Cool News
Fox Searchlight reveals the size of its sack... to release Bertolucci's DREAMERS with NC-17!
Hey folks, Harry here... Yes, I'm well aware that all the advertisements surrounding this text (except that one below) are with Fox Searchlight, but God Damn it, I'm proud as hell of them! They decided to not weinstein out and cut Bertolucci's DREAMERS! They are holding the film up and saying, ya know... some films are not meant for children and we respect the right of artists to tell stories to fellow adults with the understanding that sometimes it is necessary to leave the kids at home! In this story, Fox Searchlight says that they are following in the tradition of LAST TANGO IN PARIS by Bertolucci which was released with an X rating, along with other films like MIDNIGHT COWBOY. I'd also like to put out there that Kubrick's CLOCKWORK ORANGE had a brief release with an X on it's posters. It was also released with an R cut as well. But for now... celebrate cinephiles... Bertolucci will go unmolested in the U.S.! Wish I could say the same for HERO.
-
+ Expand All
-
Thank god Fox has come to it's senses. let's hope that Hero will eventually be released uncut.
(Oh yeah, first) -
...shame we've still got tons of major media outlets who won't run ads for the film, just 'cause it's NC-17. We need Tom frickin Hanks to make an NC-17 flick; that'll make 'em cave.
-
Jan 13, 2004 11:48:52 AM CST
You mean 90% of the people that visit this site won't be able to
by cranialleak
That's a damn shame, my friend. Damn shame.
-
what does this have to do with vampires, werewolves or trolls? Alright that was stupid, what is this film about anyways? Yes, I'm lazy...
-
Just had to.
-
FINALLY!!!!! A LEGIT REASON FOR ME TO PLAY WITH MY DOODLE INSIDE A NICE CLEAN FAMILY MULTIPLEX!!! TODAY IS A HAPPY DAY! A HAPPY HAPPY DAY!!!!!...And thus, forget vaseline, this calls for k-y! - - - George, The 7th Chicken!!!!
-
Hanks did make an NC-17 film. It was called "Saving Private Ryan." Spielberg used his clout to make the MPAA label it with an R rating instead.
-
@#$%^%$#^&***&&^^%^^%^$^$^^!!!! (Stream of obscenities)
-
Jan 13, 2004 12:27:17 PM CST
I think they should call it Last Rumba in Havana with Hulk Hogan
by lord shatner
"No names, brother"
-
I think NC17 should be abolished. The R rating is sufficient for any film aimed at adults. Sure, in most of the country, minors can be admitted, (but NOT in Tennessee, where I live, where you have to be 18 to see a R rated film!), but a parent can show a child anything they want to on DVD or the internet, so why do adults have to be penalized? The fact that the nc-17 rating exists causes cinemas and stores like Wal mart and Blockbuster to keep them off the shelves, bowing to public pressure from people who think NC17 means pornographic. R should be the oldest rating. Period.
-
It's for the birds, man. Good for Fox. I hear this film has male nudity and some shots of a dude whacking off.
-
Jan 13, 2004 12:46:52 PM CST
Is it better to release a movie with an NC-17 rating...
by themikejonas
...than to release it unrated? Someone enlighten me.
-
Jan 13, 2004 12:50:10 PM CST
We need a better adult rating (as porposed by Roger Ebert)...cul
by iamarayya
I bet the graphic violence in Saving Private Ryan was ok for showing parents but show a boob or some bush and its the Kids are gonna be spoiled like milk. And who are all the paerents who bring their kids of ALL ages to movies. People sometimes take infants to Block Buster movies, how the kids arnt deaf at the end is a surprise to me. Who are these parents? Obviously they dont vote or the Politicans would not be so against movies. The whole system is retarded. We need an adult rating so adults can see adult movies (not porn- we all know the difference).
-
This announcement makes me wonder if FOX has just said good bye to a number of screens that they would have had with an R rating. Make no mistake, I'm all for releasing the film the way its director intended. However, I'm wondering how fast the trailers I saw at my local Cinemark for this movie are going to get yanked due to some policy of the chain's not to show movies rated NC-17.
-
It's always made me laugh how the NC-17 could be a "kiss of death" for a film in the US. Correct me if I'm wrong, but NC-17 basically means that no-one under the age of 17 can be admitted, period, right? And R is similar but if you're under 17 you can still see the picture with an adult? In the UK we have the 15 and 18 certificates, which mean that anyone under these ages cannot see the film, adult supervision or not. The 18 certificate certainly doesn't spell the kiss of death for a film in the UK (many very popular movies like American Beauty, The Green Mile, all the Alien movies, etc. were cert 18). Funnily enough, Saving Private Ryan got away with a 15 cert, dispite the gore & violence, which is why I mentioned the Tom Hanks starrer The Green Mile in my little list above.
-
I've watched the trailer and have no real interest in seeing this in the theater, but if they will show some respect for the film and release it as is than they can have my money. If they do indeed release this NC-17 I will go to show my support for the future of other films getting released the same.
-
If the movie is rated NC-17, and I'm a parent, and I want to take my child to see the movie, b/c I understand that it will not cause him/her to become evil, and I understand that it will help them become a more rational, logically, interesting person, I can't do that? This makes no sense. If I want my kid to see the movie, s/he should be able to see it. And what's the deal with the R rating...it's for 18+, so some 17 year old kid can go see an NC-17 movie, but not an R rated movie? WTF?
-
You think the NC-17 rating is bad? That's what it is like in the UK for 15 and 18 certificate films. Personally, I would hate the R-Rating. The thought of kids being present in the cinema when watching, for example Kill Bill, would do my fucking nut in. The only "advisory" rating in the UK is the "12A", which is the same as a PG-13 more or less. But this means adults can bring their kids into such films as LOTR: Return of the King. It pisses me right off!
The Dreamers was rated 18 in the UK a while ago, UNCUT!
America sucks worse for censorship than the UK does with the BBFC. So for once the UK is doing great. I can't wait to see this, my local cinema has been advertising it for a while. -
I always hear some small child crying or talking and then see their jackass parents take them out of the theater. Damn it, am I the only one who thinks that there shouldn't be a child within a 10 yard radius of the theater playing "Red Dragon" or "Kill Bill". I'm talking 4 and 5 year olds in both those theaters. I realize you're desperate for a night out, but for God's sake exercise the responsibility you didn't use when you had the kid.
-
Jan 13, 2004 3:47:09 PM CST
The NC17 isn't going to keep this out of your local multiplex...
by minderbinder
...it's the fact that it's an "art film" and never had a shot at major release. Any theatre that won't show it because it's NC17 probably wouldn't have shown it anyway because it's not mainstream enough. I say good for Fox.
-
Correct me if I'm wrong but IIRC the last film that was released with an NC-17 was Paul Verhoeven's SHOWGIRLS. There were a number of unrated releases like Artisan's REQUIEM FOR A DREAM but no NC-17. I don't quite understand why studios will rather put out a film unrated than with an NC-17. It's almost as if NC-17 were a bad, dirty thing and if you put a film out unrated it could have any rating. it's just not rated ... Which is of course bullshit because even REQUIEM was slapped with an NC-17 before Artisan went and put it out unrated. It's going to be interesting to see in how many theaters THE DREAMERS will play as most theater chains refuse NC-17 movies. But THE DREAMERS is not exactly multiplex material anyway and arthouses have never had a problem with NC-17. So yeah, congrats and props to Fox Searchlight for their decision. I hope they do well and show other studios that it can (and should) be done this way. I'm still sure THE DREAMERS will get a 16+ rating here in Austria but that's kinky old Europe for ya ...
-
You managed to totally blast a film you've never seen! I'm so glad to see that people can be experts on films by talented directors without even seeing them. Now I'll go on to tell everyone how awesome The Aviator is even though I haven't seen it because it hasn't been finished yet: I assume from the concept that Leonardo DiCaprio is really good at being Howard Hughes and this movie is the best I will probably ever see when I finally see it because Scorsese is always consistent... There, now you and I are BOTH cool and hip because we've reviewed possibly good movies by possibly great directors without actually having seen them! YAY!
-
The trailer itself didn't interest me, but I'll support any film with the balls to deck out NC-17 style. Way to go fox, now if it would only play in crapsville, FL
-
Seriously, I'm thankful for the respect Fox shows for Bertolucci by putting out Dreamers in it's director's cut and not some hacked down version for FOX TV.
What gets me, though, is how many claim to be excited to see these 'art' films and praise them just because they are included in that elite group of NC-17 films that only 'educated' people can enjoy. Well, the truth is, most people see them for the nudity (as far as showgirls and last tango in paris are concerned). Another truth is, that the reason these movies don't do so well is not because people can't see them, but because they are not good films. Say what you like, but once you've climaxed, any attraction to Last Tango, Showgirls, or any other 'porn-disguised-as-art' film disappears. Geez, Last Tango was one of the most boring films I've ever seen. I saw Ken Park and was utterly disgusted my the pointlessness of the sex/nudity. This is not to say that sex or nudity doesn't have a place in cinema. An equally 'controversial' picture was Sex and Lucia, and I fell in love with that film - with the characters, the story, the photography - everything. My point is that sex and nudity in film is not always art, and neither is violence. There are too many pointlessly violent films out there, where we have become jaded to the effect. That's not to say violence doesn't have a place in cinema. In films like Irreversible, the violence is used to turn the viewer off if possible, and one (at least i did) sees the horror with it. So what conclusion do I come to? Don't be so quick to praise NC-17 films, don't be afraid to give the NC-17 rating because violence and sex sometimes play a vital part in the STORY, and finally, don't complain that you want to take your kids to the movies to see these films, cuz I guarantee you: a majority of these kids are way to horny to see the 'art' in the art-house films and if there is a good reason for them to see it, it's every parent's responsibility (because these children - under the age of 18 - are under their guard) to check out beforehand what movie they are bringing them to watch. Sorry about the rant. I'm not conservative in that I despise sex and violence or think it always unsuitable for kids. I'm in no box. But I do want our kids to be able to be kids for longer than the 12-13 years they get to experience today. thanks for listening. -
I doubt kids will ever get longer than "12-13 years" to be kids and, frankly, I don't think they get that even now. When I went to see Freddy vs. Jason, I would argue that the majority of the theatre was small, small children. From toddlers to grade schoolers. It's just a common fact that most parents are idiots and they're going to take their "little ones" to see movies that they probably shouldn't see at such a young age. Even with that, though, I think what movies kids see are insignificant compared with the many other pressures and influences baring down at American adolescence at an increasingly early age. However, I still applaud studios that are brave enough to release films uncensored. I think the main reason, though, that Fox is doing this is because The Dreamers doesn't have big enough stars to be a real draw, anyway. I mean, Eyes Wide Shut had to have a "R" rating because it was a movie with Tom Cruise, really. Michael Pitt is a 100x better actor than Cruise but he's not exactly a box office draw. But to me, he'll always be Tommy Gnosis.
-
Jan 13, 2004 6:41:44 PM CST
If the trailer didn't interest you...I assume you saw the US tra
by minderbinder
-
Violence in movies is fake and you dont get that sick feeling compared to when you see real people dieing. Nudity is real. Thought I dont think a movie should get NC-17 unless it shows intercourse. Which im fine with, but they have to draw the ling somewhere. The problem I have is how they are not even allowing our parents to decide what movies we can see. Some states you cant get into R rated even with an adult. And with NC-17 you never can!
-
If your going to restrict kids from ever coming into a rated R movie (which shouldnt be done the parents should decide) then only restrict something like 12 and lower. Cause people above those ages but not 18 yet (just turned 17 so I can see Rated R movies) that love movies should not be labled with being noisy little brats.
-
It's going to take a blockbuster type movie to make NC-17 movies acceptable. If an "important" movie like Saving Private Ryan or a sure-fire moneymaker like Hannibal were rated and released as NC-17, the stigma might have been broken. Even Showgirls (or something like Natural Born Killers) could have done it due to controversy surrounding the film. I think Showgirls even opened at the number one spot, but tanked afterwards because it was a piece of shit. NBK also opened number one, most likely because of the controversy surrounding it.
-
Art films generally don't make anything in family theatres; an art film that is massacred will make even less. I'm sure that Fox is figuring that the pure novelty of watching a guy masturbate will draw in more people than the cut version would have, with all the bad press.
-
What still doesn't make sense to me is that...it's like NC-17 is "soooo bad" that even a mature sixteen year-old can't see it with a parent. It's like it's unwatchable to anyone under the age of seventeen when, frankly, we know that's often not the case. There's hardly anything that warrants the NC-17 rating in HAPPINESS, but because the film deals with pedophilia, it got that ranking. Oh well, the MPAA is messed up.
-
I am very pleased to hear that "The Dreamers" will be released in its uncut form in the US. I have been looking forward to seeing it for quite a while now, and while the US trailers don't do it justice the international ones do. While I am pleased at the decision to release it with its NC-17 rating I can forsee many debates about the effect this will have on the film. In my hometown Yakima, WA the theatres are making a great effort at bringing art films to our town, and we get at least one a week. But the people of the town are very conservative and when Showgirls came it was taken out of the theatre before it was even shown to the public. They had the print it had been built up, and run-through. However, the conservative biddies of the community fussed and cried at it was gone. This led to an "unofficial" ban on NC-17 films. This was especially bold since Kyle Machlaughlin from the movie, was born and raised here with his family still in town. I hope to see "The Dreamers" but I may have to wait for the DVD or travel to a larger city to catch it in the theatre. On a final note NC-17 means "no children 17 and under" so you have to be 18 to get in not 17. 17 is included in the audience not let in.
-
This Bertolucci fella's flicks would be way more interesting if he wasn't so obsessed with male, frontal nudity. I get enough of that from my daily 4 hours of borderline rape porno courtesy of Max Hardcore and all those wonderful fellas in Europe where every woman's orifice is a spitoon and just because she's crying, doesn't mean it hurts. Of course I don't enjoy this horrible trash, not at all, I just feel it's my duty to masturbate furiously while muttering that if the chick wasn't such a whore, she wouldn't be currently trying to fit three, sweaty, eurofucks into her rectum.
What does this have to with Bertolucci? NOTHING! Except to say that if he'd present the full frontal nudity in context that I would not feel was assaulting my already tenative hold on my sexuality and put into a more suitable presentation such as: Being shoved violently into a screaming euroslut's various orifices. That I get, that I understand. Men walking around with their shit flopping around just to air it out on-screen? It confuses me, I'm American. We used to burn people alive for that kind of shit. Whenever I see a naked man, I get a funny feeling somewhere. It's a battle between beating the naked man to death and then pissing on his corpse. (That right there has got to be someone's fetish.) or asking him to break me in to this strange and exciting world of manlovin'! I've thought about it, sure! Don't know well I'd like having my asshole stretched out though. Sounds painful. But, the point is, Harry, AS AMBIGUOUS AS I AM AND AS DISTASTEFUL AS I FIND WOMEN IN GENERAL, MY FRAGILE LIFE DEPENDS ON KEEPING THE FACADE OF STRAIGHT MALE INTACT! So, please, stop telling me where I can see floppy cocks, ten feet tall on the big screen. It frightens and excites me and I just can't handle that kind of thing at the first of the year. Okay? Now, I'm off to reassert my sexuality by working on my car and then I'm gonna watch.....lesbian porn and drink beer. Yeah. -
Regardless of various personal biases against French/foreign films, Michael Pitt is a very talented (and American) actor. Didn't anyone else enjoy his turn as Tommy Gnosis?!
-
Jan 15, 2004 2:53:09 AM CST
Er... you want butter on the side, with that popcorn?
by hallowedbthyname
-
Hillarious post!!!!
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 439 total posts 159 posts
- WTF HOLLYWOOD: SOLARBABIES -- 144 total posts 142 posts
- Herc’s Seen Tonight’s Return Of THE WALKING DEAD!! Discuss Also DOWNTON ABBEY, FEAR FACTOR, PAN AM, ONCE, SIMPSONS, DYNAMITE, LUCK, SHAMELESS, BAIT CAR, THE GRAMMYS And More!! Sunday Is Sweeps Day 11!! -- 155 total posts 140 posts
- Avid Comic Reader Hercules Does Battle With Tedium During Kevin Smith’s COMIC BOOK MEN! -- 55 total posts 45 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 196 total posts 45 posts
- I am The Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day! No, I’m the Behind the Scenes Pic of the Day! -- 35 total posts 35 posts
- If the Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day drops her pen, pick it up, but don’t look at her legs or else it will be on your record. -- 60 total posts 34 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 127 total posts 32 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 513 total posts 29 posts
- The Sensorties Revisit The Friday Docback (And Still Smell)!! DOCTOR WHO Story #7 Again, The Coming Of Season/Series 7, And More!! -- 118 total posts 27 posts