Evan Rachel Wood blasts MPAA

[MrMidwest]

Posted: 11/28/13 at 9:14am

"After seeing the new cut of ‘Charlie Countryman,’ I would like to share my disappointment with the MPAA, who thought it was necessary to censor a woman’s sexuality once again. The scene where the two main characters make 'love' was altered because someone felt that seeing a man give a woman oral sex made people 'uncomfortable,' but the scenes in which people are murdered by having their heads blown off remained intact and unaltered.

"This is a symptom of a society that wants to shame women and put them down for enjoying sex, especially when (gasp) the man isn't getting off as well! It’s hard for me to believe that had the roles been reversed it still would have been cut or had the female character been raped it would have been cut. It’s time for people to grow up. Accept that women are sexual beings. Accept that some men like pleasuring women. Accept that women don't have to just be [used] and say thank you. We are allowed and entitled to enjoy ourselves. It’s time we put our foot down. Thanks for listening."

http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-78357763/

[romantico]

Posted: 11/28/13 at 10:03am

I agree with her 100%! Sex and nudity is considered evil in this country and Violence is just good old fashion fun! I highly recommend Kirby Dick's film 'This Film is Not Yet Rated'. The MPAA really is a group of corrupt a$$holes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFp0exGM0MU

[MrMidwest]

Posted: 11/28/13 at 10:41am

Some of the other situations like this from the last couple of years:

Gosling comments, "You have to question a cinematic culture which preaches artistic expression, and yet would support a decision that is clearly a product of a patriarchy-dominant society, which tries to control how women are depicted on screen. The MPAA is okay supporting scenes that portray women in scenarios of sexual torture and violence for entertainment purposes, but they are trying to force us to look away from a scene that shows a woman in a sexual scenario, which is both complicit and complex. It's misogynistic in nature to try and control a woman's sexual presentation of self. I consider this an issue that is bigger than this film."

http://movieline.com/2010/11/18/ryan-gosling-tees-off-on-misogynistic-mpaa-over-blue-valentine-rating/


"I had a very tame and mild love scene with Jon Hamm. It was like heavy breathing and making out. It was hardly a sex scene... I think that it's great for this young girl to actually take control of her own sexuality. Well, the MPAA doesn't like that. They don't think a girl should ever be in control of her own sexuality because they're from the Stone Age. I don't know what the f**k is going on and I will openly criticize it, happily. So essentially, they got Zack to edit the scene and make it look less like she's into it. And Zack said he edited it down to the point where it looked like he was taking advantage of her. That's the only way he could get a PG-13 (rating) and he said, 'I don't want to send that message.' So they cut the scene!"

http://scottalanmendelson.blogspot.com/2011/03/mpaa-thinks-child-rape-is-more.html

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 11/28/13 at 3:12pm

But without the MPAA where would that hack Chris Dodd have ended up after he left politics? Won't somebody please think of the lobbyists?

[MikeInTheDistrict]

Posted: 11/28/13 at 4:07pm

Wow. I have to admit I've never paid much attention to Ryan Gosling off screen (he will always be Young Hercules to me, lol), but he's far more eloquent than I imagined him to be.

[MrMidwest]

Posted: 11/28/13 at 4:44pm

"Chances are not many teens have been clamoring to see Philomena, a drama opening Nov. 22 about an elderly Irishwoman (Judi Dench) who goes looking for a son she had to give up 50 years ago. But when The Weinstein Co. appealed to the Motion Picture Association of America to change the film’s rating from an R — which it had received for using the F-word twice — to a PG-13, the studio wasn’t just trying to broaden the movie’s audience or score free publicity.

“The argument was important,” says actor Steve Coogan, who co-wrote the film and costars with Dench. “The MPAA say they represent middle-American parents. It’s okay to dismember someone—just don’t swear.”

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2013/11/23/mpaa-philomena-dench/

[StageManager2]

Posted: 11/28/13 at 6:52pm

The MPAA really needs to chill on the profanity issue. I remember being surprised that My Week with Marilyn was rated "R." There's nothing in that film to warrant a mature rating. I'm guessing the couple "Fvcks" and that one naked bum shot are to blame, but, really, a PG-13 rating would've sufficed. They have really gotten stricter. I watched A League of Their Own last month for the first time in forever and that movie had Tom Hanks cussing left and right -- and it was rated PG!

.

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 11/28/13 at 11:00pm

PG-13 is the new PG, and PG is the new G. G is...off the table for the most part.

[strummergirl]

Posted: 11/29/13 at 12:37am

Siskel and Ebert had an excellent rant about the ratings system. It is in their review of Henry: Portrait of Serial Killer (sadly cannot find it YouTube). Ebert was always a proponent of changing the ratings system to de-stigmatize movies rated primarily for adults and loathed both the PG-13 and R rating, often pointing to the hypocrisy and arbitrary aspects to the ratings system.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 11/30/13 at 1:18am

The MPAA has come under fire from a number of people recently--the last example I read was about the gravitas they give to the use of the f word, as opposed to violence. I think it does need an overhaul -- in some ways it is starting to seem as out of touch with the time (and with, arguably but IMHO, what really should be deemed unsuitable for minors) as the Hayes Code was. In Canada we seem to have a slightly better system (Catching Fire is PG here, not PG 13 as in the US, and of course that's due to violence, but Frozen, which is oddly PG in the US is G here.)

Ent Weekly just had an article with the MPAA's response, which basically said that middle Americans still don't want their kids to hear the F word but don't mind sexualized violence. http://insidemovies.ew.com/2013/11/14/mpaa-ratings/

[romantico]

Posted: 11/30/13 at 2:29am

Martin Scorsese,known for his violent films, had to cut scenes from his latest film because of nudity. How graphic was the nudity in this? Scorsese is a smart guy. If it were that bad he would have had to known when shooting that these scenes that were cut would not make it into the final cut.So, films of his like THE DEPARTED and GOODFELLA'S are fine with the MPAA as long as the nudity is minimal.Anyone else see the irony?

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/wolf-wall-street-avoids-nc-660653

Updated On: 11/30/13 at 02:29 AM

[dramamama611]

Posted: 11/30/13 at 7:32am

I will agree with one point: this IS the thinking of "parenthood". I am basing this on what my general audiences take issue with in my productions.

Violence is ok, sex and bad words are not. The reason? They highly doubt their kids will ACTUALLY mimic violence but don't want them cursing or having sex -- and "somehow" letting them ACT like sexual beings migh encourage them to BE sexual. They are uncomfortable watching their children in sexual situations, because they don't want to be able to imagine that their kids ARE sexual. (I suppose I understand that point. Years ago, I had cast a long term (and now married) couple AS a romantic couple in a play. Working on the scene where the couple made out, and fell on a bed together, while natural for them, was indeed more awkward to watch -- knowing that this was also them in real life.)

Example: no one complains about all the violence in The Scottish Play, but they hate all the sexual innuendo in Taming of the Shrew (when they understand it).

[winston89]

Posted: 11/30/13 at 9:49am

Stage Manager,

There was, at one point, a time where there wasn't any PG-13 rating. And, "A League of Their Own" came out during that time. In fact, there were several films that were rated (and stayed rated) PG that most likely shouldn't be. Not that I am one for censorship, but an example would be the movie Big. I think that if it were released today as a new film, it would be PG-13.

[Liza's Headband]

Posted: 11/30/13 at 10:14am

"There was, at one point, a time where there wasn't any PG-13 rating. And, "A League of Their Own" came out during that time. In fact, there were several films that were rated (and stayed rated) PG that most likely shouldn't be. Not that I am one for censorship, but an example would be the movie Big. I think that if it were released today as a new film, it would be PG-13."

Wow. That is incredibly inaccurate. The MPAA simply decided to give both of those movies a PG rating. The PG-13 rating existed as early as 1984, when Spielberg led the effort to create the new rating. League Of Their Own came out in 1992 and Big came out in 1988. Not sure where you get your facts from. If you wanted to be accurate, you would have used examples like "Gremlins" or "Indiana Jones." But not movies released AFTER 1984.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_Picture_Association_of_America_film_rating_system#Addition_of_PG-13_rating

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 11/30/13 at 10:24am

Right--I thought that was pretty well known. And I kinda get that (but maybe because I was a five year old traumatized by Temple of Doom.) I guess this is not worth arguing, but, excepting the time when we rented the Monster Squad and our parents at a dinner party had rented Hellraiser, and they didn't seem to realize we were watching the wrong movie until my twin sister started screaming, most parents DO pay attention to ratings, and if they don't, then they won't pay attention to any rating.

[romantico]

Posted: 11/30/13 at 10:44am

POLTERGEIST came out in 1982 and that film was pretty intense for a PG (of course,today it would seem so mild) POLTERGEIST would have been the perfect candidate for a PG-13 film. Of course, the original PLANET OF THE APES had Charelton Heston nude in the film and there was a decent amount of violence and that got a G rating.

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 11/30/13 at 11:43am

G went a long, long way in the sixties. The Monkees' HEAD was rated G and featured the infamous footage of South Vietnamese troops shooting a Vietcong fighter in Cholon in the head. (And a very young Teri Garr holding a mildly bleeding finger to Davy Jones and instructing simply, "Suck out the poison before it reaches my heart." But I digress...)

If memory serves, POLTERGEIST was one of the movies that got some viewers up in arms about the PG rating, along with GREMLINS and, the movie that pushed it all over the edge, INDIANA JONES AND THE TEMPLE OF DOOM.

Updated On: 11/30/13 at 11:43 AM

[StageManager2]

Posted: 11/30/13 at 2:26pm

I just thought of Adventures in Babysitting (1987), which was rightfully rated PG-13, and it featured a lot of profanity (e.g. bitch, sh!t, a$$hole), especially from the kids. It even has Elisabeth Shue say "Don't fvck with the babysitter!" immediately after a gang member tells them "Don't fvck with the Lords of Hell!" Not to mention the whole being mistaken for a Playboy model, and horned-up, 15-year-old Anthony Rapp getting laid at some frat party they crash. If it were released today, it would probably get an "R" rating or all that stuff would need to be toned down or removed altogether to even secure a PG-13 or preferably PG. Can you imagine a Disney film like that today? They won't even allow cigarette smoking.

.

[Patronus]

Posted: 12/1/13 at 9:04am

"You know what's wrong with America? If I lovingly tongue a woman's nipple in a movie, it gets an "NC-17" rating, if I chop it off with a machete, it's an "R". That's what's wrong with America, man...."--Dennis Hopper