POSTERS

Weinsteins' Spark Buzz with Sexy MPAA Banned 'Sin City 2' Poster

by
May 29, 2014
Source: Page Six

Sin City: A Dame to Kill For

Just a little over a week ago, we got a look at five new character posters for the sequel Sin City: A Dame To Kill For. However, what we didn't see was a poster featuring the titular woman played by Eva Green, and now we know why. Page Six just debuted a new poster featuring the actress, but it was deemed to be too sexy for a sanctioned release by the MPAA “for nudity — curve of under breast and dark nipple/areola circle visible through sheer gown.” Clearly this is just The Weinstein Company trying to stir up some controversy to get some buzz around their late summer release, but you can't deny that's a damn sexy poster. Look now!

Here's the sexy, unapproved poster for Sin City: A Dame to Kill For from Page Six:

Sin City: A Dame to Kill For

Sin City: A Dame to Kill For is directed by Robert Rodriguez who co-wrote the script with William Monahan (The Departed) and Frank Miller, creator of the graphic novel series and co-director of the first film. Dwight (Josh Brolin) is hunted down by the only woman he ever loved, Ava Lord (Eva Green), and then watches his life go straight to hell. Chronologically, this story takes place prior to "The Big Fat Kill" (seen in the first Sin City) and explains how Dwight came to have a dramatically different face. Jessica Alba, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Mickey Rourke, Juno Temple, Jaime King, Rosario Dawson and many others star in the film being shot in 3D and Dimension Films will send the sequel to theaters on August 22nd this summer. Excited?

Find more posts in Hype, Posters

Discover more on ZergNet:

  • Nielsen700
    Oh no! Not boobs!!!
    • TheOct8pus
      I call them "Fatty chest protuberances"
      • Akirakorn
        Men = got you some bitch tits! Women = bitch you got some tits!
  • Tyler Cobaugh
    I am excited! The trailers look fantastic!
  • Brian Sleider
    Fucking puritans. IF it were some fat man with fucking C cups that would be fine but sheer beauty? yeh censor that shit.
    • http://www.sonicmayhem.com Sascha Dikiciyan
      Exactly. Seriously, who the fuck decides what i can and cant see. Such bs.
      • Josef Saltpeppaketchup Woods
        Watch the documentary NC-17
        • Brian Sleider
          Pretty much a council of unnamed puritans.
  • SpideyLex
    I'm in love with Eva Green. Ever since Dreamers I have been down right obsessed with her. She's beauty to the perfection.
  • TheOct8pus
    Really? Have they ever received a Victoria's Secret catalog in the mail, or seen the Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue at the supermarket magazine rack? It's nothing but blatant T & A.....i can't believe these prudes.
    • Akirakorn
      Yes, in my mail at my house. Not in public. Even SI and other shameless mags have some standard as what can be on the cover. I grew up with HBO, Skinemax and worse in the house and nobody cared. In public it's a different story. After all. It's inappropriate to pick your nose, fart, burp and scratch your itch in public.
      • TheOct8pus
        This was in the magazine rack at my supermaket. Tell me that the movie poster above is MORE revealing and racy than this magazine that was out in the open among children and grannies.
        • Bo
          You're right on the money. Just what does this photo mean to do and what is it purpose other than titilation of men's sexual fantasies? These gals might as well be totally naked. Guys like Akirakorn must be in heart attack mode especially if they have children and grannies...lol... it's all so ridiulous you just gotta laugh at it all...
          • TheOct8pus
            That magazine cover is basically porn. I made awkward eye contact with the overweight middle-aged lady at the checkout counter while I was buying my bottle of water and cat food. She knew I was staring at that magazine and drooling, like every other dude in the store...personally I think it's an awesome cover, by the way....haha
          • Bo
            Pretty funny. Yea, nothing wrong with being a red-blooded guy that appreciates really good looking women. We just gotta learn to be cool and keep a grip on it...pun attended.
      • Bo
        Man oh man do you sound like a programmed robot what with what's inappropriate to do in public. It's different in all cultures as to what's acceptable and what's not. You can't scratch your itch in public because you are so programmed not to? Wow...what a repressed person you must be. Why should we care for god's sake? Who made up these stupid rules and why do you so adamently follow them and require others to do the same? Relax man...you're not in control here...and by the way...it's all Christain related these rules you spout...poor sod!...sorry...but really!
  • http://benhunter.co Benjamin Hunter
    I love me some boobs. But seriously, guys. Quit your whining. I don't have kids, but I'm an uncle. And I wouldn't want my 1st-grade nephew staring at this image when I take him to the theater. The MPAA really hasn't done anything wrong here. The existence of the internet (and websites like these and Reddit and the like) make all the complaints I read in this comment section moot, whilst accomplishing exactly what was intended when the image was created. Enjoy the boobs and quit complaining about public censorship.
    • Bo
      So, it sounds like you're all for public censorship? And why in the world would you be so adverse to your 1st. grade nephew seeing this poster? What do you think, it's going to turn him into somekind of beast/monster? Man on man....I think the weird stuff is going on inside your head and not the kid's. Just sayin'...
      • Akirakorn
        I gotta agree with Ben. Unless your theater caters to mature(r) audiences or separates theater areas by age, yep this shouldn't be next to a Despicable Me 3 Poster. Turning a kid into a beast!? Talk about being weird. Actually it would avoid awkward discussions and misunderstandings, that could lead to very inappropriate situations in the immediate future. Let kids be innocent and enjoy life without hormones, phobias and social hangups. At least until puberty (tweens).
        • Bo
          Appreciate you reply, but really disagree with. What are you so afraid of? Let kids be innocent? Come on, man. Hide this from them and they will develop phobias and social hangups like you seem to enjoy. Kids will only develop social hangups and phobias if we as adults give it to them. What's wrong with discussions? Why do you label them awkward? Do you think kids don't pick up on that from you and adults like you? The fear; the inappropiate situations are created by you and other adults. Deal with it; treat kids with respect. All kids know when adults hide stuff from them. All you're doing is sending a message to kids that sex and beauty and desire are bad and thus you give them hangups about it. I'd rather my kid see a poster like this than those stupid Despicable Me movies that are nothing but lies and a false misrespresentation of life. And I stand by my statement re: adults fear of kids seeing posters of this type turning them into what?, somekine of sexual evil monsters and beasts? How can looking at a photo of a beautiful woman cause kids to have hangups and phobias? That's ridiculous! It's your reactions that will cause kids to have hangups and phobias!!
    • Snev De la Fontaine
      I've been wanting to ask this to someone with a different opinion from mine: What exactly would be wrong with kids seeing boobs? I don't mean specifically this poster. Also, don't get me wrong: I think highly sexualized images would have a bad impact on a children's view of his/her own identity and that of others. But you can have highly sexualized images without nudity and nudity without a scarring sexualization or objectification. Is there a reason nudity in itself might be a bad thing whereas images of violence and non-nude objectification are still ok?
      • http://benhunter.co Benjamin Hunter
        Context obviously plays a huge role. Boobs are intrinsically innocent. However, innocent boobs almost never happen in advertising. It's always on purpose.
  • McWetty
    Blood splatter, guns, explosions, man nips... All ok. The slight suggestion of a fem breast (not even full on) and it's banned. No wonder the French make fun of Americans.
  • Trey Wilson
    The MPAA are so hypocritical. Why do they continue to bow down to these do-gooder Christian lobbyists and NeoCons? Such double standards and hypocrisy - when most media conglomerates freely allow murder and mayhem to be shown in all its guises through film, TV, video games, and heck, even the six-o-clock news. But show the slightest hint of a boob on a movie poster, and it's not fit for public consumption. I'm sure if she was wearing a Burka there'd be public outrage from Christian groups for not showing enough of her body. Fuck MPAA censorship.
  • John
    You gotta be kiddin me. SMDH. The MPAA needs to find them something better else to do already.
  • Bo
    America is so immature it's embarrassing sometimes to be from here. I've traveled a great deal and Europeans especially laugh at our hypocrital and puritanical views on sex and our dark, dark obsession with violence. I bet the guy below who wouldn't want his 1st. grade nephew to see this poster in a movie theatre would have no problem with the kid seeing posters with Stallone or Arnold with gun it hands spurting fire and bullets at unseen other humans. Weird stuff, man!
    • Akirakorn
      Yep spitting bullets at unseen other humans, werewolves, furniture, pokemon. If there was gore, death and violence on the poster yes, you'd make your point just fine. Best argument: I bet some of those who want to shelter their kids to the horrible antics of others are the ones bringing their strollers to R-rated movies.
      • Bo
        Excellent reply and excellent point re: strollers. Thanks.
  • DAVIDPD
    Isn't she lovely?
  • Cal J.
    I really wish this could become an alternate cover for the Blu-ray release.
  • redskulllives
    Who ever didnt approve for this loves the cock.
    • Bo
      Very funny...very funny indeed. Thanks.
  • Chris Groves
    Eva Green is just gorgeous in every way.
  • MrFoo
    This poster was obviously never going to make it to theaters. I manage a 16 screen theater, and if I had this poster up I'd have 10 complaints by noon. Weinsteins got some great publicity out of it, and we all get the pleasure of seeing it. So I say hooray for the Weinsteins.
    • Bo
      Good reply and good point. Very mature and intelligent. Thanks.
  • http://twitter.com/virgofromjersey Andrew
    Even if it had passed the MPAA no exhibitor would have put it up. It certainly wouldn't go up at any of the ones I run. It's unnecessarily sexual and anyone who says different is deluding themself. They did this for the publicity knowing full well it couldn't be shown.
    • Bo
      Unnecessarily sexual? Umm...granted it was sexual. But unnecessarily so? When would you grant sexual nature to necessary vs. unnecessary? Just curious. It's actually quite a good photograph on an artistic level...and yes...very sexual...which is okay by be as I don't find it crude or in bad taste. Just a well shot photo and make its point.
      • http://twitter.com/virgofromjersey Andrew
        Unnecessarily sexual for a poster that is to be displayed in public areas with young children was obviously what I meant. They KNEW the poster would never be approved.
        • J Damon
          Murder and guns are cool, but sexuality is an absolute No No. Spoken like a true puritan
          • http://twitter.com/virgofromjersey Andrew
            No, spoken like someone who works as a theatre manager and knows that this poster would never be allowed to be used. I'm about as far from a Puritan as it gets but nice try.
        • Bo
          Okay, Andrew. I get it. Again, I just disagree with you. I understand you have a problem with children being exposed to life and its sexual component. That is taking the position that somehow sex is bad or evil or a destroyer of innocence. I say let the children see it. They are going to somehow somewhere anyway. Let them question me as to what it is, etc. and let me explain it to them like they are intelligent human beings, which they are. That's the way I raised my daughter. She's now an intelligent, very perceptive mature woman with a healthy outlook on all of life, including the sexual part as she's not had any problems of that nature so far...lol...Take care, I respect your right to feel as you do...I just disagree...it's cool...and you're right...it was all done for marketing purposes and seems to have worked. That type of manipulation is what I find distasteful...not the sexual nature of the poster.
          • http://twitter.com/virgofromjersey Andrew
            No, you don't "get it" this isn't about my opinions of sex or nudity and what children should be exposed to. This is about me knowing that no theatre would post this picture because of the complaints they would get and Weinstein knew that when they commissioned it.
          • Bo
            Ahh...I see...okay, Andrew...'got' it!
  • capitandelespacio
    Eva Green is one of the most sexiest actresses evah.
    • norcal1953
      Wouldn't know it from Penny Dreadful though. They certainly waste her.
      • capitandelespacio
        I like to think that she improves that show.
  • Snev De la Fontaine
    One can only agree with the subtitle.

FEATURED POSTS

GET MORE NEWS

Subscribe to our feed or daily newsletter:
Follow Alex's main profile on twitter:
For the news posts only, follow this acct:
Add our feed to your Feedly: follow us in feedly
Subscribe to me on YouTube for interviews 

POPULAR COMMENTS

NEWEST PODCAST

FACEBOOK + LINKS