Why Does NC-17 Exist?

[Harshaw]

Huh. Blue Valentine examplifies that a distributor did not agree with the NC-17 verdict, and had it reversed to R. The film is the same, no editing was done to please the MPAA...

That does absolutely nothing to refute me or bolster you. You just don't know what you're talking about.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

Huh. Blue Valentine examplifies that a distributor did not agree with the NC-17 verdict, and had it reversed to R. The film is the same, no editing was done to please the MPAA...

its an organization set up by the studios that they voluntarily join. That doesn't mean they get to simply veto their rating scores.

 

[Jerry]

Seriously, why? Why do you need to go to lengths of NC-17 when you have an R rating, is it acceptable in the United States to force certain films underground or change the movie because of their content? The U.S. film rating system seems to be run by Nazis. Films that get NC-17 in the U.S. might get R here and in Quebec will get PG-16 or 14.

I don't know whether this should be in the forums used for movies or political discussion so move it accordingly.

Here's the real reason: so movie corperations can shelve a film for internal corporet political reasons.

NC17 movies don't sell. People want either a softdrink of a movie they can take their kids to, or they want a hard liquor R movie for themselves. NC17 is basicaly a wine spritser, and no one wants that gay ****.

Orgasmo, for example, was given an NC17 rating and shelved indefinantly after final production. The movie wss completely finished and in the wraper when it wss warhoused.

Only after Trey Parker and Matt Stone became famus for South Park was Orgasmo released to the public.

 

[paris]

That does absolutely nothing to refute me or bolster you. You just don't know what you're talking about.

Yea, okay. How about Ryan Gosling? Does he not know what he's talking about, too?

 

[paris]

its an organization set up by the studios that they voluntarily join. That doesn't mean they get to simply veto their rating scores.

But how can you say it's all voluntary when the Weinstein Company had to appeal their verdict?

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

But how can you say it's all voluntary when the Weinstein Company had to appeal their verdict?

because they voluntarily submitted to them, voluntarily joined the organization, and voluntarily branded their film with the rating. They could have released the film without any of that, but such would hurt their commercial interests (not their artistic ones)

 

[Gaius46]

Yea, okay. How about Ryan Gosling? Does he not know what he's talking about, too?

Ryan Gosling can speak? The only movie I saw him in I think he grunted three times and that was about it.

 

[Harshaw]

Yea, okay. How about Ryan Gosling? Does he not know what he's talking about, too?

If he thinks it's illegal to advertise on TV, then no, he doesn't. But what you're failing entirely to grasp as that what he said does NOT contradict what I said.

You could understand that if you wanted to. You obviously don't.

 

[Harshaw]

But how can you say it's all voluntary when the Weinstein Company had to appeal their verdict?

The one has nothing to do with the other.

 

[paris]

So you have a rating wich definitely limits ability to market a film, and you want us to believe it doesn't drive films underground. All the big chains such as Walmart and Blockbusters will not carry NC-17 movies. If you choose not to accept the ratings, you can't run tv spots. You never see tv spots for unrated films.

And amongst thirty different countries rating systems, the MPAA is the only one not disclosing who are their rating system board members. The MPAA raters are supposedly made up of anonymous parents to protect them from influence, but they regurlarly meet with the people who are the most likely to influence them: studio personnel.

It's a very powerful culturally censor group. Such public policy role for American culture, probably shouldn't be hiding in a veil of secrecy. The MPAA has said they're afraid their people would be under pressure, but there are many people who make important judgements and are under pressure, such as judges, prosecutors, school officials, and they all operate in the public sphere.

Though we know who they work for: Warner Bros, Universal, Sony Pictures, 20th Century Fox, Paramount, and Walt Disney. These corporations control more than 95% of the US film business and are part of even larger conglomerates which own more than 90% of all media in the US.

We also know that clergy members are part of the appeal process. These are moral censors, they make judgement about other people's morality. There aren't many places in the US where you get that.

Nearly four times as many films received an NC-17 for sex as opposed to violence.

 

[paris]

Film makers are usually puzzled as to what criteria drive the MPAA to assign an NC-17. That's quite difficult to figure out indeed.

American Beauty, straight guy masturbates naked in the shower - rated R.

But I'm A Cheerleader, gay girl masturbates fully-clothed in her bedroom - rated NC-17. When originally submitted to the Motion Picture Association of America rating board, But I'm a Cheerleader received an NC-17 rating. In order to get a commercially-viable R rating, Babbit removed a two second shot of Graham's hand sweeping Megan's clothed body, a camera pan up Megan's body when she is masturbating, and a comment that Megan "ate Graham out" (slang for cunnilingus). American Pie (also released in 1999), which features a teenage boy masturbating, was given an R rating.

Single White Female, straight guy has oral sex performed on him - rated R.

Boys Don't Cry, gay girl has oral sex performed on her - rated NC-17. Initially assigned an NC-17 rating from the MPAA, the content was strongly toned down for the US release, where the film was rated R. Peirce displayed anger over the fact the MPAA wanted the sex scene between Brandon and Lana removed but were satisfied with the overall brutality and violence in the murder scene.

Where The Truth Lies, gay girl has oral sex performed on her - rated NC-17. The film received an NC-17 rating in the United States due to scenes depicting a threesome and graphic lesbian sex. Egoyan condemned the MPAA decision as "a violent act of censorship", while Bacon stated, "I don't get it, when I see films (that) are extremely violent, extremely objectable sometimes in terms of the roles that women play, slide by with an R, no problem, because the people happen to have more clothes on." Both suggested that homophobia may have played a role in the decision, as the film deals in part with repressed homosexuality.

Mysterious Skin, gay guy is shown having sex with another man from behind - rated NC-17.

Unfaithful, straight guy is shown having sex with a woman from behind - rated R.

Sideways, straight sex scenes - rated R.

Henry & June, gay sex - rated NC-17. Henry & June was the first film to receive the MPAA's rating of NC-17, which had been devised as a replacement for the X rating. NC-17 was intended to signify serious, non-pornographic films with more violence or (especially) sexual content than would qualify for an R rating. The inclusion of the postcard Nin views at the start of the film (which is of Hokusai's The Dream of the Fisherman's Wife), and some scenes of le Bal des Beaux Arts contributed to the NC-17 rating.

American Psycho, rated NC-17 because of a three way sex scene, but not for the axe and chainsaw murders. The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) gave the film an NC-17 rating for a scene featuring Bateman having a threesome with two prostitutes. The producers excised approximately 18 seconds of footage to obtain an R-rated version of the film.

Sin City, full of dismemberments and decapitations and grizzly forms of violence, rated R.

The Dreamers, sex among three young people, rated NC-17. The film was controversial in the United States because of its nudity and sexual content. There are two versions: an uncut NC-17-rated version, and an R-rated version that is about three minutes shorter.

The Cooler, shows a woman's pubic hair, rated NC-17. Tthe MPAA originally rated the film NC-17 because of a glimpse of Maria Bello's pubic hair during a sex scene. An edited version rated R was released in theaters. A director's cut has been broadcast by the Independent Film Channel and Cinemax.

Basic Instinct is rated R for "strong violence and sensuality, and for drug use and language". It was initially given an NC-17 rating by the MPAA, but under pressure from TriStar, Verhoeven cut 35–40 seconds to gain an R rating. Verhoeven described the changes in a March 1992 article in The New York Times: Actually, I didn't have to cut many things, but I replaced things from different angles, made it a little more elliptical, a bit less direct. The film was subsequently re-released in its uncut format on video and later on DVD.

More about the MPAA here: Biggest MPAA Ratings Controversies - Business Insider

Those are the guys who rated The King's Speech as R...

 

[radioman]

Films that get NC-17 in the U.S. might get R here and in Quebec will get PG-16 or 14.

.

Really???
Most NC-17 films contain lots of naughty, sexy stuff.
Those rascally French-Quebecois seem to be a little lax morally.
I can only say....woo-hoo...vive la france!!

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

So you have a rating wich definitely limits ability to market a film, and you want us to believe it doesn't drive films underground. All the big chains such as Walmart and Blockbusters will not carry NC-17 movies. If you choose not to accept the ratings, you can't run tv spots. You never see tv spots for unrated films.

And amongst thirty different countries rating systems, the MPAA is the only one not disclosing who are their rating system board members. The MPAA raters are supposedly made up of anonymous parents to protect them from influence, but they regurlarly meet with the people who are the most likely to influence them: studio personnel.

It's a very powerful culturally censor group. Such public policy role for American culture, probably shouldn't be hiding in a veil of secrecy. The MPAA has said they're afraid their people would be under pressure, but there are many people who make important judgements and are under pressure, such as judges, prosecutors, school officials, and they all operate in the public sphere.

Though we know who they work for: Warner Bros, Universal, Sony Pictures, 20th Century Fox, Paramount, and Walt Disney. These corporations control more than 95% of the US film business and are part of even larger conglomerates which own more than 90% of all media in the US.

We also know that clergy members are part of the appeal process. These are moral censors, they make judgement about other people's morality. There aren't many places in the US where you get that.

Nearly four times as many films received an NC-17 for sex as opposed to violence.

I don't think anyone is denying they carry lots of influence in the industry (I have stressed this myself and noted it's even hard to produce and R-rated product these days). But it's worlds away from a govt run system that carries the force of the state. Especially in the age of the internet, when marketing and distribution is so decentralized

 

[Harshaw]

So you have a rating wich definitely limits ability to market a film, and you want us to believe it doesn't drive films underground. All the big chains such as Walmart and Blockbusters will not carry NC-17 movies. If you choose not to accept the ratings, you can't run tv spots. You never see tv spots for unrated films.

How would you know? You're not here to see it. And yes, you absolutely DO see TV spots for unrated films, frequently.

In fact, doing so is marketing niche all unto itself, because it makes the movie seem edgier or "forbidden." The same is true with the marketing of "unrated" or "director's cuts." It makes films MORE attractive to certain markets.

So I'm sure you'll continue to try to find articles which say what you want to believe, but you'll continue to have no clue what actually goes on.

And amongst thirty different countries rating systems, the MPAA is the only one not disclosing who are their rating system board members. The MPAA raters are supposedly made up of anonymous parents to protect them from influence, but they regurlarly meet with the people who are the most likely to influence them: studio personnel.

It's a very powerful culturally censor group. Such public policy role for American culture, probably shouldn't be hiding in a veil of secrecy. The MPAA has said they're afraid their people would be under pressure, but there are many people who make important judgements and are under pressure, such as judges, prosecutors, school officials, and they all operate in the public sphere.

Though we know who they work for: Warner Bros, Universal, Sony Pictures, 20th Century Fox, Paramount, and Walt Disney. These corporations control more than 95% of the US film business and are part of even larger conglomerates which own more than 90% of all media in the US.

We also know that clergy members are part of the appeal process. These are moral censors, they make judgement about other people's morality. There aren't many places in the US where you get that.

Nearly four times as many films received an NC-17 for sex as opposed to violence.

This can only be described as paranoid fantasy.

 

[paris]

lol, all these claims are coming from people who work in the film industry, so I bet they have a better clue than you.

 

[Harshaw]

lol, all these claims are coming from people who work in the film industry, so I bet they have a better clue than you.

1) None of them claim what you think they did. It's been explained to you why; you just don't want to know any different.

2) You've made any number of claims which are just balderdash, like legal restrictions and that unrated films aren't advertised on TV.

3) You believe what you want to believe, regardless.

4) I am in the film industry.

 

[rocket88]

Why do you freak out about all kinds of things you don't need to worry about (or, most of the time, actually understand)? This doesn't affect you in the slightest.

But to answer your question, those under 17 can get into an R-rated movie if accompanied by an adult. They can't in an NC-17 movie. That's why it exists -- for content too mature for an R-rating. Nothing goes "underground" because of an NC-17 rating.

It's called "NC-17" because the previous, similar rating, benignly called "X," was exploited by the porn industry (who used the unofficial "XXX rating"), and the X rating was so stigmatized that it was done away with. "Midnight Cowboy," Oscar-winning Best Picture for 1969 releases, was rated X.

X became a badge of honor. It was like an advertisement after a while.

 

[rocket88]

Really???
Most NC-17 films contain lots of naughty, sexy stuff.
Those rascally French-Quebecois seem to be a little lax morally.
I can only say....woo-hoo...vive la france!!

Quebec ain't "La France." Vive les francophones!

 

[paris]

Once again, I didn't make the claim that it was legally enforced, I just asked a question. Now I know that it's not, though it's customary. And I see you didn't comment about Walmart and Blockbusters not carrying NC-17 films, which definitely limits marketing abilities. No wonder why.

 

[Harshaw]

And I see you didn't comment about Walmart and Blockbusters not carrying NC-17 films, which definitely limits marketing abilities. No wonder why.

Yeah, it's no wonder at all, because you're wrong about that, too -- which happens when you just make things up.

http://www.walmart.com/search/searc...-17+&ic=16_0&Find=Find&search_constraint=4096

http://www.blockbuster.com/browse/search/product/products?keyword=nc-17

 

[paris]

Wow. Four NC-17 movies available across all Walmart department stores in the US. Very impressive.

 

[Fiddytree]

Wow. Four NC-17 movies available across all Walmart department stores in the US. Very impressive.

Yet they still refuse to sell unedited "parental advisory label" music.:lol:

 

[Harshaw]

Wow. Four NC-17 movies available across all Walmart department stores in the US. Very impressive.

Oh, of course; even though carrying even ONE refutes you, you still have to try to move the goalposts. See, you just don't let go of what you want to believe no matter how many times you're shown to be wrong.

Tell you what -- here's a list of the top-grossing NC-17 films.

Top Grossing NC-17 Rated Movies at the Box Office

Report back on which ones Walmart doesn't carry.

 

[paris]

Look. That claim came from John Waters in Kirby Dick's 2006 doc, This Film Has Not Been Yet Rated. So perhaps Wal-mart's policy has changed since 2006, or perhaps he didn't know what he was talking about, like all the others in that doc? Kevin Smith is the one who said that unrated (unrated, not 'not yet rated') films aren't advertised on tv. Could you provide some proof to the contrary? Thanks. Also I can't access your Blockbusters link.

Anyway, La Vie d'Adèle (Blue Is The Warmest Color), which is restricted to people under 12 in France (NC-17 in the US), has had a remarkably good start in theaters here. Let's see how it fares elsewhere...

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

Look. That claim came from John Waters in Kirby Dick's 2006 doc, This Film Has Not Been Yet Rated. So perhaps Wal-mart's policy has changed since 2006, or perhaps he didn't know what he was talking about, like all the others in that doc? Kevin Smith is the one who said that unrated (unrated, not 'not yet rated') films aren't advertised on tv. Could you provide some proof to the contrary? Thanks. Also I can't access your Blockbusters link.

Anyway, La Vie d'Adèle (Blue Is The Warmest Color), which is restricted to people under 12 in France (NC-17 in the US), has had a remarkably good start in theaters here. Let's see how it fares elsewhere...

I recall seeing the unrated edition of both "the devil's rejects" and "Halloween" both being advertised on TV. But how you would go about validating that here is rather difficult (any commercial could just be web based). But I am unsure how they would get around the 1st with such a law