on their own value system, whether they should watch a movie with or without their kids.
It's like a food labeling system which tells you what a food item contains. That's it. We make no judgments about what is good or bad or anything else.
Indeed, we do not "condemn," "critique" or "criticize" movies. And we don't "praise" or "recommend" movies either.
We advance no "beliefs" and we do not "preach" anything. We are not affiliated with any political party, any cultural or religious group, or any ideology. The only thing we advocate is responsible, engaged parenting.
If one reads our reviews one will often find many instances where our descriptions are so detailed they seem absurd. But we'd rather err on the side of comprehensiveness. It's up to parents to decide which details are useful to them and their family, and which ones they consider fatuous.
Parents should seek out sites like ours and make decisions based
on objective information about content. Our position is that no
organization should be involved in arbitrating who should or
shouldn't see a film (especially one as closely involved with
Hollywood as the MPAA). What we'd like to see is many
independent organizations like ours distributing ratings to
media outlets and theater chains. And allow the marketplace
work. Consumers will choose the ratings system that serves them
best in making a decision, according to their own values and
priorities -- we freely admit that we think our ratings are hard
to improve upon, but the consumer should be allowed the final
decision.
The fact is, however, that while the current system does not
serve consumers well, it works perfectly for the filmmakers, the
studios and the theater chains. It is based on a cozy
relationship between the MPAA, the film industry, and the
theater chains. It is a malleable system that can be altered at
will to accommodate changes in the market. For instance, the
rating of choice right now is PG-13. A movie with a PG-13 rating
is just easier to market: parents like it better than the more
adult R-rating, and kids like it better than the more juvenile
PG rating; plus, a PG-13 rating is merely a "cautionary" rating,
as opposed to the more restrictive R rating (although, of
course, anybody, of any age, can watch any R-rated movie as long
as he's accompanied by an "adult guardian"; in some locales any
17-year-old will do).
So, in order to accommodate the marketing demands of studios and
theaters, the MPAA has been slowly but surely changing its
criteria so that a PG-13 movie today contains far more violence,
sexual content and profanity than a few years ago (for example,
it used to be that one F-word would garner a film an R rating;
now it takes 3 or more F-words).
|
|
|
Our History |
|
We came up with the idea for Kids-In-Mind after we went into a video store and watched as a customer was trying to get one of the clerks to explain exactly why a film was rated PG-13. Of course the clerk couldn't. She realized that the MPAA ratings were simply too vague, and that most parents would not agree on what they'd consider offensive material. Some are upset by profanity and nudity, but seem indifferent to violent scenes, while others think that kids will hear all sorts of obscenity at the playground in any case, and so don't mind them listening to actors spewing expletives. We never doubted that Kids-In-Mind would be a hit with parents and other concerned adults. We were surprised, however, to receive support from an unexpected quarter -- the MPAA itself. Apparently, filmmakers will sometimes screen one version of their film for the MPAA's ratings board and then release a slightly different version in theaters. So, the MPAA got into the habit of comparing our Kids-In-Mind with their own notes. Since we were the first to come up with this concept (we started publishing Kids-In-Mind on AOL in 1992, as part of our Critics Inc. site) we have the largest database of parents' reviews available anywhere, enabling parents to check out the content of innumerable videos. Several newspapers, magazines and web sites have tried to emulate our reviews, with varying degrees of success, but none has generated the same amount of trust and loyalty our Kids-In-Mind reviews have.
|
|
|
Our Company |
|
Critics Inc. is a for-profit company that
was established in 1992 as an online entertainment magazine
exclusively available on the America Online and Delphi networks.
Since 1998, Critics Inc. has moved its properties to the web and
in addition to kids-in-mind.com,
publishes two other movie-related websites:
Critics.com
is a unique, prominent review hub that provides movie ratings
determined by a survey of notable critical opinion. Each
critics' ratecard illustrates the national critical consensus in
one glance and provides links for readers who want to explore
individual reviews further.
MediaScreen.com
is a leading online guide to DVDs, that originally started
covering laserdiscs in 1993. It became the one and only
destination for home-theater fanatics on AOL and its popularity
continues on the web. While MediaScreen.com does cover prominent
Hollywood features, it also specializes in covering art, foreign
and obscure titles.
Our websites have been featured and praised by many American and
international press and other media outlets. A partial list
includes TIME, USA Today, Chicago Tribune,
Detroit News, Fresno
Bee, San Francisco Chronicle, Cincinnati Enquirer,
Philadelphia
Inquirer, Boston Globe, MSNBC,
CNN, CNBC, BBC World Service, and
several local radio and TV stations, websites, magazines and
newspapers.
Kids-in-mind.com is extraordinarily popular, registering millions of accesses every month (it is the
first site listed on Google when you search for "movie ratings,"
even above the MPAA's own official site).
|
|
|
Our Address |
|
Critics Inc.
6724 Perimeter Loop Rd., Suite 310
Dublin, Ohio 43017-3202
614.408.3865
E-mail: |
|
|
Our Staff |
|
Patty Inglish [Critic]
Anna Sturgeon [Critic]
Renee Phillips [Critic]
Teressa L. Elliott [Contributing Critic]
Paul Brenner [Contributing Critic]
S. Damien Segal [Contributing Critic]
Lori Pearson [Communications Director]
Bob Marlowe [Senior Editor]
Aris T. Christofides [Publisher/Editor] |
|
|
|
|
|
WE NEED YOUR HELP! Although our site remains very popular, the current economic climate has reduced our ad revenues and, as if that wasn't enough,
it has become the target of hackers who don't like what we do and are
determined to destroy it. To protect our reviews we moved to a much more secure, and expensive, server and we need your help more than ever. If you think what we do is worthwhile and helpful
to you, please consider
donating or
becoming a member and make sure we continue to publish
-- as an extra benefit, members have access to our premium website, which is totally free of ads. |
|
|
|
|
|
|