Money talks... or does it?

Here's a great quotation: Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital. And a fascinating illustration of this point came out of the US recently, courtesy of foam-at-the-mouth reactionary right-wing industry blog Big Hollywood.

In the 2009 Movieguide® Magazine’s Annual Report, Dr Ted Baehr reveals the stunning fact that American audiences prefer movies without violence, sex and bad language. He certainly sounds convincing - after all, he breaks down each element of offensive content and looks for correlation with the movie's box office results.

Take the following example:
No nudity: $36,274,503
Some sexual nudity: $29,132,665
Extensive sexual nudity: $19,874,327

It certainly makes a compelling case for the success of movies where the cast remain fully clothed. Or does it?
Bollocks. And I don't care if that means I lose some of my audience.

What this disingenuous dickhead neglects to mention, is that the content he finds offensive also has a bearing on the rating that the movie receives. And the rating a film gets dictates everything from how many screens it appears on and where it's advertised, right through to who can actually buy a ticket. It doesn't take a genius then, to see that the bigger your audience, the better your chances of making money. Films aimed at kids will have twice the audience of a film aimed only at adults.

And yet the conservatives fall over themselves to quote this filmic fidiot every year to prove the point that Americans don't want adult content in their movies. Although I can't help but marvel at how ironic it is that the most successful R-rated movie of all time was none other than Passion of the Christ, a film described by one critic as a 'primitive and pornographic bloodbath'. Sounds lovely.