“Showgirls” (1995)
What’s It About? Nomi (“Saved by the Bell” icon Elizabeth Berkley) is a young woman with big dreams: to become a Las Vegas showgirl. (Has this ever been anyone’s dream?) Unfortunately, she’s stuck working at a seedy strip club instead. Still, this is the story of the American dream, and soon she becomes the protégé (and eventual successor) of a diva showgirl played by Gina Gershon. Other adventures include her getting violently f–ked in a swimming pool by the guy who played FBI Agent Dale Cooper and mispronouncing the word “Versace.”
Why Did It Get The Rating? Public opinion at the time had the staggering amount of nudity as the chief reason “Showgirls” was saddled with an NC-17 rating (at the time it was the most expensive and lavishly marketed film to carry such a rating; to date it’s the highest grossing NC-17 rated movie). There is also a fair amount of sex, but nothing even remotely approaching penetration. In fact, comparing the NC-17 version to the R-rated cut (that was released on home video and for television markets) shows that simulated masturbation was a huge concern, with whole sequences reframed to delete the suggestion of masturbation or anal play. There is also a pretty violent rape.
Did It Deserve Its NC-17? Absolutely not. There is more shocking stuff on pay cable than in “Showgirls,” with the amount of violence, nudity, and rape regularly eclipsed on any given episode of “Game of Thrones.” One of the things that remains at least somewhat shocking is Berkley’s pubic hair (or lack thereof); in the years since a shaved pubic region has remained a taboo that can tip an R-rated movie into NC-17 rated territory. In the commentary track for “Piranha 3D,” director Alexandre Aja feared the wrath of the MPAA not because of the movie’s envelope-pushing violence but because costars Kelly Brook and Riley Steele “shave in between their legs.”
How Good Is It? “Showgirls” isn’t a good movie by any stretch of the imagination, but it has reached that rarified air of the so-bad-it’s-good movie and remains an enduring cult classic, best watched after midnight and after several beers have been ceremoniously downed. [B]
Yes. Yes. No. Yes. No. No. Yes. No. Yes. No. Yes. No. Yes. Yes. Yes. No. No.
(In no particular order.)
Yes. Yes. No. Yes. No. No. Yes. No. Yes. No. Yes. No. Yes. Yes. Yes. No. No.
(In no particular order.)
Yes. Yes. No. Yes. No. No. Yes. No. Yes. No. Yes. No. Yes. Yes. Yes. No. No.
(In no particular order.)
Yes. Yes. No. Yes. No. No. Yes. No. Yes. No. Yes. No. Yes. Yes. Yes. No. No.
(In no particular order.)
Yes. Yes. No. Yes. No. No. Yes. No. Yes. No. Yes. No. Yes. Yes. Yes. No. No.
(In no particular order.)
Yes. Yes. No. Yes. No. No. Yes. No. Yes. No. Yes. No. Yes. Yes. Yes. No. No.
(In no particular order.)
POISON does have a quick shot of a penis, actually, and more controversially for the ratings board, it's erect.
POISON does have a quick shot of a penis, actually, and more controversially for the ratings board, it's erect.
Actually I *would* mistake "Lust, Caution" as top-tier Ang Lee. Only it's not a mistake. Westerners rarely ever connect with this haunting picture.
Actually I *would* mistake "Lust, Caution" as top-tier Ang Lee. Only it's not a mistake. Westerners rarely ever connect with this haunting picture.
Actually I *would* mistake "Lust, Caution" as top-tier Ang Lee. Only it's not a mistake. Westerners rarely ever connect with this haunting picture.
What about Caligula?
What about Caligula?
No mention of Y Tu Mama Tambien?
No mention of Y Tu Mama Tambien?
No mention of Y Tu Mama Tambien?
Maybe there needs to be a new classification, for example – MAWC, 'Material for Adults Without Children'. Or, how about – AGTEWDM, 'Adult Graduates of a Tertiary Education Without Dependent Minors'?
Maybe there needs to be a new classification, for example – MAWC, 'Material for Adults Without Children'. Or, how about – AGTEWDM, 'Adult Graduates of a Tertiary Education Without Dependent Minors'?
Maybe there needs to be a new classification, for example – MAWC, 'Material for Adults Without Children'. Or, how about – AGTEWDM, 'Adult Graduates of a Tertiary Education Without Dependent Minors'?
Maybe there needs to be a new classification, for example – MAWC, 'Material for Adults Without Children'. Or, how about – AGTEWDM, 'Adult Graduates of a Tertiary Education Without Dependent Minors'?
You forgot the biggest one, In the Realm of the Senses? And how about Michael Winterbottoms 9 Songs?
Also, Werner's flick is not a remake of the original Bad Lieutenant.
You were spot on with your assessment of Last Tango In Paris. A cinematic masterpiece. I made the mistake of renting the R-rated version once, which is a total abomination. I did purchase a pristine "X" or NC-17 DVD of it recently, but still I wondered if anything would be deleted (having seen the film at least 25 times.) The only thing missing from the original was in the subtitles. They took out the line, "Go shit in Africa." Being non-PC is now worse than any sex or violence you can throw out there.
You were spot on with your assessment of Last Tango In Paris. A cinematic masterpiece. I made the mistake of renting the R-rated version once, which is a total abomination. I did purchase a pristine "X" or NC-17 DVD of it recently, but still I wondered if anything would be deleted (having seen the film at least 25 times.) The only thing missing from the original was in the subtitles. They took out the line, "Go shit in Africa." Being non-PC is now worse than any sex or violence you can throw out there.
You were spot on with your assessment of Last Tango In Paris. A cinematic masterpiece. I made the mistake of renting the R-rated version once, which is a total abomination. I did purchase a pristine "X" or NC-17 DVD of it recently, but still I wondered if anything would be deleted (having seen the film at least 25 times.) The only thing missing from the original was in the subtitles. They took out the line, "Go shit in Africa." Being non-PC is now worse than any sex or violence you can throw out there.
actually, "Lust, Caution" is my favorite Ang Lee film.
actually, "Lust, Caution" is my favorite Ang Lee film.
actually, "Lust, Caution" is my favorite Ang Lee film.
actually, "Lust, Caution" is my favorite Ang Lee film.
actually, "Lust, Caution" is my favorite Ang Lee film.
actually, "Lust, Caution" is my favorite Ang Lee film.
actually, "Lust, Caution" is my favorite Ang Lee film.
actually, "Lust, Caution" is my favorite Ang Lee film.
I happen to think that Lust, Caution is in the top tier of Ang Lee films.
It's also much better than the overrated Last Tango in Paris.
I happen to think that Lust, Caution is in the top tier of Ang Lee films.
It's also much better than the overrated Last Tango in Paris.
I happen to think that Lust, Caution is in the top tier of Ang Lee films.
It's also much better than the overrated Last Tango in Paris.
I happen to think that Lust, Caution is in the top tier of Ang Lee films.
It's also much better than the overrated Last Tango in Paris.
I happen to think that Lust, Caution is in the top tier of Ang Lee films.
It's also much better than the overrated Last Tango in Paris.
I happen to think that Lust, Caution is in the top tier of Ang Lee films.
It's also much better than the overrated Last Tango in Paris.
I happen to think that Lust, Caution is in the top tier of Ang Lee films.
It's also much better than the overrated Last Tango in Paris.
I happen to think that Lust, Caution is in the top tier of Ang Lee films.
It's also much better than the overrated Last Tango in Paris.
NC-17 is dumb, just dumb. I mean, I could be wrong, but I thought the MPAA's whole thing was they are not a censorship group but an educational tool. Their motive is to educate guardians to determine whether their kids are mature enough to see any given movie, but you take away a guardians ability to approve with a rating designed to exclude children (how different was your 16 year old self from your 17 year old self really?) no matter what. If the idea of an R-rating means if your under 17 but a parent permits you to see said movie that seems like the most restriction needed.
Although I probably wouldn't care so much if the general public didn't treat NC-17 movies as if they were porn. Some theaters won't show them. Some media outlets won't allow them to advertise. People definitely think of it as gratuity for the sake of gratuity which is completely unfair for movies like Shame or Crash.
All of this rating business is, of course, subjective. However, there are times in which a film is obviously too much for children, or pre-adults 17 and below; this seems like a safe and sound number. Past this age, it only becomes adults censoring adults, which is ridiculous. In the process of rating a film for children, the most we (as parents) can do is use our best judgement and reasoning skills. Put ourselves in the shoes of our children and make a sound assessment of content suitability. This assessment can be reached by asking ourselves a series of important questions regarding the child's maturity, proclivity to act out perceived actions, history of vulnerability towards things which bear a keen likeness to content displayed in the movie, etc. I find that making such decisions is far easier by carrying this out.
Now moving on to the controversial MPAA. Let me first explain why I think the R rating is absurd and the NC-17 rating is helpful, yet, also absurd in the end. How many times have you attended an R rated film, say, of the SAW or HALLOWEEN slasher series in the presence of a mindless parent(s) with their youngster wailing out at the sight of every decapitation, disembowelment, and hacked off body part? I have. This is when the MPAA can be justified in stamping the film with an NC-17. No children 17 and under — with or without the accompaniment of an adult. No fu*king R (too many dumb as* parents out there, sorry) — just a fat fu*king NC-17. When the content of a film is that conspicuously intense, there should be no argument. And, no, I'm not ignorant to the fact that there are "some" kids out there who have the fortitude for such things extreme in nature. Sure, I was one of them. However, my perception rests on the notion that no film bearing the indubitable earmarks to probably inflict psychological damage is THAT worth seeing, anyway. So fu*king what if they have to wait a few years. It ain't gonna kill 'em.
Now the dismal news. Having said all of this, I must confess that censorship is ultimately pointless. Any child with access to a computer and the knowledge to bypass their parent's blocked site mode, if need be, can reap access to anything he or she desires.
Yes… this…. is… the… VILLAGE… OF… THE… DAMNED!!!
You've imagined the raw, unprotected gay sex in Shame. It's just a none too graphic blowjob.
There's also no male frontal in Borat. There's the nude wrestling scene, but the frontal a are blurred.
The fact you are even accepting the MPAA's parameters is so fuccking lame.
How about a whole article challenging the cabal of corrupt ass motherrrfucckas that sit on the board of MPAA? Or is that ruffling too many feathers for you?
Until that article appears, you are legitimizing an illegitimate body by caving to their rules. It's about the future of movies here….not giving in to reactionary forces trying to tame the power of film.
Great list! But "Whore" is by Ken Russell, not Michael Winner.
I saw Henry & June for the first time recently, and I'm at an absolute loss as to what could have qualified it for an NC-17. According to the movie's Wikipedia page:
"The inclusion of the postcard Nin views at the start of the film (which is of Hokusai's The Dream of the Fisherman's Wife), and some scenes of le Bal des Beaux Arts contributed to the NC-17 rating."
If that's true, it's ridiculously lame reasoning.
What about Salo? Definitely deserved the NC17.