Thursday, August 09, 2007

NC-17

NC-17, the movie rating that pisses off more liberals in Hollywood than Ann Coulter. Maybe. But thats not the point, of liberal vs conservative (and im a liberal-ish person). Often times the movie rating is just used incorrectly. The rating means that no one under 17 can be admitted to see a movie that has the rating, even if their parents allow them. Although many people have taken a better look at the injustices of the system, Im going to say what I think is wrong with the MPAA, and also the reason the rating carries the poison it does.



Injustices

1) Homophobia. Homophobia in Hollywood you say? I know, it sounds ridiculous, but several decisions by the MPAA can be only justified by homophobia. Obvious example, is "But Im a cheerleader", a movie about a cheerleader who is sent to christan camp. basically it has such light nudity and the stuff it got a NC-17 for is garbage (masturbation with clothes on?). Another example is Boys Don't Cry, which got an NC-17 for showing the face of Chloe Sevigny having an orgasm for too long. I understand there has to be arbitrary lines for ratings, but its her face, not her naked that got it. The more obvious example comes from back when X was still around, Midnight Cowboy. This is a movie my grandma was shocked got an R. It has one major problem: Jon Voight is a gay prostitute. Do you see him having sex? no, but that mere fact got it an X.



2) Pubic Hair Phobia. Picture this, 2 people having sex while actually in love. There is nudity, yes, but there is no hardcore shots or anything. The Cooler recieved a NC-17 because, as the MPAA put it, there was too much of Maria Bello's pubic hair. I could see if the MPAA took a no genital stance in movies, but it hasnt. At least that line, while arbitrary, would be fair. But you are allowed to see genitals, only if there is no hair? Mind Boggling. And if you think the scene is meant to show sex to turn people on, it has William H Macy in it. He is certainly not a Brad Pitt or a George Clooney.



However, I dont agree that....


Its all the MPAA's fault. Dont blame the MPAA, although it has its flaws. The studios are probably more to blame. They have to have the balls to release smaller movies that are NC-17, at least on a few hundred screens. Why Boys Dont Cry couldnt have been released on the same scale as it was with an NC-17 doesnt make sense. While NC-17 could prevent a movie for being released on a Spiderman level, studios should release art films if the scenes that make them NC-17 are needed for the plot and vision of the film.

Secondly, stop thinking every NC-17 movie will become Showgirls. Showgirls was flawed by one of the worst lead performances in movie history, and the smutty writing and directing of Joe Ezterhaus and Paul Verhoeven. Elizabeth Berkeley, of "Saved by the Bell" fame was not terrible looking. But the sex scenes were not even good at being sexy. When she has sex in a pool, she thrashes around so much i wasnt sure if she was having an orgasm or an epileptic seizure. She had less facial expressions than Ben Stiller and Zoolander, and sadly this movie was not meant as a joke. To think Kyle MacLaughlan went from doing "Blue Velvet" and "Twin Peaks" with David Lynch to this movie. The dialogue written for the characters was so wooden I will not make a pun about it.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home