TGB Episode 86: The Dreaded NC-17 (Guest: Film Threat's Don Lewis)
by Tim Buel
December 1, 2011
On this week's episode of The Golden Briefcase, Tim & Jeremy are joined by Don Lewis of Film Threat and co-director of award winning doc Worst in Show, to discuss their Picks of the Week, the newest DVD & Blu-Ray releases, talk about the trailers for Gary Ross' The Hunger Games and Oren Moverman's Rampart and much more. The main topic is a discussion on the dreaded and notorious NC-17 rating in honor of Steve McQueen's Shame (rated NC-17) hitting select theaters this weekend. The guys talk over some famous NC-17 ratings in the past and discuss alternative release solutions for films that are slapped with the taboo rating.
The Golden Briefcase is also broadcast LIVE on Wednesday nights starting ~7:30PM PST. You can listen in via our Ustream page or by visiting our own live page right here on FS. The podcast is just as fun to listen to live while it's being recorded, with plenty of special guests, so I suggest you tune in the next time it records!
Download #86 or Listen Now:
Previous Episode: The Muppets? Mahna Mahna (Guest: Scott Weinberg)
Don R. Lewis: @PetalumaFilms
Picks of the Week:
Pick of the Week: 0:00
New Releases: 0:00
Trailer Watch: The Hunger Games: 0:00
Trailer Watch: Rampart: 0:00
Topic of the Night: The NC-17 Rating: 0:00
The Golden Briefcase is:
Any and all feedback, compliments, topic discussions, contest entries and yes, hate mail, can be sent directly to email@example.com. We would LOVE to hear from you! Thank you for listening to the show.
Gracias caballeros for another sublime podcast! One more week until I am back in the U.S. of A. Mr. Lewis is a great guest host. I hope to hear him again soon. I agree that VOD is the future for NC-17/Unrated films. I can't wait to see "TAKE SHELTER", the you guys are praising it, its going to be incredible. I would pay to the "Robert Rodriguez Road Show." I hope you guys were joking about that iTunes Review. That was the most back handed "compli-sult" I have heard in awhile. Be Well Tim and Jeremy.
DAVIDPD on Dec 1, 2011
late to the party, but thanks, great podcast. loads of talking points, but the discussion on alternate ways of unrated distribution was bang on point. good to highlight the hypocrisy on harsh ratings for sexual content compared to lower ratings for strong violence, too (This Film Is Not Yet Rated should be required viewing for all film fans). and how *does* Spielberg get so much face melting, heart ripping and bodily dismemberment info lower rated films?!
Anonymous on Dec 9, 2011
"hypocrisy on harsh ratings for sexual content compared to lower ratings for strong violence, too (This Film Is Not Yet Rated should be required viewing for all film fans)." - There is no hypocrisy. There are tons of films out there rated R because the violence is to strong. Saving Private is mentioned on the podcast. - This Film Is Not Yet Rated SHOULD NOT be required viewing. It is a documentary. By it's very nature, it has a bias. A film maker could just as easily make a documentary extolling the virtues of the MPAA. "and how *does* Spielberg get so much face melting, heart ripping and bodily dismemberment into lower rated films?!V" - He couldn't today. Those movies you're talking about occurred along time ago. Before PG-13 existed and before this country was so sissified.
Anonymous on Dec 17, 2011
thanks for thoughts. briefly: - i meant that films with sexual violence often get rated R, but films with just sex often get rated NC-17, should have been clearer. - just because a film or documentary has a bias does not mean it should not be viewed. someone could make a pro-MPAA film, and it would be equally valid as a work of art. - re: Spielberg - maybe you're right! peace.
Anonymous on Dec 20, 2011
I'm a couple of episodes behind and have never felt the need to leave a comment because your podcast is pretty good, pretty fair, but this episode was just terrible. You had a filmmaker on to discuss something having to do with the MPAA? What were you thinking? He made is disdain for the MPAA clear very early on and because of that, nothing he had to say was worth much. If you want to do discussions that are maybe more political in nature, you need to find guests that are going to offer different viewpoints instead of the three of you just ganging up on some topic. It doesn't make for an interesting podcast. A few other observations: - Mr Kirk needs to learn the definition of censorship. - Not sure how the MPAA assigns 'arbitrary' ratings. There a set up guidelines they go buy and filmmakers and producers are well aware of them. - It's not just about sex. There are plenty of R rated movies that got that rating solely based on language or violence. - Saving Private Ryan was never going to be NC-17. War of the Worlds is not that violent. Plus is meets the PG-13 guidelines - You really shouldn't have recommended This Film Is Not Yet Rated without acknowledging that since it's a documentary, it has a bias. If someone wanted to, they could make a documentary showing how good the MPAA is. Would you recommend that? And how come no one brought up the real reason that filmmaker have the MPAA rate their films knowing full well it will get an NC-17. That reason is because it gets people talking about the film. All the major (and minor) entertainment sites eat this crap up everytime a movie gets and NC-17. Especially when it start actors that film nerds (I use that term in a good way) love like Williams/Gosling of Fassbender/Mullingan. If they had chose not to rate this film, would anyone even know it exists? PS I saw Shame. Overrated to say the least. It think it goes back to what I mentioned above about film nerds loving Mulligan/Fassbender. Just wondering - has anyone ever seen Mulligan smile?
Anonymous on Dec 17, 2011
Hey Rick, Tim here. Sorry to piss you off with this episode man =/ We honestly all have a pretty heavy disdain for the MPAA regardless of what This Film is Not Yet Rated says, and we definitely agree that the doc is a very biased look at the MPAA, in fact I believe Jeremy mentioned that during the show. In regards to the topic, we were more so talking NC-17 instead of the MPAA (again mentioned at the top of the show), so I'm sorry you still felt we were ganging up on the MPAA. We had Don on because he is an indie filmmaker who has done his own distribution, not dealing with the MPAA whatsoever, and we were hoping he could bring some insight to the alternatives filmmakers have for distribution without a rating (which I truly feel he brought). Hope that clears some stuff up and I hope you don't stop listening! We appreciate the feedback, even if its not completely in our favor 😉 Also, http://i.imgur.com/NTXM2.jpg. I think that would be considered a smile! haha!
timbuel on Dec 22, 2011
Amazing write-up! This could aid plenty of people find out more about this particular issue. Are you keen to integrate video clips coupled with these? It would absolutely help out. Your conclusion was spot on and thanks to you; I probably won’t have to describe everything to my pals. I can simply direct them here!
cheap bras on Jan 19, 2012
New comments are no longer allowed on this post.