It’s certainly no accident that The Wrap’s Sharon Waxman found out about and reported on Bruno initially receiving an NC-17 rating from the MPAA. After all, what raunchy docu-comedy wouldn’t want additional buzz focused on how “objectionable” some scenes were? Universal and Sacha Baron Cohen obviously pushed the envelope in order to both see how much they could get away with and to draw attention to themselves with a desired NC-17. Hasn’t anyone been following Hollywood the past 10 years? Here are a few benefits to both garnering the unacceptable rating and having news of that “unfortunate” rating leaked to all the fanboy bloggers:
- Typical outrage over the MPAA’s dealings guarantee postings (including this one), which continue to give attention to the film.
- Excitement over how hard the ultimate R-rating will likely be continues the interest from moviegoers interested in raunchy content. And if they’re upset that it won’t be as dirty as the original NC-17 version they can always…
- …look forward to the Unrated DVD release, which will most definitely include the censored “objectionable” scenes either in the movie or as supplement material.
Of course, news of the ratings controversy does draw potentially unfair complaints regarding the MPAA’s reputation for typically having problems with homosexual themes. For once, though, the gay community can leave the ratings board alone on this one, since the studio and filmmakers most certainly wanted all of this. Of course, if you do decide to protest, make sure you mention the film title often. That will help the marketing, too.
And now some of the unnecessary complaints from my fellow internerds helping with the film’s buzz:
…Read more
Movie posters have become increasingly more controversial in the past decade, or else people have become a lot more sensitive. Either way, it seems like there’s a new and controversial movie poster or billboard being banned somewhere. Usually it’s for one of two reasons: sex or violence, with violence being far more popular. One of the first sexually banned posters I could find was 1981’s For Your Eyes Only, which featured an A-frame design that was banned. It wasn’t so much the vaginal roof as it was the exposed buttocks, so they had to release a retouched version that covered more derriere.
It’s been more than 25 years since that poster was sent back to the drawing board, so why do posters keep getting banned? Marketing people know that controversy can turn into a marketing campaign of its own, so maybe they’re pushing the boundaries in the vein of “there’s no such thing as bad publicity.” With that in mind, here’s a look at controversial movie posters from the past several years. Prepare your innocent eyes and take a look after the break.
…Read more
As far as Hollywood is concerned, the best way to lose one’s virginity is on the road. Whether driving cross-country for a sure thing or making a weekend trip to the state university in an attempt to get laid, teens are always taking sex-seeking trips in the movies. Already this year, there was College, which featured some high school kids having sex on a campus far from home, and now this week sees the release of Sex Drive, a movie about a guy traveling 500 miles in order to hook up a girl he met online, just so he doesn’t begin college a virgin.
Though it may be wrong to celebrate movies that could possibly be encouragement for online predators and purveyors of sex tourism, we present some of our favorite cinematic virgins who lost it on a road trip:
(Warning: potential spoilers ahead.)
…Read more
