totse.com | Something I've never understood.

Kitsunexus · #1 2008-08-08, 07:37

OK, you know unrated movies must get rated before they are shown in a wide theatrical release, and the MPAA are the people who rate those movies and tell you what needs to be cut to make a certain rating, etc...

Well like, what if you made a movie that the MPAA said was clearly an NC-17 rated movie but you wanted R. Or you were making a superhero movie, and it was classified as R, but you wanted PG-13 (bigger audience for superhero movies). However in both cases, you don't believe the MPAA, you think that they are over-exaggerating and above all, you think that ANY cuts to the film will ruin it's artistic integrity and you are inflexible on that fact.

I'm assuming that this is a real situation a lot of directors run into. What's stopping them from saying "OK, MPAA, here's your cuts, gimme my R/PG13" and then actually distributing the NC-17/R version under that guise?

Does this not happen because of plain honesty/fear of lawsuits or like does the MPAA have a hand in the distribution of film and can bypass tricks like that?

Has it ever happened before? I mean, in my uninformed mind, it's flawless. Nobody will complain, because they never knew about the original rating. The only way you'd get caught is if a media watchdog group complained to the MPAA about the content, and under review, the MPAA sees your deception.

Thanks in advance, I'm a noob when it comes to the business side of film making. XD

Death Insurance · #2 2008-08-08, 15:38

Probably the lawsuit part. Thar'd be hardcore legal action if the MPAA found out.

only black man in vermont · #3 2008-08-08, 16:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kitsunexus View Post

...does the MPAA have a hand in the distribution of film and can bypass tricks like that?

Short answer: yes.

Documentary about the fucked up rating system if you want to know more: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MjJ56BUPnSw

Kitsunexus · #4 2008-08-08, 22:02

Whoa, thanks for that man. That's fucked up. Our country needs to stop being so pussy. >_<

whocares123 · #5 2008-08-09, 00:52

i don't get how you see the "OMFG UNRATED" version of all these crude comedies come out on DVD in masse, but they couldn't release the unrated movie in theatres originally? wha?

Kitsunexus · #6 2008-08-09, 01:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by whocares123 View Post

i don't get how you see the "OMFG UNRATED" version of all these crude comedies come out on DVD in masse, but they couldn't release the unrated movie in theatres originally? wha?

My guess to that would probably be something about the trailers, but I need to elaborate on it more which is something i cant do.

only black man in vermont · #7 2008-08-09, 03:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by whocares123 View Post

i don't get how you see the "OMFG UNRATED" version of all these crude comedies come out on DVD in masse, but they couldn't release the unrated movie in theatres originally? wha?

First of all, it's not that they can't release unrated shit in theaters, it's that they won't for a number of reasons, mainly because so many mainstream/corporate theaters won't show them due to possible public outrage, etc. -- as well as marketing/advertising limitations. So they can't make money. You can see unrated films in independent art theaters, but of course major studios that spend a lot of $$$ on production can't recoup expenses just through the indie route.

For DVDs, usually the "unrated version" for major studio films is just a marketing gimmick and the movie wouldn't have been NC-17 even with the "unauthorized" scenes or whatever, which is generally like a few seconds of nudity that they just cut for whatever reason. There are exceptions like Todd Solondz' Storytelling where they show the uncensored "NIGGER FUCK ME HARD!" anal rape scene which would have made it NC-17, but on DVD nobody really gives a fuck, much lighter restrictions, and anyway it's not the kind of film that a studio would spend advertising money on.

IdentityCrisis · #8 2008-08-09, 04:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by only black man in vermont View Post

First of all, it's not that they can't release unrated shit in theaters, it's that they won't for a number of reasons, mainly because so many mainstream/corporate theaters won't show them due to possible public outrage, etc. -- as well as marketing/advertising limitations. So they can't make money. You can see unrated films in independent art theaters, but of course major studios that spend a lot of $$$ on production can't recoup expenses just through the indie route.

For DVDs, usually the "unrated version" for major studio films is just a marketing gimmick and the movie wouldn't have been NC-17 even with the "unauthorized" scenes or whatever, which is generally like a few seconds of nudity that they just cut for whatever reason. There are exceptions like Todd Solondz' Storytelling where they show the uncensored "NIGGER FUCK ME HARD!" anal rape scene which would have made it NC-17, but on DVD nobody really gives a fuck, much lighter restrictions, and anyway it's not the kind of film that a studio would spend advertising money on.

This. Also, if you have read 1984 you will understand that all media is censored in a way that is deemed fit for input.

zumtream · #9 2008-08-09, 12:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kitsunexus View Post

OK, you know unrated movies must get rated before they are shown in a wide theatrical release, and the MPAA are the people who rate those movies and tell you what needs to be cut to make a certain rating, etc...

Well like, what if you made a movie that the MPAA said was clearly an NC-17 rated movie but you wanted R. Or you were making a superhero movie, and it was classified as R, but you wanted PG-13 (bigger audience for superhero movies). However in both cases, you don't believe the MPAA, you think that they are over-exaggerating and above all, you think that ANY cuts to the film will ruin it's artistic integrity and you are inflexible on that fact.

I'm assuming that this is a real situation a lot of directors run into. What's stopping them from saying "OK, MPAA, here's your cuts, gimme my R/PG13" and then actually distributing the NC-17/R version under that guise?

Does this not happen because of plain honesty/fear of lawsuits or like does the MPAA have a hand in the distribution of film and can bypass tricks like that?

Has it ever happened before? I mean, in my uninformed mind, it's flawless. Nobody will complain, because they never knew about the original rating. The only way you'd get caught is if a media watchdog group complained to the MPAA about the content, and under review, the MPAA sees your deception.

Thanks in advance, I'm a noob when it comes to the business side of film making. XD

The Director wouldn't have a say generally and would get bitch slapped around by the MPAA and the studio. Studios generally want a lower age rating for big budget pictures so more people will see them. They will often force directors to cut gore,swearing,nudity, etc. A studio will always agree with the MPAA in the end because its power as a governing body.

And btw, how does the rating system go in America?

Over in England with have:
U: Universal. Anyone can see it.
PG: Parents are advised to cosider the content before taking younger children.
12A: Anyone can go see it but children under 12 have to be accompained by an adult.
15: No one under 15.
18: No one under 18.

Whiskeyclone · #10 2008-08-09, 20:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kitsunexus View Post

Has it ever happened before? I mean, in my uninformed mind, it's flawless. Nobody will complain, because they never knew about the original rating. The only way you'd get caught is if a media watchdog group complained to the MPAA about the content, and under review, the MPAA sees your deception.

XD

Back in the 70's when Troma Studios (Toxic Avenger, Tromeo and Juliet, etc) released Bloodsucking Freaks, they had to cut it down to get the R rating. Afterwards they sent out the NC-17 cut to theaters anyway, and the MPAA sued them for misuse of their "R" trademark.