The MPAA, from the moviegoer's perspective, is the organization that hands down arbitrary rulings that determined whether 16-year-olds will have to sneak into certain films or seek them out only at theaters brave enough to show something NC-17. But in Washington, the MPAA is the group that lobbies for more support for the industry and wines and dines the most influential politicians-- and this is where the guy in charge of the whole thing matters most.
So now that Dan Glickman has announced his intention to leaves his post as Chairman of the MPAA next fall, the discussion about who will replace him largely matters to the movers and shakers at the top-- not us lowly moviegoers on the bottom. There are suggestions in the Variety piece about Glickman's exit that suggest his replacement could mean a new role for the MPAA, but pretty much no mention of revamping the ratings system, which is the main thing most moviegoers would care about.
Of course, the money that comes to the industry in Washington, and pretty much any seemingly minor thing that Glickman's successor does, will affect the movie industry lately. But thus far there seems to be no evidence that whoever comes next will shake up the status quo. Read Variety's piece if you like, but it might only be a depressing reminder that, when it comes to the people who make the big decisions, you are very, very far from the top.
