CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › CHUD.COM Main › 50 SHADES OF GREY FILM PLANNED WITH AN NC-17 RATING
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

50 SHADES OF GREY FILM PLANNED WITH AN NC-17 RATING

post #1 of 91
1/8/13 at 1:14pm
Thread Starter 
by Renn Brown: link

...what happens when a major studio says "fuck it" and goes with an X?
Reply
post #2 of 91
1/8/13 at 1:21pm

I fucking hate 50 Shades Of Grey. Hate it. I hated sitting on the train into and out of work, and seeing all of the women around me reading that thing as though they were a hive mind. I hated having to suffer through the endless boring discussions around me by female co-workers about who was the ideal Christian Grey. I hated the almost daily news snippets about how the novel had encouraged more women to try out S&M, or reading about how the author had made millions of dollars from something that started out as Twilight fan fiction.

 

God I hate this book.

Reply
post #3 of 91
1/8/13 at 1:39pm

Why?  Poorly written though it may be (at least that's what I gather - I haven't actually read it) what harm can come from getting people to open up and explore their own sexuality?

Reply
post #4 of 91
1/8/13 at 1:51pm

I doubt there will be two versions released theatrically. It may be shot for NC-17, but I bet it will be released R with unrated on home video.

I WISH they would do NC-17 though, not because I give a flying fuck about 50 Shades, but because that could mean great things if the film was a commercial success in that form. NC-17 could actually be a viable rating that would make it beyond the arthouse circuit! Imagine that!

That said, I'm not holding my breath.

Reply
post #5 of 91
1/8/13 at 1:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JGButler View Post

Why?  Poorly written though it may be (at least that's what I gather - I haven't actually read it) what harm can come from getting people to open up and explore their own sexuality?

 

You misunderstand me. It wasn't each of these factors which drove me to hate this book. It was the fact that I was subjected to them all at once, pretty much continuously at one point.

Reply
post #6 of 91
1/8/13 at 1:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JGButler View Post

Why?  Poorly written though it may be (at least that's what I gather - I haven't actually read it) what harm can come from getting people to open up and explore their own sexuality?

 

Part of the problem, as I see it, is that the central conceit of the narrative (from what I've heard) is young woman meeting someone who knows all of her kinks for her. I haven't read the books, so I don't know where the plot goes (does the main character ever own her sexuality, or is it always seen as this gift given to her by her male counterpart?), but I'd imagine that a lot of the weird gender stuff going on in Twilight is present in Fifty Shades.

 

EDIT: Again, not making a judgment on the series, just trying to give voice to some critiques I've heard from people who have.

Reply
post #7 of 91
1/8/13 at 2:03pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JGButler View Post

what harm can come from getting people to open up and explore their own sexuality?

 

Not with any of us I'm sure. Just with young billionaires. 

Reply
post #8 of 91
1/8/13 at 2:03pm

Ooohhh - that's interesting, Randlett.  I'd never heard that brought up.  I suppose I should get around to reading it.  But even if it is questionable I'm still glad it succeeded the way it did for the reasons Nexus mentioned above.  Finer details aside, it does set a positive precedent.

 

And I hear ya, Saxon - that's actually why I forced myself to sit down and read Twilight, just so when those conversations came up I had something solid to stand on when I said it was terrible.  Haha

Reply
post #9 of 91
1/8/13 at 2:06pm

I think it's cool. Bondage sex movie with A-listers. Neat!

Reply
post #10 of 91
1/8/13 at 2:13pm

I'll be honest: I've always been kind of fascinated by these books and their influence. The mere fact that they contain so much unrestrained sexuality and are female oriented, while being massive hits, is the kind of thing that could power dozens of doctoral theses.

 

Like (I'm assuming) everyone else in this thread, I haven't read them, but I actually feel like I should. They're probably godawful, but it comes back to the standard argument that male geeks are willing to put up with plenty of godawful stuff if it speaks to THEIR interests, so that criticism rings a bit hollow. I dunno. I'm just interested in these weird corners of pop culture that get shunned by the usual critical circles, both geeks and literati. I mean, Renn says in the article that they're not dangerous or edgy...and then he turns around and says that this movie might actually have a shot at shoving the MPAA off its pedestal. If they do, that will be more than enough to justify their existence as far as I'm concerned.

Reply
post #11 of 91
1/8/13 at 2:13pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arjen Rudd View Post

I think it's cool. Bondage sex movie with A-listers. Neat!

 

And yeah, this.

Reply
post #12 of 91
1/8/13 at 2:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by D.S. Randlett View Post

Part of the problem, as I see it, is that the central conceit of the narrative (from what I've heard) is young woman meeting someone who knows all of her kinks for her. I haven't read the books, so I don't know where the plot goes (does the main character ever own her sexuality, or is it always seen as this gift given to her by her male counterpart?), but I'd imagine that a lot of the weird gender stuff going on in Twilight is present in Fifty Shades.

EDIT: Again, not making a judgment on the series, just trying to give voice to some critiques I've heard from people who have.

I have not read the book either, but Twilight is a young adult novel written by a Mormon selling girls a very backwards idea of a healthy relationship, hence the backlash to that book.

50 Shades on the other hand might be inspired by Twilight... but it is strictly a BDSM fantasy for adults. 50 Shades is under no obligation to present it's main character "owning her sexuality", since it's masturbation material and not a real novel of any stripe nor is it concerned with presenting people with a guide to a healthy Ds relationship.

I think the intense backlash against 50 Shades comes down to certain people who seem to have some sort of fundamental problem with the idea that this book is encouraging women to consider S&M fantasies that used to be unspeakable. Mr Saxon you're a good guy, so I'd be curious to hear why you have such a visceral reaction to this book's success. It is not like the book is encouraging racism or hatred. It's encouraging consensual adult fantasies.

I hope the studio puts some muscle into marketing a NC 17 film to the general public. That I'd like to see.
Reply
post #13 of 91
1/8/13 at 2:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Harford View Post


 Mr Saxon you're a good guy, so I'd be curious to hear why you have such a visceral reaction to this book's success. It is not like the book is encouraging racism or hatred. It's encouraging consensual adult fantasies.

 

Around the time that the book began to be noticed by the media, I was working in London. Eventually there were two topics that every newspaper and person around me latched onto - the Olympics and 50 Shades Of Grey. I would travel on the London tube in the morning and sit next to a woman reading the book whilst another woman read the book opposite me. I would arrive at work and the girl next to me would have a picture of an obscure male actor (I forget his name) on her laptop's desktop because she had decided this person should play Christian Grey. Within an hour, she and the majority of the women in our part of the office would discuss where they had reached in the books (as there is more than one) and which actors had been mentioned in the tabloids as potentially signing up to the movie. I would climb back onto the underground at the end of the day, where I would flick through the free newspaper to read about how an increase in pregnancy rates might be blamed on 50 Shades Of Grey, how the author had bought herself a new house with the money earned from her book sales, how Ryan Gosling was now rumored to be playing Christian, and then a double-page article about the history of S&M.

 

And that would be just one day.

 

I swear that I'm not making this shit up.

 

Does that help?

Reply
post #14 of 91
1/8/13 at 2:34pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrSaxon View Post

 

Around the time that the book began to be noticed by the media, I was working in London. Eventually there were two topics that every newspaper and person around me latched onto - the Olympics and 50 Shades Of Grey. I would travel on the London tube in the morning and sit next to a woman reading the book whilst another woman read the book opposite me. I would arrive at work and the girl next to me would have a picture of an obscure male actor (I forget his name) on her laptop's desktop because she had decided this person should play Christian Grey. Within an hour, she and the majority of the women in our part of the office would discuss where they had reached in the books (as there is more than one) and which actors had been mentioned in the tabloids as potentially signing up to the movie. I would climb back onto the underground at the end of the day, where I would flick through the free newspaper to read about how an increase in pregnancy rates might be blamed on 50 Shades Of Grey, how the author had bought herself a new house with the money earned from her book sales, how Ryan Gosling was now rumored to be playing Christian, and then a double-page article about the history of S&M.

 

And that would be just one day.

 

I swear that I'm not making this shit up.

 

Does that help?

I dunno man, kinda sounds like us with a new Tarantino or Coen Brothers movie.

 

EDIT - just in terms of the general collective geek out.

Reply
post #15 of 91
1/8/13 at 2:50pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JGButler View Post

Why?  Poorly written though it may be (at least that's what I gather - I haven't actually read it) what harm can come from getting people to open up and explore their own sexuality?


I wish it was more widely seen, but SECRETARY, from a few years ago was very frank about kinky sex and how it's perfectly okay if you're not hurting anyone, and it had a loving couple to boot.

Reply
post #16 of 91
1/8/13 at 3:07pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by D.S. Randlett View Post

 

Part of the problem, as I see it, is that the central conceit of the narrative (from what I've heard) is young woman meeting someone who knows all of her kinks for her. I haven't read the books, so I don't know where the plot goes (does the main character ever own her sexuality, or is it always seen as this gift given to her by her male counterpart?), but I'd imagine that a lot of the weird gender stuff going on in Twilight is present in Fifty Shades.

 

EDIT: Again, not making a judgment on the series, just trying to give voice to some critiques I've heard from people who have.

 

It's not exactly feminist literature, but for the people who enjoy it that's actually part of the appeal. It's an S&M novel seen completely from the POV of the submissive and a part of that fantasy is the idea of a man who is stronger and more in tune with his sexuality who comes along and teaches the woman about all these things she never thought she'd like.


Edited by Evi - 1/9/13 at 6:08am
Reply
post #17 of 91
1/8/13 at 3:15pm

For my sins - I'm a 37 year old bloke - I have read "Fifty Shades Of Grey" (the first one - I passed on the remainder of the trilogy).

 

SPOILER:

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

Remember "9 1/2 Weeks"? Add in more of a bondage element and it's exactly the same story. It ends exactly the same way.

 

 

/SPOILER

 

With the introduction of riding crops etc, and the addition of some non-mainstream language and concepts (e.g, the couple have a contract which specifies no fisting), this is still a very old, familiar story.

 

Having said that though, I agree with the comments above - if releasing it in cinemas NC-17 (another SPOILER: Will never happen!) allows more eroticism into movies, I'm 100% behind it!

Reply
post #18 of 91
1/8/13 at 3:20pm

Maybe they should get Joe Eszterhas to adapt the novel into a screenplay here. This sounds like it's in his sort of ball park.

Reply
post #19 of 91
1/8/13 at 4:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexus-7 View Post

I doubt there will be two versions released theatrically. It may be shot for NC-17, but I bet it will be released R with unrated on home video.


I WISH they would do NC-17 though, not because I give a flying fuck about 50 Shades, but because that could mean great things if the film was a commercial success in that form. NC-17 could actually be a viable rating that would make it beyond the arthouse circuit! Imagine that!


That said, I'm not holding my breath.

Imagine if this piece of shit movie heralded a theatrically released Paul Verhoeven NC-17 movie.
Reply
post #20 of 91
1/8/13 at 4:07pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cameron Hughes View Post


I wish it was more widely seen, but SECRETARY, from a few years ago was very frank about kinky sex and how it's perfectly okay if you're not hurting anyone, and it had a loving couple to boot.

A few years ago? It was 11 years ago when I was a senior in High School!

 

And, awesomely, Spader's character was named Mr. Grey.

Reply
post #21 of 91
1/8/13 at 4:19pm

Christian Grey played by Gary Busey, the chick played by Blade Runner girl.  They're the only actors that would make it worth it, they're also the only actors who would touch this thing with a 20,000 foot pole. 

Reply
post #22 of 91
1/8/13 at 4:32pm

My problem with 50 Shades of Grey (I have o intention of reading it) is that just when I thought Twilight was over and could finally fade away its fan-fiction manages to extend the franchise. If it wasn't Twilight fan-fic, I'd just ignore it.

Reply
post #23 of 91
1/8/13 at 4:47pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freeman View Post

Christian Grey played by Gary Busey, the chick played by Blade Runner girl.  They're the only actors that would make it worth it, they're also the only actors who would touch this thing with a 20,000 foot pole. 

 

 

"Blade Runner Girl"? Do you mean Sean Young? Daryl Hanna? Joanna Cassidy? All would be good picks. in fact, they should hire all of them!

Reply
post #24 of 91
1/8/13 at 4:57pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freeman View Post

Christian Grey played by Gary Busey, the chick played by Blade Runner girl.  They're the only actors that would make it worth it, they're also the only actors who would touch this thing with a 20,000 foot pole. 

This probably isn't the right thread for it but good Lord there's a whole discussion just waiting to be had about that first sentence alone.

Reply
post #25 of 91
1/8/13 at 5:15pm

Why isn't it the right thread?  Are we expecting this to be filled with lots of in depth passionate discussion of the source material?
 

Reply
post #26 of 91
1/8/13 at 5:34pm
Why not? Is the source material not worth that sort of discussion? And I'm pretty sure actors and actresses will be lining up to star in a movie that's essentially guaranteed to be a massive commercial success and be a part of the cultural conversation.

Also, w/r/t the book essentially being about a man knowing all a ladies quirks for her... People aren't usually formed sexually until they meet the right partner(s). Often it takes another to tell you what you've wanted but been unable to articulate.

Anyway the criticism seems wrong-headed to me in a number of ways. This is infinitely better than another by the numbers Rom Com.
Reply
post #27 of 91
1/8/13 at 5:34pm

I want Tommy Wiseau to helm and star in this. Oh hello doggy style

Reply
post #28 of 91
1/8/13 at 5:38pm
I assume JG is referring to the word 'chick' which would take us into a whole discussion of gender politics that perhaps he doesn't want in here.
Reply
post #29 of 91
1/8/13 at 5:57pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan S~ View Post

I assume JG is referring to the word 'chick' which would take us into a whole discussion of gender politics that perhaps he doesn't want in here.

That's a bingo.  But, like Freeman said - it's not like any of us are particular familiar with the source material so there's not a lot of OTHER discussion that can happen here either, so eh.

 

But even moreso than just the word "chick," it's that in that sentence, both males referenced were identified with full, proper names, while both females referenced were barely identified at all.  Once you start unpacking the implications of that there's no chance for this thread to stay "on topic" as it were.  Although, in an effort to - it did kind of strike me funny that if you don't count people who've read the book, EVERYBODY knows who Christian Gray (Grey?  whatevs) is, but I don't think I've ever heard the female character's name mentioned once.

Reply
post #30 of 91
1/8/13 at 6:06pm

You can't really point fingers and call me a misogynist for that though, I only got his name because of this thread, and I don't think her name has been mentioned yet.  I honestly accidentally called them Edward and Bella in that post before realizing my mistake.

Reply
post #31 of 91
1/8/13 at 6:09pm

OH no no, that wasn't necessarily a finger pointed at you, just pointing something out that a lot of people don't think about.  That's basically what I meant by unpacking the implications - it didn't even occur to you that you had done that and people could fill pages as to why.
 

Reply
post #32 of 91
1/8/13 at 6:12pm

I hope Neil Labutte gets the director gig for this one.

Also, wasnt there a insane as hell rumour they wanted Emma Watson for this? (or was that some pervo fanboy wish thing?)

Reply
post #33 of 91
1/8/13 at 6:13pm

Racy multiplex erotic drama? Time to call in the vets:

 

 

 

 

Think about it. Rourke. Stone. Ezterhas writing. Verhoeven directing. NC-17.

That's so much concentrated crazy in one place cinemas would spontaneously combust by the end of reel one.

Reply
post #34 of 91
1/8/13 at 7:35pm
Quote:
Also, wasnt there a insane as hell rumour they wanted Emma Watson for this? (or was that some pervo fanboy wish thing?)

Completely bullshit rumor that she straight up denied.  My girl wouldn't go anywhere near this for a number of reasons. 

Reply
post #35 of 91
1/8/13 at 9:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freeman View Post

Completely bullshit rumor that she straight up denied.  My girl wouldn't go anywhere near this for a number of reasons. 

 

Prepare to have your heart broken.  Emma and I eloped.

 

(Which I saw in a future vision reflected in bath water after I hit my head.  IT'S TOTALLY RELIABLE.)

Reply
post #36 of 91
1/8/13 at 9:27pm

You don't actually want to be that guy Dark, cause I will go straight up Oldboy to get my revenge.  It's just not worth it for you.  :P

 

I might even go...  Jack Reacher on your ass.  And if you're smart that scares you!


Edited by Freeman - 1/8/13 at 9:40pm
Reply
post #37 of 91
1/8/13 at 9:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrSaxon View Post

Around the time that the book began to be noticed by the media, I was working in London. Eventually there were two topics that every newspaper and person around me latched onto - the Olympics and 50 Shades Of Grey. I would travel on the London tube in the morning and sit next to a woman reading the book whilst another woman read the book opposite me. I would arrive at work and the girl next to me would have a picture of an obscure male actor (I forget his name) on her laptop's desktop because she had decided this person should play Christian Grey. Within an hour, she and the majority of the women in our part of the office would discuss where they had reached in the books (as there is more than one) and which actors had been mentioned in the tabloids as potentially signing up to the movie. I would climb back onto the underground at the end of the day, where I would flick through the free newspaper to read about how an increase in pregnancy rates might be blamed on 50 Shades Of Grey, how the author had bought herself a new house with the money earned from her book sales, how Ryan Gosling was now rumored to be playing Christian, and then a double-page article about the history of S&M.

And that would be just one day.

I swear that I'm not making this shit up.

Does that help?

Well, in reacting to your anecdote, I have to put myself in the role of Morgan Freeman talking to the accountant in The Dark Knight: every woman you encountered in London was openly obsessed with a lurid piece of kink fiction, and you're trying to convince me this was a bad thing? Good luck. rolleyes.gif
Reply
post #38 of 91
1/8/13 at 10:28pm
Yeah, I'm pretty sure Mickey Rourke starred in the movie versions of this story 20 years ago. A few different versions, as I recall.

What's funny is that all the girls I knew thought I was a perv for diggin' it. Here they are, 20 years later, eating it up. Idiots.
Reply
post #39 of 91
1/9/13 at 5:30am

I believe the names I heard most associated with this were Mila Kunis and Matthew Bomer. Personally, I'd like Mila Kunis and Macaulay Culkin.

 

Hah, Macaulay. Never really thought about it, but that's a terrible goddamn name.

Reply
post #40 of 91
1/9/13 at 6:14am
I couldn't even finish the first book due to nothing happening plot-wise aside from supposedly kinky sex that produced a shrug and a "that's it?" from me. I guess if you're an old hag who hasn't had her pussy licked before, this would be relevatory to you. For the rest of us, it's boring, badly-written, and a completely unredeemable piece of shit.

I don't buy this NC-17 shit for a second. That's posturing to rile up the fanbase. This movie will be R. And a piece of shit.
Reply
post #41 of 91
1/9/13 at 8:51am

Maybe they can just re-release 9 1/2 weeks and re-title it "50 Shades of Grey".

 

Also, does anyone who's into the books ever mention the woman's name? They all seem to know the dude's.

Reply
post #42 of 91
1/9/13 at 9:08am
Her name is Anastasia Steele. I remember that because it sounds like someone's pen name, not an actual character in a book.
Reply
post #43 of 91
1/9/13 at 9:16am
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarleyQuinn22 View Post

I don't buy this NC-17 shit for a second. That's posturing to rile up the fanbase. This movie will be R. And a piece of shit.

 

This.

 

A major studio releasing an NC-17 film in an era where studios don't even give A-listers first dollar gross anymore?  The 90s are over.  And studios are not in the business of just reaching the "target audience", they want everybody to see this movie, because that's how hits happen and studios are in the hit business.  NC-17 drastically limits the number of screens a movie can play on and the number of publications that will advertise it.

 

They will Basic Instinct the hell outta this, and cross promote an unrated cut later on video like they do for every other "racy" film.

Reply
post #44 of 91
1/9/13 at 9:43am

I still think studios should be allowed to release multiple versions of a film.  Why not have both NC-17 and R-rated versions?  Oh, yes -- because the MPAA forbids it.

 

Not that I give a damn about 50 Shades of Grey; it's a stupid rule.

Reply
post #45 of 91
1/9/13 at 9:50am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arjen Rudd View Post

I believe the names I heard most associated with this were Mila Kunis and Matthew Bomer.

 

If this ends up happening, I honestly don't know who I would be more excited to see get it on. Bomer is waaaaaay prettier than Mila Kunis who is a sight for sore eyes in her own right.

 

EDIT: also, this may be condescending or sexist or something, but I really like it when Harley storms into a thread around these topics and proceeds to tear said property a new one.

Reply
post #46 of 91
1/9/13 at 11:24am
Someone's got to, dammit!
Reply
post #47 of 91
1/9/13 at 11:59am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambler View Post

This.

A major studio releasing an NC-17 film in an era where studios don't even give A-listers first dollar gross anymore?  The 90s are over.  And studios are not in the business of just reaching the "target audience", they want everybody to see this movie, because that's how hits happen and studios are in the hit business.  NC-17 drastically limits the number of screens a movie can play on and the number of publications that will advertise it.

They will Basic Instinct the hell outta this, and cross promote an unrated cut later on video like they do for every other "racy" film.

Perhaps. But they'll also know that ’everyone' is never going to watch a movie about s&m, and watering down the main selling point might just turn off those that do. They have a built in audience - going all out to please them and trading off the ensuing controversy is riskier, but I bet could pay off even more if it captured the public imagination.

I hope they do because the us rating system, ghettoising anything too 'adult', is idiotic and a hit NC-17 movie would be a healthy blow against it.
Reply
post #48 of 91
1/9/13 at 12:02pm

I have no interest in the books. But I hope this happens just so there can be an ultra popular NC-17 movie. It'd be like if people actually saw Showgirls.

Reply
post #49 of 91
1/9/13 at 12:24pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricBlair View Post
e.g, the couple have a contract which specifies no fisting

 

Re the whole BDSM agreement thing- if one goes into arrears, is that considered breach of contract?

 

PS. They should go all the way with this movie. Enemas, strap-on sissy training and cuckold foot worship. Then she cuts his dick off at the end like In the Realm of the Senses.

Reply
post #50 of 91
1/9/13 at 12:36pm

Under-dressed Mila Kunis in 3D?

 

I hope they make the first book into a trilogy. There's enough material there. They could bring in some of the appendices. (Grabs coat and leaves)

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: CHUD.COM Main
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › CHUD.COM Main › 50 SHADES OF GREY FILM PLANNED WITH AN NC-17 RATING