Unrated/NC-17/Graphic Films

08-19-2010, 09:58 AM

PRE-NC-17 CINEMA SCREENS IN LOS ANGELES
(2004-08-04) filmthreat.com

The American Cinematheque at the Egyptian Theatre presents FOR ADULTS ONLY: PRE-NC-17 CINEMA IN AMERICA, a weekend (September 10 - 12, 2004), of movies that were rated X upon original release. The series kicks off with a new 35mm print of Bernardo Bertolucci's LAST TANGO IN PARIS (1972, MGM/UA), presented in memory of the film's star Marlon Brando. Other films include Russ Meyer's BEYOND THE VALLEY OF THE DOLLS (1970, 20th Century Fox/Criterion), a pop-culture sexfest about a girl band, written by Roger Ebert!; Ralph Bakshi's animated FRITZ THE CAT (1972, MGM/UA), based on R. Crumb's 60's counter-culture comics; Stanley Kubrick's A CLOCKWORK ORANGE (1971, Warners); New York hustler drama MIDNIGHT COWBOY (1969, MGM/UA) starring Jon Voight and Dustin Hoffman; Haskall Wexler's MEDIUM COOL (1969, Paramount), a look at the 1968 Chicago Democratic Convention riots; PERFORMANCE (1970, Warner Bros.) starring a very young Mick Jagger; and Ken Russell's blasphemous THE DEVILS (1971, Warner Bros.). Writer, critic and author of the book The Ratings Game, Stephen Farber will appear for discussion after the screening of A CLOCKWORK ORANGE.

for more information click here

as it says above......no children allowed.....

08-19-2010, 10:00 AM

honestly i watched R rated films when i was 10..i dunno if that is too young.but i don't think kids should watch R,NC-17,or unrated films that involve graphic sex scenes,rape,violence,nudity,and alot of graphic language.

**RockStar** · 08-19-2010, 11:06 AM

Guys please if you like to continue discussing Ewan's movie make a thread for it -- and keep the graphic descriptions to a minimum.

Thanks.

08-19-2010, 06:23 PM

Hey, what the hell, I saw Trainspotting at 18 and though it wasn't even that clear, yeah... bulgy eyes.

:lol:

08-19-2010, 09:54 PM

We live in a lost society.

**RockStar** · 08-20-2010, 01:40 AM

NC-17 and Unrated movies are a gift. There's nothing I love more than watching a good NC-17 film (I can't wait to catch "The Dreamers"), but it has to be one so good that earns its be NC-17.

But I agree that parents should play a role in discussing and explaining certain things to their youngsters.

My personal experience was different and not because my parents didn't want or didn't care to explain to me certain things, it was because I liked to find out for myself. I've always been mature and old fashioned so I could watch whatever and it didn't have *ANY* side effects because I knew it was fantasy and because I knew it was art.

I've always had a tv (with cable, HBO, Showtime, etc) and a VCR/DVD in my room and my mom and my dad trusted me because they know me so well. But that was me.

I would *never* want kids watching films like "Wide Sargasso Sea" (an adaptation of a book by the same name) or "Interview with the Vampire". "Wide Sargasso Sea" is a beautifu, painful movie but the sex scenes are porn.

But I don't trust most kids with sex/violence, 'unrated' movies anymore than I trust them to take out the garbage without being told. I agree with everyone here that parents should know what their kids are watching and they should discuss and talk to them immediately. These are dangerous times. Hehe.

What I'm saying is that although maturity and age don't have to be linked, they usually are. Films that are not rated PG or lower carry themes you need to understand to appreciate.

08-20-2010, 03:33 AM

It depends on a lot of factors, but mainly, is the child ready for the violence and/or sex and will they understand it in terms of the context of both the story AND that it's not real -- in all aspects since it is a film?

My parents let me watch extremely violent movies like "Forte Apache, The Brox" when I was growing up as well as Disney classics like "Bambi" and whatnot.

However, if it was an adult (R) rated film, they always saw it with me AND we would discuss what we had just seen in terms of any questions I might have (remember, I'm talking being about six, seven years old so I had no idea what sex was or what it really meant to kill someone) and my parents did their best to explain things in realistic terms that didn't sugar coat things BUT that also emphasized the difference between fantasy and reality... Which I think was the deciding factor on why they trusted me to see adult films when I got slightly older and they weren't around (like when I would get home from school and watch movies on HBO and things).

So, basically, in my own personal experience it was the fact that my parents were INVOLVED in helping distinguish between fantasy and reality, as well as discussing the things we would watch together which built up trust in me (and vice versa) that I could watch anything I wanted, and if I had any questions we could talk about it together to undo any confusion I might have.

The other side to the equation is that I, as an individual, even at six or seven, was READY to see some of the things I saw in adult movies with the understanding that none of it was real which also played a big factor in my parents trusting me to watch whatever I wanted because they knew I wasn't going to go out and imitate the things I saw (violence OR sex as I became a teenager).

I think this individual aspect is another major factor that parents need to decide for themselves because as much as everyone hates to jump onto the "movies and video games make kids more violent" argument... The fact is it CAN make some younger kids violent if that is all they are exposed to -- Or rather, allowed to be exposed to UNSUPERVISED which agian, I think is the key.

As for the debate of why it is "okay" in our culture to let younger viewers see (fictionalized) acts of brutality, yet our culture comes all unglued whenever a frank or realistic discussion or portraly of sex or sexuality comes up?

As Shrrshrr said, it IS because of the puritanical roots this country has that our forefathers brought over here when they founded America, right or wrong.

Also, the rating system we have for music, movies and video games is a joke and often just their as "lip service" to appease those who say that we aren't doing enough -- as parents and a society -- To help curb violence and raise our children "right" -- Whatever that means...

For instance, a movie can be completely R-Rated because it has two F-Words and ONLY because of that. The same is true for a PG-13 movie, only it can have just one F-Word.

So, for example, you could make a movie that has tons and tons of bloody killings, and only one F-word... And it'll still be a PG-13 which is what movie studios want so they can get not just the older teens (over 18) who would go see this violent movie, but the YOUNGER teens as well.

And guess what? Most parent's DON'T care in that as long as it ISN'T an R-Rated movie -- for whatever reason -- They'll just let their younger kids go and assume it is "safe" because it isn't an R. It's ridiculous...

And it really shows that a lot of parents AREN'T that involved in what their kids are watching or playing (video games) whether people want to admit it or not.

Anyway, there's my take on the whole issue.

There are a lot of issues that factor into it... But the most important, I think, is the involvement of parents to actually *gasp* raise their kids (in discussing things their kids see in films and helping distinguish between fantasy and reality) because all the other issues of whether or not should a child see an R-rated or graphically violent or sexy film stems from this very thing and it just isn't happening these days with both mom and dad both working to make ends meet. It's a sad, sad situation.

**Headhunter** · 08-20-2010, 04:36 AM

Violence taking precedence over sexuality in the order of socially acceptable content is rediculous, but now a deeply entrenched belief in North American society.

The only real solution with any resonance/credibility is to raise children to deal with violence, sexuality, and any other "controversial" issues in a manner which allows them to keep it in context. Avoiding exposure to one thing or another exclusively as the method to prevent negative growth is not a real solution...

08-20-2010, 12:42 PM

Are there even movies that are rated G nowadays? I can't remember the last time I saw a G rated movie. Maybe the last time I saw a G rated film was seven years old or younger.
I don't think that little kids should see movies with a lot of violence or graphic sex. IMO it would be too traumatizing.
My dad always complains that my uncle let his son see Pet Cemetary when he was under 10. I never saw the movie so I don't know if it's very violent, but my dad doesn't like how my cousin saw this movie. I remember when I was four and my older cousins were watching Freddy movies I would be terrified and have to leave the room.
I think when kids are young they shouldn't be exposed to violent films. It's impossible to avoid when they're older, but as kids they shouldn't have to witness violence. They should see movies like Mickey Mouse's Sing Along. I use to love watching those movies.

08-20-2010, 04:17 PM

So, I watched Caligula last night, having watched it 20 years ago, almost to the day. I remembered a great deal about the film, including the smarmy theme music, but I was surprised by how unmoved I was when I was absolutely horrified and appalled by it when I was younger.

Which leads me to the question/debate - should younger viewers be allowed to watch graphic films?

My friend let her 16 year old son see Grosse Point Blank while she watched Chasing Amy in a nearby theater. I was shocked that she considered gratuitous, over-the-top violence a better subject for him than a fairly accurate story about the trials of romance in today's society.

She felt the honest discussion of sexual acts was too much (frankly, I thought they were fairly tame and rather funny), but it was okay for him to see people shot through with bullets over and over and over and over and over (you get the idea) again.

I'm not okay with this - I have issues with youngsters watching any gratuitous sex and violence because I strongly believe that our society is way over exposed to it right now (pun intended). I'm not puritanical, but I think there's a difference between the way Europeans portray the female body and the length to which sexuality enters their culture. They're two different issues, and it would be better if we in the US were able to see that.

When I was a kid the whole town would turn out for G-rated films. That was perfectly acceptable, and well established in the community. When was the last time you saw a G-rated film that wasn't put out by Disney and geared towards children?

So...what are your thoughts on the topic? I'll post more later...