I Need To Know : What's wrong with the NC-17 rating?

What's wrong with the NC-17 rating?

I have seen movies such as The Wolf of Wall Street which is rated R by the way, but considering how graphic the sex scenes were, I was surprised it didn't get an NC-17. There are movies like Showgirls, in which they kept a NC-17 rating. Why is the NC-17 rating the most dreaded rating ever of the MPAA? Is there a reason why most movie theaters won't allow NC-17 movies?

What, do you got your period?

Re: What's wrong with the NC-17 rating?

It's all very much bureaucratic and political clap-trap.

Consumer advise has helped lax what is permissible too.

NC-17 was devised to differentiate it from X in the very early 90's, but many exhibitors were contracted to not screen films that were above R rating and some films were contracted to bring their film in at R level.

With guidelines of what is permissible in film content today, many R films now, would have been classified NC-17 30yrs ago and would have been censored down to suit then guidelines of R content.

It seems preposterous to have a hardcore violent movie rated R, (or even strong sexual content film), when a romantic comedy/drama could be rated R as well, just for having a sprinkling of several F bombs. These films are not in the same category contextually.

Restricting films to persons of a certain age ONLY is NEVER an issue in other countries, except the US.

Norman! What did you put in my tea?

Re: What's wrong with the NC-17 rating?

I know movies like Showgirls, Henry and June and Bad Lieutenant all were kept the NC-17 rating. Were movie theaters back in the 1990s not as strict as those now?

What, do you got your period?

Re: What's wrong with the NC-17 rating?

They would have likely played largely at art-house venues and not mainstream multi-plexes and cinemas in the US. There may have been some contractual clauses where usual cinemas may have screened them.

Showgirls, which I haven't seen, had an 'R' cut done for Blockbuster video. I can't comment if they had an 'R' theatrical cut. Couldn't find any information on this.

I don't live in the US and it wasn't a big deal, because we have an R18+ rating which both Bad Lieutenant and Showgirls received. Showgirls did screen mainstream cinemas, BL arthouse.

Henry and June was rated M only which was just a recommended rating for mature audiences and non-restricted. The MA15+ Mature Accompanied rating wasn't available until 1994, which I'd say H&J would be given if re-rated.

Norman! What did you put in my tea?

Re: What's wrong with the NC-17 rating?

So you live in Australia? Sweet!

What, do you got your period?

Re: What's wrong with the NC-17 rating?

NC-17 is too violent and secually explicit

The day I tried to win, I wallowed in the blood and mud of all the other pigs. Just like you.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ybkU9yiFdVg

Re: What's wrong with the NC-17 rating?

Also, some NC-17 movies have graphic profanity as well.

What, do you got your period?

Re: What's wrong with the NC-17 rating?

Profanity doesn't bother me. Sometimes it's funny.

The day I tried to win, I wallowed in the blood and mud of all the other pigs. Just like you.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ybkU9yiFdVg

Re: What's wrong with the NC-17 rating?

Agreed. A great example is the Thunder Buddies scene from Ted:
"Fuck you, thunder! You can suck my dick!"



What, do you got your period?

Re: What's wrong with the NC-17 rating?

😄Ted. There shouldn't have been a sequel though.

The day I tried to win, I wallowed in the blood and mud of all the other pigs. Just like you.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ybkU9yiFdVg

Re: What's wrong with the NC-17 rating?

I don't think there is anything wrong with it.

1 of My Favorite Movies "BLUE IS THE WARMEST COLOUR" is rated NC-17 and it is still a Pretty Good Movie (to me at least) and does not hurt it at all.

Re: What's wrong with the NC-17 rating?

Guaranteed to flop as well

Re: What's wrong with the NC-17 rating?

Yes, its seen as a box office killer, due to restricting the audience.

Thing is, many R rated films should not be seen by early teens and that is why most other countries have age restrictions like 16 and up ONLY.

Norman! What did you put in my tea?

Re: What's wrong with the NC-17 rating?

Re: What's wrong with the NC-17 rating?

Gonna’ go slightly off topic for a bit of a rant.

The American ratings system is broken and stupid.

There’s far too wide a gap between PG and R, and the R rating there is too broad. Like The Matrix is lumped in with movies like Evil Dead.

In Australia The Matrix is rated M, meaning kids can see it but it’s not recommended for them and Evil Dead is R, which is restricted to 18 or over.

In between is MA 15+ Which is the rating most adult movies get, like Scream, Deadpool n’ anything else with just moderately impactful violence, language and nudity. Kids are allowed to see MA movies at theatres as long as they’re accompanied by a parent or guardian.

I wouldn’t care about the different rating system if it didn’t have an impact on the way movies are made in the states. Shits me how they always aim for that PG rating. Venom is a good example of that, and The Dark Knight trilogy.

Re: What's wrong with the NC-17 rating?

The first Matrix seems more PG-13 than R. The Wolf of Wall Street is rated R, but I was shocked that considering how graphic the sex scenes/some of the nudity were, it didn't garn a NC-17. Shows how stupid the American movie rating system is.

Secret Window is PG-13 and I think in one scene, Johnny Depp's character says "fuck" sexually. Wait, I thought only rated R movies can allow "fuck" in a sexual manner.

What, do you got your period?

Re: What's wrong with the NC-17 rating?

The Mountains Between Us is PG-13, yet you can glimpse Kate Winslet's titty during a love scene. Wait, I thought only rated R movies can allow bare breasts in sex scenes.

What, do you got your period?

Re: What's wrong with the NC-17 rating?

That’s that broad gap I was talking about.

You can have breasts in a PG movie, but an extra few seconds of tits and it jumps to R.

I think a lot of your NC-17 rated movies in the states are just rated R over here, since our R is reserved for pretty heavy stuff.

Our heaviest rating is X, which as far as I know is reserved for porn. I don’t know if any X rated movie that isn’t porn. Like NC-17, we cant show X rated movies in theatres.

Re: What's wrong with the NC-17 rating?

The PG-13 is what the PG used to be, and PG movies then (and PG-13 movies now), can and did feature some nudity. When PG-13 was created, it basically eliminated PG. The rating still theoretically exists but it's been little more than on paper for decades.

There are no hard rules for these things; a rating is the subjective judgment of the ratings board, and if you're looking for some list of things that make things fall into a certain rating's range, they don't make any sense at all. A scene can get a movie slapped with a higher rating even if it basically just replicates another scene in a previous movie that got the lower rating. A problem for decades has been that scenes showing women very ardently enjoying sex are constantly stamped with more restrictive ratings. A scene of that nature in an indie movie, rather than a Hollywood studio picture, can get that movie rated into oblivion (because the MPAA is a Hollywood protection racket).

"The Dig"
http://cinemarchaeologist.blogspot.com/

Re: What's wrong with the NC-17 rating?

Originally, movies judged by the MPAA to be of more questionable content than an R-rating could sustain were rated X. Unlike the other MPAA ratings, the MPAA never copyrighted X; anyone could self-apply it. It very quickly became the province of hardcore porn, an industry that integrated X into its marketing. Very quickly, most theaters wouldn't show X-rated movies; most media wouldn't advertise them. For non-porn, an X-rating became the kiss of death.

In the '80s, there was a movement advocating that the MPAA create a new rating–an "A" rating, to fall between R and X, and signify adult content that wasn't porn. Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert were among those campaigning for this. The MPAA vigorously resisted, not just because it was a conservative institution but, more importantly, because it was a creature of the big studios and worked to "rate" out of the market indie features that threatened to cut into Hollywood's pie. The org denied this charge but it was true. And it was a dirty racket that badly needed to be broken up. As long as it was just killing movies like HARDWARE, HENRY: PORTRAIT OF A SERIAL KILLER and KING OF NEW YORK, it didn't seem likely it was going to end.

The debate over it went on for a few years. Then, HENRY & JUNE, a picture by a major Hollywood studio, got the X.

Suddenly, the sky opened, the sun appeared through the clouds and the MPAA instantly saw the wisdom in totally reversing itself and created the NC-17, which, unlike the X, it copyrighted.

But while this largely dispelled the controversy that had been brewing, the MPAA had the last laugh and sabotaged the reform. The A-rating movement had always wanted a rating to fall between R and X but the MPAA, instead, just did away with the X entirely.

Which, within a very short period, just recreated the original problem.

"The Dig"
http://cinemarchaeologist.blogspot.com/
Top