The MPAA's latest idiocy

Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.

The MPAA's latest idiocy

Posted: 10/8/10 at 12:53pm

Watching PIRANHA this summer, I was amazed that that bloody film managed to snag an R rating. But I guess this is how the MPAA works.
BLUE VALENTINE gets an NC-17 for showing...an upsetting relationship!

"Impossible is just a big word thrown around by small men who find it easier to live in the world they've been given than to explore the power they have to change it. Impossible is not a fact. It's an opinion. Impossible is not a declaration. It's a dare. Impossible is potential. Impossible is temporary. Impossible is nothing.” ~ Muhammad Ali

The MPAA's latest idiocy

Posted: 10/8/10 at 12:54pm

Just saw this. May be the first NC-17 film to get an Oscar nod as both leads are in serious contention.

....but the world goes 'round

The MPAA's latest idiocy

Posted: 10/8/10 at 12:58pm

My favorite line from the comments:

"It's ok. I just read another report on a different site. They made a deal with MPAA. They're replacing it with a alternative scene they shot where Gosling is trapped in this torture device and Williams has to dig through this dead dude's intestines to find the key, but she doesn't do it fast enough and he device rips Gosling's spine from his back. They used something like 50 gallons of blood in just one take.

It'll be PG-13. See it Christmas day."

The MPAA's latest idiocy

Posted: 10/8/10 at 1:31pm

Does Gosling do full-frontal?

The MPAA's latest idiocy

Posted: 10/8/10 at 2:17pm

For those who have not seen this film, I HIGHLY recommend it. It shows just how corrupt the MPAA really is.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTL3XMDwY0c

'There are three sides to every story. My side, your side, and the truth. And no one is lying. Memories shared serve each one differently' -Robert Evans-

Updated On: 10/8/10 at 02:17 PM

The MPAA's latest idiocy

Posted: 10/15/10 at 8:17am

I was reading some articles about this BLUE VALENTINE situation, and buried in the comments on one of them was something that makes a little more sense, as far as causing the NC-17 rating (although, still inane, to my mind.)

***SPOILER***
A supposedly 'realistic' abortion sequence.

The MPAA's latest idiocy

Posted: 10/15/10 at 12:40pm

I fail to see how an abortion is anymore graphic than what is depicted in the average slasher movie.

If they edit the movie to be rated R, I'll see it once. If they take a stand and release it as NC-17, I'll see it 5 times just to spite the MPAA.

Like a firework unexploded
Wanting life but never knowing how

The MPAA's latest idiocy

Posted: 10/15/10 at 12:45pm

I don't know if the issue is that it's graphic, but maybe why (or even how) she goes about it.

The MPAA's latest idiocy

Posted: 10/15/10 at 12:52pm

I fail to see how an abortion is anymore graphic than what is depicted in the average slasher movie.

Maybe they show vagina?

#10

The MPAA's latest idiocy

Posted: 10/15/10 at 12:54pm

Q, the NC-17 is specifically because of the sex scene where apparently....

SPOILER****************
SPOILER**********************
SPOILER SPOILER DOWN BELOW*****************

He tries to have sex with her, she doesn't want to but acquiesces, he holds a knife to her throat and she--and I'm sure this is what got the MPAA upset--has an orgasm.

Updated On: 10/15/10 at 12:54 PM

#11

The MPAA's latest idiocy

Posted: 10/15/10 at 12:57pm

Hmmmmm - wasn't there a movie named CRASH that dealt with people who got off by being in a car during an accident? What rating did that get?

#12

The MPAA's latest idiocy

Posted: 10/15/10 at 1:39pm

There was an NC-17 and an R-Rated version.

#13

The MPAA's latest idiocy

Posted: 10/15/10 at 1:54pm

AHEM

DOES GOSLING DO FULL-FRONTAL??

Sheesh. You people have NO sense of priorities.

#14

The MPAA's latest idiocy

Posted: 10/15/10 at 2:04pm

Weinstein Company To Fight 'Blue Valentine' NC-17 Appeal In November

http://www.deadline.com/2010/10/weinstein-company-to-fight-blue-valentine-nc-17-appeal-in-november/

'There are three sides to every story. My side, your side, and the truth. And no one is lying. Memories shared serve each one differently' -Robert Evans-

#15

The MPAA's latest idiocy

Posted: 10/15/10 at 2:07pm

Nope. No Gosling dick for you, Joe!

There are the auld pumping buttocks, supposedly. Another visual that often gets the MPAA's panties into a Puritan twist.

#16

The MPAA's latest idiocy

Posted: 12/8/10 at 5:23pm

It won its appeal and will be rated R
Link

....but the world goes 'round

#17

The MPAA's latest idiocy

Posted: 12/8/10 at 5:42pm

Very interesting. I'm sure the enormous amount of publicity this has been getting had everything to do with the overruling of the rating, but I'm glad it was done.

#18

The MPAA's latest idiocy

Posted: 12/8/10 at 8:05pm

Good for them!

#19

The MPAA's latest idiocy

Posted: 12/8/10 at 10:19pm

I never understood how a sex scene or using f bombs gets you the same rating as some piece of crap showing various ways of peoples bodies being ripped apart.

Midnight Cowboy was the only X rated movie to win an oscar for Best Picture although it was later rerated as an R

Poster Emeritus

#20

The MPAA's latest idiocy

Posted: 12/9/10 at 6:28am

Roxy, for once I totally agree with you. If I were a parent I would rather my kid see a nude body then someone being murdered or tortured with blood and guts spraying all over the room. I've seen some horror films (or as I call it, torture porn) then gets an easy R rating (HOSTEL,30 DAYS OF NIGHTS,LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT,etc.)I can watch over the top violence in a movie like KILL BILL and just laugh. I think how it's presented makes a big difference.I have yet to hear the MPAA justify how some violent horror films get an R rating but too many flashes of some T & A's or frontal nudity makes it a soft core porn film.

'There are three sides to every story. My side, your side, and the truth. And no one is lying. Memories shared serve each one differently' -Robert Evans-

#21

The MPAA's latest idiocy

Posted: 12/10/10 at 9:53am

Oh brother, of course the Parents Television Council is pissed off:

"The entire point of the film ratings system is to protect children and guide parents as they make informed choices for their families. Clearly, the motion picture industry’s system has failed at that task"

Ok you morons, Blue Valentine is rated R. That means no one under 17 is allowed in without someone older. Are you afraid some innocent and unknowing parent will accidentally take their family of 6 year olds to an R rated film?

Or is blaming the MPAA just easier than trying to control what your kids see?

At this point I'm not sure which organization is the most out of touch.
PTC - boo-hoo!

....but the world goes 'round

← Back to Message Board

View all Videos

Tickets From $59

Tickets From $71