COMMENTARY : Is It Time to Change the Ratings System for Movies? : Films: Critics say R is a joke, an X is the kiss of death and PG-13 has become meaningless.

“Why fix it if it isn’t broken?”

Everytime there is a controversy over Hollywood’s movie ratings system, Motion Picture Assn. of America President Jack Valenti says, “Why fix it if it isn’t broken?”

When critics suggest ways to improve a system that has not changed substantially in its 22 years, Jack Valenti--who launched it way back then--says, “Why fix it if it isn’t broken?”

When filmmakers ask that the system do away with its skull-and-crossbones X rating to allow films with serious non-pornographic themes aimed at adults, Valenti says . . . “Why fix it if it isn’t broken?”

Jack, it’s broken.

* The R rating, which is supposed to keep unaccompanied people under 17 out of theaters, is a joke, enforced by neither exhibitors nor parents.

* The X rating, signifying films that can be seen only by adults, is a kiss of death to filmmakers. Long since co-opted by film pornographers, the rating has been virtually disassociated from the legitimate film industry. Most theater chains won’t book X-rated films and many publications and electronic media won’t accept advertising for them.

* The PG-13, spurred by Steven Spielberg’s inclusion of a heart being ripped out of a chest in the PG-rated “Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom,” has become meaningless.

The X ratings slapped on four films about to open in Los Angeles--Peter Greenaway’s “The Cook, The Thief, His Wife & Her Lover,” John McKnaughton’s “Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer,” Pedro Almodovar’s “Tie Me Up, Tie Me Down,” and Zalman King’s “Wild Orchid”--demonstrate just how antiquated and narrow-minded the system has become.

It is not the judgment of the raters themselves that is the flaw in the system; it is the adamant refusal of the MPAA to create and copyright, for example, an A rating--for adults only--that in an instant could right all the wrongs. The copyrighted A rating would be adults only; the X rating would be a catch-all, open classification that could be used by anyone. Without the A, or something like it, serious filmmakers will continue to be limited in what they can do and adult moviegoers will get less than what was intended.

Valenti successfully deflects every appeal for an A rating, quoting annual MPAA surveys that show most people find the ratings system helpful, as is. Sure they do; most people aren’t specifically interested in adults-only material. That is no reason to condone de facto censorship.

Unfortunately, the public--convinced that critics are championing artful degradation--remain unmoved. There has been no popular movement, no outrage, not even from the vocal art community so vociferously fighting for continued federal funding of unchaperoned art. And Valenti, who can lick his finger and read the political winds as well as anybody, just sits back and says, “Why fix it if it isn’t broken?”

The loss of any one of these films is not going to leave a scar on America’s cultural landscape, but all of them deserve better than they’re getting from the MPAA. Filmmakers should have full access to the market, and adult moviegoers should be able to see them in their uncut, uncompromised versions. Not just in the major cities where there are enough art house theaters to accommodate unrated movies, but in any town where there are enough people interested to see the movie.

“The Cook, The Thief, His Wife & Her Lover,” an operatic story about a vulgar, murderous thief whose abuse of everyone gives vent to the saying, “what goes around comes around,” has been a critical hit in England. It got mixed reviews in New York, where it opened last week, but the New York Times’ Caryn James lavished it with praise. Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert both turned thumbs up on “The Cook” on their syndicated TV movie review show, and though L.A. Times critics Sheila Benson and Kevin Thomas find it a loathsome bit of business, both agree it’s serious filmmaking for serious filmgoers.

What’s so tough about it? Plenty. The movie, opening in Los Angeles Friday, contains scenes of graphic (though non-pornographic) sex, scatological violence, child abuse, torture and--here’s something you don’t often see--sit-down, banquet-style cannibalism. It is definitely not for kids and should be rated for adults only.

But there is no effective adults-only rating to give it. X?

“Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer” was made in 1986 and shelved when it was given an X rating. The movie was revived last year at film festivals and is now being given a limited release, unrated. It is scheduled to run for one week at the Nuart beginning Wednesday.

By almost critical consensus, “Henry” is a responsible, well-made film that profiles a few days in the life of a mass murderer. The tone and nature of the film is deeply troubling, and because it feels like you’re really living with a sociopathic serial killer, there are scenes that turn your head (and stomach) in a way no conventional thriller or horror film could.

“Henry” is a scary film made scarier by the notion that the joy that Henry and a temporary sidekick take in their murders may titillate some borderline crazy in the audience. This movie, even more than “The Cook,” deserves an adults-only rating.

Although the movie is obviously not meant to be exploitative, there are already signs of a cult building around it, meaning that kids are going to want to see it. When films go out without a rating, audience restrictions are left completely to the distributors and the exhibitors.

“Tie Me Up, Tie Me Down,” opening May 4 at the Westside Pavilion, was made by the popular Spanish director Pedro Almodovar (“Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown”). It is a romantic comedy, of sorts, about a man who breaks into the apartment of a woman he admires, ties her to her bed and--a la “The Collector”--keeps her captive while he tries to win her over.

The woman is not raped, nor is she tied up naked. But you don’t need a priest, or the MPAA, to tell you that bondage is probably too strong for children, even if there are no whips or saddles involved. It’s not the fact that the ratings board thinks it should be seen by adults only, but that there is--to any rational mind--no adults-only rating to apply.

“Wild Orchid” is an erotic fantasy about a young woman lawyer whose first assignment in Rio de Janeiro turns into a hothouse sexual adventure. Directed and written by Zalman King, who produced “9-1/2 Weeks,” and starring Mickey Rourke and newcomer Carre Otis, the film has already broken box-office records in Italy and Spain. But you’re going to have to wait for the video if you want to see what those audiences are seeing. The film playing in Europe was rated X by the MPAA and because the distributor, New Visions, had planned a wide national release for it, King edited it down to get an R. (It opens in 800 theaters April 27.)

It’s hard to know exactly what the ratings board saw that caused it to raise the hatchet; New Visions is not screening the X-rated version for the American press. The R-rated version includes some steamy sex scenes, but the one that was obviously meant as the film’s sensual centerpiece--a last reel encounter between Rourke and Otis--has been so heavily edited, it’s tamer than a rock video.

People who’ve seen the European version came away believing that the stars were practicing Method acting for that scene, which would surely justify an adults-only label.

There are a couple of final ironies in all this. When Valenti created the current ratings system in 1968, he clearly intended for filmmakers who wish to “push the envelope” to be able to do so. And for a while, the X rating worked.

“Midnight Cowboy” was released with an X and became a box office hit destined to win the Oscar for best picture. “The Last Tango in Paris” was released with an X and it has gained the stature of a classic.

But when the pornographers opportunistically adopted the uncopyrighted X for their own, the letter was irreversibly stained. Though the video revolution has put most of the X-rated theaters out of business, a few still operate and as long as there is confusion over what an X means on a film, ads for legitimate X-rated movies will be excluded from mainstream media outlets.

Is this machine broken, or what?