Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » Sex & Lucia: "Banned" in Seattle? (Page 1)

 
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2 
 
Author Topic: Sex & Lucia: "Banned" in Seattle?
Charles Everett
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1470
From: New Jersey
Registered: May 2001


 - posted 08-16-2002 12:52 PM      Profile for Charles Everett   Email Charles Everett   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Sex & Lucia opens today in Seattle but the city's 2 daily newspapers have banned ads for the picture. The excuse given? "We put this newspaper in classrooms. It's really about having standards for advertising content."

As usual, Landmark Theatres doesn't fight this act of corporate censorship.

The kicker is that Sex & Lucia won an award in a film festival where one of the offending newspapers was a corporate sponsor.


 |  IP: Logged

Chad Souder
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 962
From: Waterloo, IA, USA
Registered: Feb 2000


 - posted 08-17-2002 08:26 AM      Profile for Chad Souder   Email Chad Souder   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
These are probably the same classrooms that are teaching the kids about sex in 4th grade anyway.

------------------
"Asleep at the switch? I wasn't asleep, I was drunk!" - Homer Simpson

 |  IP: Logged

Randy Stankey
Film God

Posts: 6539
From: Erie, Pennsylvania
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 08-17-2002 08:49 AM      Profile for Randy Stankey   Email Randy Stankey   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
It says that the film is unrated. There you go. A lot of theatres won't play movies that are unrated or NC-17. A lot of companies won't even carry advertising for these movies.

It doesn't matter WHY it's unrated or NC-17. They are just a "mark of death" to most movies like that.

 |  IP: Logged

Thomas Procyk
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1842
From: Royal Palm Beach, FL, USA
Registered: Feb 2002


 - posted 08-17-2002 10:54 AM      Profile for Thomas Procyk   Email Thomas Procyk   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I never understood why some theaters treated ALL not-rated movies as if they were NC-17. (No children under 17. Period. With or without parents.) While a lot of unrated arthouse product can be risque, what about those occasional documentaries, biographies or classics that come along? While on the topic of classics, I noticed when GWTW was re-released in 1998, it had a "G" rating. So a film about the civil war, slavery, adultery, and a scene where a woman shoots a man point blank in the face gets a "G"?!?!

So if GWTW remained unrated as it was in 1939, nobody under 17 would be allowed to see it at some of those theaters. However, since they slapped a G on it, a 6-year old can walk up and get a ticket by themselves. Go figure.

=TMP=

 |  IP: Logged

Paul Linfesty
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1383
From: Bakersfield, CA, USA
Registered: Nov 1999


 - posted 08-17-2002 11:44 AM      Profile for Paul Linfesty   Email Paul Linfesty   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Actually, if GWTW was re-rated today, it probably would have ended up with a PG or maybe even a PG-13. The G rating was awarded back in 1968 shortly after the ratings system debuted. The film was in a 70mm roadshow re-release at the time. Once a film is given a rating, as long as it remains in the version that was rated, it can keep that rating regardless of changing mores. Many films were given G's back at that time that today would be more strongly viewed. OLIVER, with its off screen beating death of a woman and child in jeopardy was also a G. Funny Girl, Ice Station Zebra, and many other roadshow films were also G.
Even True Grit, originally an M, was re-rated G after cutting out the word "Damn." However, the explicit shot of a man getting his fingers shot off remained in the film.

When WB re-released the "uncut" version of The Wild Bunch, the ratings board initially hit it with an NC-17. Strangely, the scenes that had been cut in the first place had no additional violence than the original R cut, which shows that standards of violence have been toughened up since the 60's. WB's saving grace was finding the documentation that proved the R had been given to The Wild Bunch before the general release version cuts had been made, so the MPAA rules allowed this version to retain the R rating.


 |  IP: Logged

Charles Everett
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1470
From: New Jersey
Registered: May 2001


 - posted 08-17-2002 01:04 PM      Profile for Charles Everett   Email Charles Everett   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Randy: Many chains played Y Tu Mama Tambien even though it didn't carry an MPAA rating. Some of those chains also played the NC-17 picture L.I.E.

The ad ban on Sex & Lucia smells of a double standard.

 |  IP: Logged

Arthur Allen
Film Handler

Posts: 99
From: Renton, WA, USA
Registered: Aug 2001


 - posted 08-19-2002 12:07 PM      Profile for Arthur Allen   Author's Homepage   Email Arthur Allen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
The Seattle Times has had a history of altering naughty movie advertising. A movie called "The Last American Virgin" got changed to "The Last American NICE GIRL," with a newspaper headline font crudely superimposed on the original advertising artwork. The day after that ran, they changed the title to "Call Theater for Title," presumably after they found out the virgin in question was a boy. You didn't even have to call the theater for the title either, just look over at the regular text movie listings and there it was. Later the movie "Puberty Blues" got changed to "Growing Up Blues," and "Sammie and Rosie Get Laid" was changed to "Sammy and Rosie." Later the newspaper said that the local chain running that movie submitted the advertising that way. Based on the Times' track record, I'm not surprised.

Strangely, the Times' former competitor, the P-I, used to run ads for X-rated theaters; until the two papers advertising departments merged in a Joint Operating Agreement. Back in 1981 my junior high social studies class used the P-I in an assignment, and one of the tasks was to find a G or X-rated movie advertisement and add it to our clippings for the assignemnt. According to the Times' spokesperson, I should have been warped for life for that.


 |  IP: Logged

Randy Stankey
Film God

Posts: 6539
From: Erie, Pennsylvania
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 08-19-2002 10:36 PM      Profile for Randy Stankey   Email Randy Stankey   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Of course it's a double standard!
We had the movie, "Escape from LA", which had nothing more than "A-Team type violence" and got an "R" simply because of ONE SINGLE occurrence of the "F-Word".

 |  IP: Logged

Bill Enos
Film God

Posts: 2081
From: Richmond, Virginia, USA
Registered: Apr 2000


 - posted 08-21-2002 11:06 PM      Profile for Bill Enos   Email Bill Enos   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Film ratings pg-13, NC-17, etc. are the property of MPAA and are copyrighted. Non members may not use them withoutpermission.

 |  IP: Logged

Charles Everett
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1470
From: New Jersey
Registered: May 2001


 - posted 08-23-2002 11:53 AM      Profile for Charles Everett   Email Charles Everett   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
The ad ban on Sex & Lucia is a double standard because the Seattle papers ran ads for Y Tu Mama Tambien.

Then again it's good to see a "Film Snob" admire The Fast and the Furious.


 |  IP: Logged

Bill Gabel
Film God

Posts: 3873
From: Technicolor / Postworks NY, USA
Registered: Jan 2002


 - posted 08-23-2002 12:21 PM      Profile for Bill Gabel   Email Bill Gabel   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Sometimes a theatre can not book a film because of the rating (NC-17
X ). At some theatre locations it is written in the lease between the
property owner and the theatre chain, that they can not play rated X
adult films. Its a matter of wording rated X or NC-17 or adult X. Most of these leases were done before MPAA, changed X to NC-17.

If a film maker or studio does not like the rating they got, they can
appeal the rating. In Los Angeles the appeal screening is done at a
screening room other than the MPAA screening room in Sherman Oaks, Ca.. They run the film and afterwords talk for about 1-2 hours about
the cuts that were done to the film. Most of the time the director
or studio rep. is waiting in the lobby of the screening room. The directors would try to come into the booth to see what was happening
in the other auditorium. When I was in Los Angeles, I worked at a screening room in Beverly Hills that did all the MPAA appeals screenings. So I saw a few MPAA ratings appeals, every few months.


 |  IP: Logged

Aaron Sisemore
Flaming Ribs beat Reeses Peanut Butter Cups any day!

Posts: 3061
From: Rockwall TX USA
Registered: Sep 1999


 - posted 08-23-2002 12:41 PM      Profile for Aaron Sisemore   Email Aaron Sisemore   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
>>The ad ban on Sex & Lucia is a double standard because the Seattle papers ran ads for Y Tu Mama Tambien<<

Perhaps it is because the paper will not allow print ads for anything containing the word 'SEX'?

Y Tu Mama Tambien (and your mother too) and L.I.E., while both containing very graphic sexual material, do not have the magic word 'SEX' in their titles.

-Aaron

 |  IP: Logged

Barry Floyd
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1079
From: Lebanon, Tennessee, USA
Registered: Mar 2000


 - posted 08-23-2002 12:53 PM      Profile for Barry Floyd   Author's Homepage   Email Barry Floyd   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Sex is a taboo topic in this little town where we're building our drive-in.

In the sales contract for the land, there is a "covenant" in the deed that will prevent us from ever showing any movie rated harder than "R". The land we bought was city owned... and the Mayor and Town Council would only agree to the terms of the sale if that "covenant" was included.

As far as banning the ad in the local paper.... In the main Nashville newspaper, the ads for the local "Strip Joints" and "Gentlemen's Clubs" have graphics and things that no one would dare place on a movie poster... and they run those ads 7 days a week.

 |  IP: Logged

Leo Enticknap
Film God

Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000


 - posted 08-24-2002 03:49 PM      Profile for Leo Enticknap   Author's Homepage   Email Leo Enticknap   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
that will prevent us from ever showing any movie rated harder than "R".

Pun intended?

As for Sex and Lucia being unrated, I'd say that it was overrated. When will these people ever learn that kicking off a censorship issue is guaranteed to make people want to see it? Crash, Romance and all the rest of them would surely have disappeared without trace - which they surely deserved to do, because they are shite films - if it weren't for those elements of the religious right who chose to turn them into causes-celébres and by doing so increase the audience and thus shoot themselves in the foot.

 |  IP: Logged

Peter Kerchinsky
Master Film Handler

Posts: 326
From: Seattle, WA, USA
Registered: Jan 2002


 - posted 08-25-2002 05:06 AM      Profile for Peter Kerchinsky   Email Peter Kerchinsky   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Go to www.seattletimes.com
there is a so-called explaination for them not running ads for S&L in the two Seattle papers in the Sunday edition.

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2 
 
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.