There could be an interesting conflict brewing in New York where IFC Center in Greenwich Village has declared that it will not impose the NC-17 rating for Abdellatif Kechiche’s three-hour long lesbian drama “Blue Is the Warmest Color”. In other words, it will allow in teenage viewers in violation of the rating. The case could force a confrontation over the voluntary system of ratings. This was a compromise with politicians and some groups that want to regulate films for obscenity or violence or sexual content. If theaters refuse to comply with the ratings, there may be a move to re-introduce legislation imposing direct government regulation — raising obvious free speech issues.
The theater will allow teenagers below the age of 17 to see the film. The company does not explain why it decided to challenge the ratings over this one film or how it will decide in the future to waive or apply the NC-17 standard.
John Vanco, senior veep and general manager of the IFC Center, simply said “it is our judgment that it is not inappropriate for mature, inquiring teenagers who are looking ahead to the emotional challenges and opportunities that adulthood holds.”
The company has stressed that the MPAA rating is purely voluntary and so it is not going to apply it in this case to allow more teenagers to see “Blue Is the Warmest Color”. The movie includes one segment that is a 15 minute lesbian sex scene.
On the other end of the spectrum, an arthouse in Idaho has decided not to screen the film due to obscenity laws that cover venues that sell alcohol.
Here is the current standard:
NC-17 – No One 17 & Under Admitted
This film is clearly adult and people under the age of eighteen are not admitted. Such films may contain brutality/pervasive extreme non-stop graphic violence, explicit sexual content, sexual assault, extreme horror, extreme emotional intensity, discrimination/bullying, crude situations, strong graphic non-stop language, disturbing/startling images, strong graphic drug use, alcohol, tobacco and/or aberrational behavior.
This standard is part of a compromise brokered by MPAA president Jack Valenti in May 1966 who opposed the earlier Hays Code. The voluntary standard took affect on November 1, 1968 with three organizations serving as its monitoring and guiding groups: the MPAA, the National Association of Theater Owners (NATO), and the International Film Importers & Distributors of America (IFIDA).
If theaters are now going to waive the rating, it could revive demands in Congress for regulation. Senators like Joseph Lieberman have long called for regulation or censorship of games and music viewed as bad influences on our children. It will be interesting to see if they respond to this move in New York. Likewise, as reflected in the Idaho case, such decisions could revive obscenity prosecutions in more conservative states.
The imposition on audience restrictions raise serious concerns over censorship and the rights of free speech and association. However, states are given more authority in acting to protect the interests of children. What do you think about these voluntary or mandatory standards?
Nick has lots of comments on certain types of posts, not unlike this one.
I think he is a specialist. 😉
“I wasn’t aware that any theaters actually enforced those ratings anyway.”
As someone that was carded – at 25 – to see “V For Vendetta” (as well as 18 to see “South Park”) – yes they enforce them. However, enforcement itself is a bit like censorship. “South Park” the show highlighted this in the episode “Passion of the Jew” – tons of theaters did let people under 17 in to them to see “Passion of the Christ”, but the same ones refused people when it came to movies they personally didn’t agree with. AND there was 0 outcry when they did it over Passion. I see controversy and outcry in the future of the film at hand here.
I think coal minors should have the same rights as anyone.
wordpress put my prior comments in moderation which is quite curious. As you can see there are no vulgarities. Then they were released @ the same time. Curiouser and curiouser.
HELP, I have 2 comments, both of the same substance, flagged for moderation. There are no vulgarities. However both do mention female orgasms..Hmm
Another point made in the aforementioned doc is that female gratification, orgasms, are more often “flagged” by the board than male orgasms. This was irrespective of straight or lesbian. Probably won’t surprise many women.
Another point made in this aforementioned documentary was female sexual orgasms were much more “flagged” than male orgasm. And this was whether it be straight or lesbian sex. Probably no surprise for women here. Men still do run most everything.
Another point made in this aforementioned documentary was female sexual orgasms were much more “flagged” than male orgasm. And this was whether it be straight or lesbian sex. Probably no surprise for women here.
The rating system brokered by Jack Valenti included the X rating, but that was not copyrighted and became a generic term for adult films. The MPAA later changed it to NC-17.
It’s a Palme d’Or winner, and won the critics’ prize at Cannes. Stopping under-17s from seeing it just because it’s about sex is ridiculous.
Warspite, I see your perspective and to a degree, agree. As I said, nobody in the movie industry wants the govt. And, indy filmmakers are fine w/ this “voluntary” ratings. They simply want one set of rules, not one for the big studios, and a much tougher one for them. This ratings system helps keep the big studios in control of the creative process, even when it’s not one of their flicks.
A 15 minute long lesbian sex scene & no rating to keep anyone out? I guess teenage boys will make up the largest group of ticket buyers during the film’s early run. I say early ’cause after the scene gets video’d by an iPhone or Android and uploaded, the teenage male audience will wane.
One interesting angle (from the point of view of a Southerner) of the story is the arrogance of Northeastern, liberal elites. There is broad agreement throughout American society regarding the use of ratings for movies. Though a voluntary system, there is a true consensus recognising the wisdom of voluntary use and compliance with ratings. Frankly, it’s too bad we can’t reach such broad acceptance and agreement on other issues!
But up there in N.Y.C., there are folks that just know better than the rest of us. Perhaps it’s by virtue of education, worldliness, or a superiority by accident of geographical birth. Whatever its cause, this elite loves to periodically come forward and work to upset the apple cart. After all, they are brilliant. Right? Just ask them.
These “voluntary” standards are an inside game, rigged for the big studios. It’s voluntary in name only. The board is supposed to be a representative group of parents. The investigation by the PI in this doc shoots a hole in that. This is censorship by pretext. The government should not get involved. I think this is an internal struggle by indy filmmakers to level the playing field and make this process fair. It is warranted. But, the big corporate studios will play hardball, you can bet on that.
An R compared to NC-17[The old X rating] means millions of dollars in lost revenue.
There is a very good doc, This Movie is Not Yet Rated. It’s on Netflix and covers this travesty of ratings well. If you’re an independent movie maker you have a different standard than the big studios. Oh, it’s not stated, but there is nothing stated. It is an anonymous board that makes arbitrary restrictions on free speech and expression under the hypocritical, “It’s voluntary.” On this particular post, they are MUCH tougher on homosexual sex. John Watters is interviewed @ length. You can imagine the problems he’s had. I love John Watters. There’s a constitutional attorney interviewed @ length, I forget his name. There is a lesbian PI who does work for the filmmaker tracking down this anonymous star chamber. I give it 3 out of 4 stars. Oh, in case you couldn’t figure it out just by looking @ him, Jack Valenti is a slimy weasel.
Reblogged this on Brittius.com.
As minors children have less legal rights, and are also shielded from other provisions of laws which make actions of minors less onerous in the criminal justice system. So therefore, they do not have the same rights as adults, and such restrictions are perfectly legal and justified. If we can ban minors from drinking alcohol, we certainly can do so with porn and the production of it.
I wasn’t aware that any theaters actually enforced those ratings anyway.
In any case, I can’t see why any film should need to include a 15-minute lesbian sex scene. That’s what the internet is for. I mean, jeez.
Film, TV and Video game ratings were originally developed by the industry as a guide for consumers to make their own judgements. I’m against all forms of censorship no matter what the reasoning behind it is. Which includes removing the censorship powers from the FCC (if not outright dismantling it completely).
If anything this should be used a lesson to parents that it’s up to you (referring to the parent) on what your kids watch. I also see this as a way for the religious right constructing this as “….the IFC Center is forcing homosexuality onto your children” argument.
In internet parlance “FFS”.