NC-17 movies

just a bunch of really cheesy "horror" flicks. nothing much interesting.

This is why I'm glad I live in Canada where no such silly ratings exist. To me, NC-17 is just silly. Sure they are there to protect people but really is it necessary? Canada has none of that, and our crime rates or whatnot are not high or whatever the film boards want to avoid that causal relation. We are more lax, sure, I mean we showed Irreverible in all of its uncut glory. We held a North American preimere of the Brown Bunny, etc etc

So, really, NC-17? Abolish?

We get R16 & R18 ratings.
Kill Bill was R18,
Lower MPAA R stuff like American Pie gets R16,
Donny Darko didnt even get an R rating.
R ratings in New Zealand, Australia and the UKs 18 are purely restrictive,ie you cant even go with a gardian. But theaters generally show everything.

The question is, are those distinction needed? Does R just mean Restricted unless accompanied by a person over 18? That's what pisses me off, this loophole as I see it. So technically, I, being 21, can bring a 12 year old into a rated R movie because of said loophole. This again, reminds me of another South Park episode where the kids would buy the bums off the street to take them to movies.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by origamiLips [/i]
[B]The question is, are those distinction needed? Does R just mean Restricted unless accompanied by a person over 18? That's what pisses me off, this loophole as I see it. So technically, I, being 21, can bring a 12 year old into a rated R movie because of said loophole. This again, reminds me of another South Park episode where the kids would buy the bums off the street to take them to movies. [/B][/QUOTE]
Funny thing is, that is exactly what we all tried to do to get into that movie. Not with bums, but various sneeky methods.

See that's the thing. By putting some sort of barrier encourages rebellion and in this case, sneaking in. It's like all those underage kids who buy all the Fake IDs or what not and try to buy alcohol or ciggies and when they actually turned legal, there is really no longer that need anymore. This is of course some cases and not generalizing here.

Truth is, there is really no big deal. At least that is to me. I understand that it is the responsiblity of the censorship boards, but again, as you said, people are going to find ways around it. In essence, it is really a no-win situation.

NC 17 movies I've seen:
Crash, Orgazmo, and Showgirls

Kids. Was Kids NC-17?

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by origamiLips [/i]
[B]This is why I'm glad I live in Canada where no such silly ratings exist. To me, NC-17 is just silly. Sure they are there to protect people but really is it necessary? Canada has none of that, and our crime rates or whatnot are not high or whatever the film boards want to avoid that causal relation. We are more lax, sure, I mean we showed Irreverible in all of its uncut glory. We held a North American preimere of the Brown Bunny, etc etc
[/B][/QUOTE]
This is idiocy, yes. NC-17 is totally unnecessary. And our rating systems have nothing to do with our crime rates. NUMEROUS studies have said this, and yet idiots like Quayle's wife want to have restrictions. The reason America has high crime rates and all that is because we are idiots. Plain and simple.

Henry and June
Tie Me Up, Tie Me Down
Damage
Bad Lieutenant
Happiness

...all good movies too.

andy

sorry...just remembered...

Last Tango in Paris
Pink Flamingos
Midnight Cowboy
Two Girls and a Guy
Poison
Sex and Lucia

[u]Y tu mama tambien[/u] was going to be given an NC-17 in the U.S. but went "unrated." [u]Robocop[/u] was also originally given an X rating. I think the same goes for [u]The Evil Dead[/u].

Enjoy!

andy

Midnight Cowboy is the only one I've seen. Didn't 28 Days originally get an NC-17 rating, and then was cut down to an R?

Kids was unrated. It got NC-17, but they didn't use it.

28 Days? The Sandra Bullock movie? Well anyway, tons of movies get cut down to an R. South Park, American Pie, American Psycho, Natural Born Killers, The Rules of Attraction, Dead Alive, etc.

I think Jane means 28 days later.

Haha, I hope so. Unless the Sandra Bullock movie used to be about zombies too.

No, I meant 28 Days.

Whore

What the hell?

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Diabetic [/i]
[B]I think Jane means 28 days later. [/B][/QUOTE]

I don't know, Steve Buscemi's drug counseling scenes were pretty dramatic and yeah, Sandra Bullock and Viggo Mortenson, well you could tell they were thinking some pretty nasty thoughts about doing the deed...

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by fullmetalbrak [/i]
[B]If I'm not mistaken, I think morey's referring
to the Ken Russell movie titled "Whore." [/B][/QUOTE]

Awful, awful movie... bored me to tears... Lair of the White Worm and Gothic are much, much better Russell films...

I sees lots of these movies just to make me look cool:

Pink Flamingos
Female Trouble
Man Bites Dog
Bad Lieutenant
Santa Sangre
Crash
OrgaZmo
Poison
Happiness (heard it was NC-17 in theaters; video is unrated though)
The Cook, The Thief, His Wife, & Her Lover
Beyond the Valley of the Dolls
and a bunch of others...

CLERKS was originally going to be NC-17 based off the dialogue, DIALOGUE! I think Orgazmo was slapped with the NC-17 rating for the same reasons, the only thing even close to sex or violence consisting in that entire movie that I could remember were a couple of man-asses, some dildos, and slapstick violence. Stupid Shit the MPAA is.

Oh yeah, Pulp Fiction was NC-17 at first too, but Miramax appealed and got an R.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by SpacedOut_Fetus [/i]
[B]
CLERKS was originally going to be NC-17 based off the dialogue, DIALOGUE! I think Orgazmo was slapped with the NC-17 rating for the same reasons, the only thing even close to sex or violence consisting in that entire movie that I could remember were a couple of man-asses, some dildos, and slapstick violence. Stupid Shit the MPAA is. [/B][/QUOTE]

Independaent movies have a harder time with the MPAA than larger studios... I remember Tre Parker going off about it in Rolling Stone a few years ago...

I'm surprised at some of the movies that were NC-17. I never pay attention to ratings.
Then there was that one weird 70s sacreligious-on-purpose shock movie Holy Mountain, has anyone seen that?

How Could 28 Days Later get NC-17? Because of the guy's dick in the begining?

Yeah, that must be it. Cuz it's not like the rest of the movie is violent or anything...

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Maddetchke Malorkus [/i]
[B]I'm surprised at some of the movies that were NC-17. I never pay attention to ratings.
Then there was that one weird 70s sacreligious-on-purpose shock movie Holy Mountain, has anyone seen that? [/B][/QUOTE]

Holy Mountain is great, though I am not sure if it recieved an R or an X-Rating. Some weird LSD-induced shit that movie is... Also check out El Topo and Santa Sangre which are even better but (Santa Sangre at least) not as surreal and strange as Holy Mountain. Though they are still really, really "out there"

OK, I'm going to shut up now.

I think the director was trying to be shocking on purpose, and trying to offend people. It wasn't like he pretended that it had deep meaning, right?

i thought they did away with the nc-17 rating a long time ago ,just stuck the movies in the "R" category