3 Films so far go NC-17 in 2004

Started by SoNowThen, March 22, 2004, 03:31:13 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages1 2 3
User actions

SoNowThen

March 22, 2004, 03:31:13 PM
With Mac's last post about Haute Tension, this is starting to get exciting to me. The Lions Gate guy said something about them wanting to do their part to help legitimize the proper adult rating.

This can only be a good thing. Well, maybe it'll allow for more shit softcore or something to slip through (see Weak2nd's thread on straight-to-video), but I feel like something exciting is happening in cinema right now.

If we wanna tell our stories, and it's demanded that subject matter or presentation be suitably graphic, we can now do what we need to do.

Perhaps.

Thoughts?
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

Ghostboy

#1
March 22, 2004, 03:56:11 PM
Who knows, maybe it's a fluke that these three films have received the rating in the last three months, but it is really exciting to think that maybe distributors are becoming more open to standing behind artistic intergrity and maybe pushing for a shift in understanding of adult subject matter. It could have happened in 95, when Miramax was in their prime, but then Showgirls happened and Miramax got a permanent case of cold feet and abandoned Kids. Fox Searchlight and Lions Gate seem to be picking up the cause. Perhaps Ebert's A-rating proposal will come to fruition, which really would be the ideal circumstance, especially if it was ushered in with a really high profile film that wouldn't scare audiences away.

Weak2ndAct

#2
March 22, 2004, 04:00:25 PM
Hollywood's so dumb, all they need is one NC-17 moneymaker and more will follow...

Personally, I think they should advertise NC-17 flicks with the motto that "there aren't gonna be any kids in this theatre, so you can actually enjoy the movie in peace!"

MacGuffin

#3
March 22, 2004, 04:11:18 PM
Quote from: Weak2ndActPersonally, I think they should advertise NC-17 flicks with the motto that "there aren't gonna be any kids in this theatre, so you can actually enjoy the movie in peace!"

That'll only leave people with cell phones and those who talk during the film because they think they're at home.
"Don't think about making art, just get it done. Let everyone else decide if it's good or bad, whether they love it or hate it. While they are deciding, make even more art." - Andy Warhol


Skeleton FilmWorks

SoNowThen

#4
March 22, 2004, 04:19:10 PM
ie. middle age women

I must have missed the memo where it said "dialogue gaps in films are for chatting with your friends".
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

Chest Rockwell

#5
March 22, 2004, 04:36:25 PM
All I want is to be able to see some of these films getting the NC-17. There should either be some way of getting in legitly (eg parental consent; super special 'Mature Film-Viewer Pass') for people like me that want to see these films for appropriate reasons, or a new rating that allows some leg-room without being R (perhaps the A-rating?). Oh who am I kidding? Neither will ever be granted.

SoNowThen

#6
March 22, 2004, 04:40:26 PM
Basically, you'll just have to wait and rent/buy them on dvd.

A small price to pay for a more NC-17 friendly market, I think.
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

godardian

#7
March 22, 2004, 04:44:38 PM
Quote from: SoNowThenie. middle age women

I must have missed the memo where it said "dialogue gaps in films are for chatting with your friends".

A solely personal prejudice, perhaps? I've only ever heard men (particularly men my age, in their twenties) on cell phones in theatres, and it's always the groups of men and boy-girl couples (much less groups of women, though I actually see very few groups of women out at the movies, to be totally honest) who seem to talk to each other or the screen most loudly... in my experience. I've had obnoxious women, too, but chromosomes and age would seem to have nothing to do with it. Of course, I never, EVER go to the movies in the suburbs, but the women are hardly any more obnoxious than anything else in the hinterlands...

I'm sure you can find plenty of men and women and children who do stupid things that piss you off, but when you say "it's this group that does this," you're really talking about what you notice from your own point of view with your own biases. For example, I'm convinced that people who drive SUVs or minivans with American flag stickers plastered on the back are by far the worst, most reckless, lawbreaking, and dangerous drivers out there (I think they drive from the same stupidity, competitiveness, and sense of entitlement that would lead them to purchase such vehicles or crassly treat their patriotism like it's their favorite rock band)... but that couldn't possibly be true or logically follow. Could it?

More on-topic, I think the ratings system is horrendously stupid and I wish it didn't exist. "NC-17" means literally nothing. It tells us nothing about the film. It  tells protective parents nothing about the film. A dramatic overhaul is in order.
""Money doesn't come into it. It never has. I do what I do because it's all that I am." - Morrissey

"Lacan stressed more and more in his work the power and organizing principle of the symbolic, understood as the networks, social, cultural, and linguistic, into which a child is born. These precede the birth of a child, which is why Lacan can say that language is there from before the actual moment of birth. It is there in the social structures which are at play in the family and, of course, in the ideals, goals, and histories of the parents. This world of language can hardly be grasped by the newborn and yet it will act on the whole of the child's existence."

Stay informed on protecting your freedom of speech and civil rights.

grand theft sparrow

#8
March 22, 2004, 05:26:14 PM
Quote from: godardianMore on-topic, I think the ratings system is horrendously stupid and I wish it didn't exist. "NC-17" means literally nothing. It tells us nothing about the film. It  tells protective parents nothing about the film. A dramatic overhaul is in order.

But how would you overhaul it?  Start basing it on maturity or IQ and you'll have an entire industry making stupid and/or "safe" movies because too many people wouldn't be able to get in to anything too intense or challenging.

It sounds like you've given this some thought.  Did you come up with anything?

cine

#9
March 22, 2004, 05:51:16 PM
Now is the perfect time for Lewis Black's Back in Black segment on the Daily Show.

Chest Rockwell

#10
March 22, 2004, 05:59:15 PM
Perhaps a thorough description of all the offenses, and moreover, WHY or WHY NOT they're appropriate (ie they could mention that it's simple T & A for the sake of T & A, or that it has a real purpose that some might respect)? I just find it lame that I can't see a movie with real merit when You Got Served is ruining many minds in a much worse way.

I've actually had to start downloading The Dreamers.

grand theft sparrow

#11
March 22, 2004, 06:25:37 PM
Merit is subjective; you can't prove or disprove that something has artistic merit.  And sadly, giving people the context in which "offensive" material is shown isn't going to change anything for anyone.  You can explain all you want why you wanted a close-up of a vagina in your movie, for example, but all people are going to hear is, "blah blah blah blah blah close up of a vagina blah blah blah blah blah."  The only ones listening are the ones who wouldn't care anyway.

Unless your name is James Cameron, you put nakedness in your movie, you're going to pay a price.

cine

#12
March 22, 2004, 07:10:35 PM
Now is the perfect time for Lewis Black's Back in Black segment on the Daily Show.

NEON MERCURY

#13
March 22, 2004, 10:09:37 PM
..i'm all for the NC-17 thing...hopefully directors/screenwriter/filmmakers will keep this tren dgoing and maybe the films will rake in some $$$$$$ that way the studios/big wigs/producers..etc can shell out the cash to have these films made(and let the filmmakers get a chance to have a fully realized non-censored piece of work) for audiences to enjoy......

SoNowThen

#14
March 23, 2004, 08:49:23 AM
Quote from: hacksparrowall people are going to hear is, "blah blah blah blah blah close up of a vagina blah blah blah blah blah."

:lol:



Oh, and Godardian, yeah, I don't think it's a bias. If it's not teenagers making noise, it's always been middle age women, either with a friend, or asking their husband what just happened. I had to tell two 40 year old women to "SHUT UP!!" 5 minutes into PDL. They looked horrified.
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.
Print
Go Up Pages1 2 3
User actions