Why I want to see an NC-17-rated movie

John1007 Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 01:59 PM EST

Very nice site!

leoboy Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 05:34 AM EST

i like that.i want to see.

zstrmqeyf skmdltyph Mon, Feb 4, 2008 at 07:22 PM EST

efcmiybo ghepwrfl ewomxqp odmgysaj apdt vzng zlxrucmjb

bootsycolumbia Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 09:46 PM EST

KingLouieXVIII, note that the poster who called Ang Lee a "pretentious dolt" stayed anonymous. For good reason: now we know who the real pretentious dolt is.

t3hdow Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 05:02 PM EST

Oh, that last post was directed towards LisaMama. I forgot to mention that...

t3hdow Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 05:01 PM EST

Well, from the sound of your initial post, it seemed more anti-torture porn than anti-extreme violence; something I never understood, since the former should be applied to the latter and not categorized as something worse. The problem lies on how the ratings are enforced. Sadly, R rated films aren't enforced harshly enough for idiotic parents that bring their kids to those films (at least retailers do a better job of limiting violent videogames to kids). If theaters did a better job with that - because I don't expect parents to wise up anytime soon - then no ultra violent film would have to be given an NC-17 or limited for an R rating. I agree though that it needs to be enforced better.

Mr. Nippl-E Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 03:38 PM EST

Brosey's point is right-on. Much as I want to see NC-17 accepted, it helps to look at it from the chains' standpoint. I worked at a theater when "Showgirls" came out and an extra employee had to be paid to literally stand guard at the doors all day long and make sure no innocent children's eyes were forever scarred by Elizabeth Berkley's epileptic-dolphin impersonation. Then the movie flopped, which means the theater blew the extra money for no good reason.

NC-17 might make sense for art house theaters (what horny 15-year-old is going to try and sneak into "Lust, Caution" except to take a nap??), but for mainstream films in chain theaters, the expense and difficulty of enforcing the rating might not balance out.

LisaMama Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 02:52 PM EST

To t3hdow: I think you missed my point. If NC-17 means that no one under the age of 17 should see it, then I think it should apply to violence as well as sex. In the past, some movies with violence were allowed to pass for PG-13, but showing some breasts was an automatic R. Violent movies get let off the hook, and I think some of them should be NC-17, including Pulp Fiction, which had graphic violence and a rape. No one under 17 should see that.

And since you bring up video games (which I play), no one under 17 should be playing some of those either!

Look, there's nothing wrong with making a game, movie, book, music, or TV show for adults -- I often consume such media -- but let's have it properly labeled as such!

Fatima Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 02:22 PM EST

I'm really excited for this one. And I'm proud it is sticking to it's guns (well, now that I've been of the age to see it for the past few years). I remember being really mad when I went to Blockbuster to rent "Bad Education" and all they carried was an R rated version where they actually pixilated some scenes. Disrespectful. Thank god for Netflix.

Jenny Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 02:13 PM EST

"ZF:Tony Leung was in another rather explicit movie, The Lover. It just barely got an R rating. If it hadn't, I can't imagine that it would have been nominated for an Oscar."

That's another actor named Tony Leong.Not the one from Ang's movie.

t3hdow Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 01:44 PM EST

To LisaMama:

Sigh...I'm getting tired of hearing the torture porn argument. I can name so many films that were just as violent and disturbing before Saw ever came out in theaters, yet I don't hear outcries when the next Tarantino movie gets shipped with an R-rating. Stereotyping the genre as degenerative 'torture porn' is as effective as calling shooter videogames 'murder simulators'. Gimme a break.

Ames Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 11:10 AM EST

Theaters will definitely start showing NC-17 movies when they are able to make money from them. The problem is adults take a long time to get to the theater, so no big weekend. They don't see movies multiple times, and they don't buy as much junk food at concessions (where theaters make their money). It's economics.

aramis Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 10:42 AM EST

Brosey - makes a great point. The chains have to make the decision first. Unfortunately for a Mississippi resident such as myself, getting the people to knock down the door of the chains to show NC-17 films is like asking them to accept homosexuality as a lifestyle. It just ain't gonna happen in my lifetime. The bible-beating family types won't allow such a thing any more than they'll allow the ONE nine-screen theater in a ninety-mile radius to play what they would inevitably call "Asian smut". I live in a cultural void. :(

LisaMama Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 10:37 AM EST

Let's just hope that NC-17 is also applied to violent, sadistic, disgusting movies like Saw and its ilk.

junior Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 09:37 AM EST

Although I would like to think that "Lust, Caution" could be a rollicking good time, I remember walking into "Where the Truth Lies" thinking the same thing, and feeling like "this is NC-17, most 12-year-olds already know about this stuff and have moved on. What prudes!"

KingLouieXVIII Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 08:57 AM EST

Why is Ang Lee a pretentious dolt (whatever that means)? He is one of the world's most skillfull, interesting, and daring directors. Who else can go from tackling a Jane Austen period romance, to a martial arts epic, to a super-hero adaptation with the grace Lee has shown? Not many! I have never seen one of his movies I haven't liked. I, for one, will be in line for LUST, CAUTION.

GingerCat Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 08:39 AM EST

I agree with most of the comments here. Cheers to Ang Lee for making the movie he wanted to make, and to his studio for sticking by him. I also agree we need wider acceptance for the NC-17 rating.
There's no way this film will show in my small town, but I'll definitely check it out on DVD.

Kit-Sung Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 02:56 AM EST

If "Lust Caution" is as "explicit" as "Brokeback Mountain" was "gay", then it will be nothing more than the softest softsex.

donner Sun, Aug 26, 2007 at 05:03 PM EST

Me Want!

Kevin Smith Sun, Aug 26, 2007 at 01:42 PM EST

I love asian porn! I hope it has monster tentacles.

Tony Ginorio Sun, Aug 26, 2007 at 08:04 AM EST

The problem with NC-17 is not the rating itself, but the fact that most theater and video store chains are too skittish to carry a movie with that rating. NC-17 was supposed to replace the X rating and its connotation of porn, but the sad fact is a lot of people can't tell the difference between pornography and art with erotic content.

brosey Sat, Aug 25, 2007 at 11:44 PM EST

If anybody needs to accept the NC-17 rating, it's the movie theaters, most of which REFUSE to show NC-17 movies at all, which is why the studios don't make them. It's the mainstream, chain theaters - like the one I work at - that won't show it, leaving only those that specialize in these kind of "art house" movies that you'd most likely find only in big cities like New York and LA that'll show it. Therefore, such a movie would make very little money, so the studios don't make them. I think if enough people complained that they want to be able to see these kinds of movies, then the chains *might* consider it. But until then, you're out of luck.

kcholt68 Sat, Aug 25, 2007 at 11:44 PM EST

Ah, for the day when "Brokeback Mountain" gets some respect and stops automatically being called the "gay cowboy movie", especially since they weren't cowboys.

- kch, http://moviedearest.blogspot.com/

Kelsey Sat, Aug 25, 2007 at 09:55 PM EST

NC-17 needs to be accepted by the film world. Why have a rating that no one bothers to use?

ZF Sat, Aug 25, 2007 at 08:00 PM EST

Tony Leung was in another rather explicit movie, The Lover. It just barely got an R rating. If it hadn't, I can't imagine that it would have been nominated for an Oscar.

Stephen Sat, Aug 25, 2007 at 05:22 PM EST

Haha Snarf, now I have soda all over my keyboard! Anyay, wan't there an article about the rating a few weeks ago in EW? Like, where Stephen King's articles are? I really enjoyed it.

whol Sat, Aug 25, 2007 at 05:10 PM EST

The NC 17 makes me more excited, for sure, b/c Ang Lee seems to have made the movie EXACTLY as he wanted it, sexuality and all. Sounds marvelous

Carly Sat, Aug 25, 2007 at 04:45 PM EST

I'm all for a higher rating. But couldn't it be something more like NC-15? I just recently turned 17. Before that I couldn't even go to an NC-17 movie if I had a parent with me. It's not fair. That said, I will be seeing this movie as Brokeback Mountain is in my top five of all time.

whimsey Sat, Aug 25, 2007 at 04:21 PM EST

Ang Lee. Tony Leung. 1940s Shanghai. Not you fathers "ShangHai Suprise". Count me in.

Snarf Sat, Aug 25, 2007 at 04:20 PM EST

Won't somebody PLEASE think of the children?!

alm034 Sat, Aug 25, 2007 at 03:15 PM EST

According to the online reports, the movie "contains at least three scenes -- one a long montage -- featuring multiple acts of aggressive sexual activity in different positions. There's no full-frontal male nudity, but male-on-female oral sex, non-S&M restraints and several nontraditional sexual positions are depicted, conveying the aggression and emotional conflict between the main characters.
When asked if anyone was shown, say, upside down, one viewer said, "It depends on where you're standing. They're very flexible."" Yep, that'd do it.

trw1570 Sat, Aug 25, 2007 at 02:50 PM EST

You had me at Tony Leung. I am so going to see this movie.

BTW, Ang Lee is not in charge of marketing his films or the rating that his movies get stuck with. In fact, he hated the "gay cowboy movie" label that the media gave Brokeback Mountain. Please get your facts straight before you start calling people names.

Brian Z Sat, Aug 25, 2007 at 12:29 PM EST

Praise to Focus Features for not fighting the rating and sticking with the creator's cut of the picture. Can't wait to see it.

Sat, Aug 25, 2007 at 11:45 AM EST

Ang Lee is a pretentious dolt. Just like the "gay cowboy" gimmick, he's using the scandalous MPAA rating as another way to promote his movie. I agree that NC-17 needs to gain acceptance in the film world, but Ang Lee seems to just be using another gimmick here.

Stephen Sat, Aug 25, 2007 at 11:07 AM EST

Dang, I have to see this one, if only to see what merits that rating. I mean, "Hostel" and its sequel were R, as well as "Team America: World Police." Hmmmm.