Is NC-17 superfluous?
-
Frosted-Flame — 16 years ago(March 31, 2010 12:12 PM)
They're probably secret so that studios or filmmakers won't be able to try to influence and corrupt the process. If they know the names they can try and wine and dine them to influence their decisions. But on the last note you hit hte nail on the head. If distributors and theater chains would show NC-17's the NC-17 would get wider acceptance. It's childish to blame the MPAA when really the MPAA is voluntary. If i REALLY wanted my movie to be out there, i could bypass the system entirely and release my film as is.
-
DeadlySinner — 15 years ago(June 29, 2010 02:41 AM)
"They're probably secret so that studios or filmmakers won't be able to try to influence and corrupt the process."
Did you watch the film? Studios already influence the process! Maybe if you meant studios outside the big 7.
"It's childish to blame the MPAA"
It's childish to rationalize all of their faults away.
"when really the MPAA is voluntary."
If I put a gun to your head and tell you to do something, or I kill you, am I really giving you a choice?
"If i REALLY wanted my movie to be out there, i could bypass the system entirely and release my film as is."
And it would be seen by all of 5 people.
Required reading for theater patrons:
http://tinyurl.com/shutheeffup -
SeanMarshall — 15 years ago(October 25, 2010 04:31 PM)
Ultimately, the real problem isn't the MPAA, it's the distributors who refuse to distribute NC-17 movies.
So you're saying don't blame the left hand of the distributors, but the right hand? The ultimate ratings are in the hands of the distributors. -
SeanMarshall — 15 years ago(October 27, 2010 02:16 AM)
Basically yes, but not all distributors are represented in the MPAA.
No, but the ones who are represented effectively create a distribution cartel. In addition, even those not directly represented often have adopted the MPAA policies resulting in a very effective capability to censor which films receive any wider release. -
cca382000 — 14 years ago(July 13, 2011 06:54 AM)
"There are some R rated movies that just barely fall on the R side of the PG-13/R line"
Frost/Nixon, anyone?
The LAST film that was released fully unrated in theatres was Hatchet II. My bosses had me standing at the auditorium doors making sure EVERY guest was 18 and over (NC 17 is No Children 17 AND UNDERNOT "No one Under 17 Admitted")
Andy=
Yeah, I remember that girl. She was a ho for sho'. (The 40 Year Old Virgin) -
Theblacktionstar — 12 years ago(July 15, 2013 10:23 PM)
I saw Terminator 3 and the two Matrix sequels with my dad when I was 6 years old.
Both are very light R's, a lot less violent than some PG-13 movies I've seen, and I saw many R rated movies on TV. So yeah, there's a difference between NC-17 and R.