Zack and Miri vs. the MPAA
Kevin Smith has already had one run in with the MPAA for Zack and Miri, having to take down an internet only trailer, and now it looks like he might be facing some bigger problems. It would appear that Zack and Miri Make a Porno isn’t the type of flick the MPAA wants to give an R rating too, but rather the deadly NC-17.
Seth Rogen recently revealed the potential problem to MTV.
“The MPAA is gunning for us, I think, it’s a really filthy movie. I hear they are having some problems getting an R rating from an NC-17 rating, which is never good.”
“A guy f—ing a donkey, (in Clerks 2) they ain’t got no problem with,” he continued. “But a man and a woman having sex they seem to have real issues with, for some weird reason. It’s insane. It’s completely insane.”
“They [fight against] sex stuff. Isn’t that weird? It’s really crazy to me that ‘Hostel’ is fine, with people gouging their eyes out and sh– like that,” Rogen shrugged. “But you can’t show two people having sex — that’s too much.”
I half expected this to happen, simply because of the title and the director, but Rogen makes a good point. Sex seems to be taboo with the MPAA, but hardcore violence tends to get a pass. Here’s hoping Smith doesn’t have to cut too much to appease the rating gods.
America seriously needs to clean up their act with their hatred of all things sex on tv.
Rex | Jun 20th, 2008
NC 17? I can’t say I’m surprised, it is a Kevin Smith film after all.
website design | Jun 20th, 2008
I’m sure if Kevin Smith had a sex scene with a corpse it’d be fine because apparently the MPAA see’s that type of cinema as art but include a dick and fart in the movie your exposing America to crude and tasteless debauchery.
Dylan | Jun 20th, 2008
“I’m sure if Kevin Smith had a sex scene with a corpse…”
Dylan, have you seen “Clerks”? Lol.
Pat | Jun 20th, 2008
People are afraid of sex and nudity.
200 years ago if you saw a old nude man running around your back yard, you’d laugh, call him crazy, and chase him off with a broom.
Now people call the police and have him charged with indecent exposure, prowling, resisting arrest, and whatever else they can manage to think up.
ti | Jun 20th, 2008
I hope they show her poop in his mouth
bt | Jun 20th, 2008
NC-17-Jim Norton takes it in the fartbox.
Steve C. | Jun 20th, 2008
I’m sure Kev’s appearance in the documentary “This Film is not yet Rated” doesn’t help either. If you haven’t seen it I recommended it to you do. Puts the MPAA in a brand new tainted light.
Tyson Elder | Jun 20th, 2008
I think it’s curious that in an article about censorship they cut the words “fucking” and “shit.”
Ironic.
Jeremy | Jun 20th, 2008
Who cares what they rate it - all the Kevin Smith fans will end up seeing it - I would imagine a large number from torrents - yeah the MPAA are some bad - Shut your mouth -
Iridesce | Jun 21st, 2008
Kevin will cut it until he gets an “R” rating, take a beating at the box office, and then release the original version on DVD and clean up.
Jason | Jun 21st, 2008
Well, the MPAA’s main advisor is a cardinal for the Catholic church. and seeing how puritanical the church’s views on sexuality are, even in 2008, this isn’t very surprising.
Maybe if Zack and Miri were children they wouldn’t have as many problems with it.
Anonymous | Jun 21st, 2008
It’s a Kevin Smith movie, therefore I’d watch it even if the stuffy ass committee gave it an XXX rating. Censorship and political correctness have gone completely insane in this country. That comittee needs to take a trip overseas and turn on broadcast TV.
Who gave them the right to be my Moral Authority? In looking at the big picture; if violence begets violence, what does sex beget? (hint: peace, cause all the dudes are then to tired to fight) therefore a piece begets peace!
Make YOUR movie Kevin not theirs!!
Sam Adams | Jun 21st, 2008
How about 30 Years ago before Ronny Raygun GOD DAMN HIS SOUL
>>200 years ago if you saw a old nude man running around your back yard, you’d laugh, call him crazy, and chase him off with a broom.
Jeff Little | Jun 21st, 2008
I don’t really see why Smith is wasting his time putting it before the MPAA in the first place. Release the film unrated - who cares what the MPAA says anyway?
BJ | Jun 21st, 2008
For all of those of you who cry censorship and the like learn the facts. The MPAA is not a government organization nor does it actually censor the movies. The provide a rating and that is all. If you do some research you will learn that they really won’t even tell film makers what scenes to cut in order to get a better rating, they really just have to guess. Movie producers don’t have to even submit their movies to the MPAA to get them released, they can go straight to the movie theaters with a “No Rating” on them. Problem is that most theater chains won’t touch those movies out of fear of running movies that people will find offensive. And with that come all the idiots that threaten boycotts and the like. So while the MPAA is a f-up’d organization, don’t start waving the censorship banner because submissions to it are purly optional.
AW | Jun 21st, 2008
watch This Movie Is Not Rated. it talks all about this issue.
AT | Jun 21st, 2008
Backwards rubes with their lust for violence and self-loathing for sexuality are a real drag.
Luckily, they are also most likely to volunteer for a war of aggression and lose a few body parts.
I think it works out…more wars, less repressive joe-jobbers.
Enormous Juan | Jun 21st, 2008
I woke Kevin Smith up angrily when I heard of Heath Leggers death.
Steve from Yellowstone | Jun 21st, 2008
That’s terrible, I’m sorry…
Steve C. | Jun 21st, 2008
Just be thankful that the FCC doesn’t run the MPAA…
Mario | Jun 22nd, 2008
“Hey, Hey, MPAA! How many films did you censor today?”
-Cecil B. Demented.
“Family is a dirty word fo CENSORSHIP!”
-Honey Whitlock
Not to wax political, but there is a supremely f***ed up mentality in American culture that sex is wrong/evil/immoral/only for childbearing, etc., but violence is perfectly acceptable.
This is, in fact, not the case.
The MPAA - a seless, biased, and bribeable institution held over from Will Hayes’ self appointed Hayes Office days- is nothing more than legalized censorship. In the original days of the Hollywood film, if you didn’t have the approval of the Hayes office, and a certification from the Legion of Decency, your film was not going to be watched, and would have difficulty in even being distributed. The MPAA, with it’s rating system, has continued this vile, horrid practice of saying what can and cannot be shown on a theatre’s screens, not by withholding a certification of moral content but by - in this case, giving the film a rating that prevents all but the most independent of theatres from showing it. In fact, many major cinema corporations, including but not limited to Cinemark, one of the largest, have bans on showing NC-17 and unrated films. It is the choice of any corporate entity to choose what they allow to be shown in their theatres.
where was I… oh yeah, sex versus violence in movie ratings. It takes excessive violence to achieve an R-Rating. We’re talking an extended, 90 minute fight scene between Summer Glau and random people on the street violent (River Tam Beats Up Everyone! courtesy of xkcd.com). However, you need one count em one naked person to achieve that same rating, or one count em one mention of the work “fuck” in a sexual connotation to get rated R - see Waiting for Guffman and Billy Elliot.
An interesting note is that there is *not* a publicly accessible listing of the exact criteria that gives a movie its rating. The MPAA does not have a set criteria on its rating system, and is in fact demonstrably inconsistent in its rating criteria, allowing for appeals (read as bribes) from directors and production companies to achieve a more “accessible” rating.
In note to the above/below comments, such as about how there is no official capacity of the MPAA to censor movies, and that they are not a government agency, you don’t need official government power when you have the backing of the distributors and venues. As far as releasing an unrated version, you’d better be willing to release straight to video/dvd, as you won’t get it played in mainstream theatres. As far as the connections between quasi-censorship agencies and religion, DUH! Keep in mind that the people who founded this country were kicked out of England for being too uptight. People didn’t come to America for religious freedom by choice, they were RUN OUT OF FUCKIN’ DODGE. Thus, the strong puritanical values that are rampant in contemporary semi-secular America remain, even though the society that hosts this is just as hypocritical about them as ever.
In summation, the MPAA is unconstitutional in nature if not directly in fact, the theatre owners and rating board has a de facto monopoly on morals in American cinema, and the American public needs to realize that nudity and sex are a hell of a lot more natural to humanity that beating sommeone’s face in with a brick.
*gets down from soap box*
Alex | Jun 23rd, 2008