A Dirty Shame; Why the NC-17 rating?
09-13-04, 07:34 PM
#1
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Thread Starter
A Dirty Shame; Why the NC-17 rating?
The blurb states "for pervasive sexual content". I don't suppose any of the starts are responsible for such a thing (except maybe Selma's massive rubber boobies), so what's in there to cause the rating?
09-13-04, 10:27 PM
#4
DVD Talk Hero
09-14-04, 10:36 AM
#8
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Posts: 4,521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I read that Waters was really disappointed he didn't get an R - apparently, he was aiming for it. Sounds like the Clerks syndrome. If only this was distributed by Miramax... no, wait!
09-14-04, 02:45 PM
#9
Needs to contact an admin about multiple accounts
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 2,730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Saw this today, and it EARNS the NC-17, lemme tell ya...
Pretty much every sexual fetish is discussed (shown in some cases), and there's nudity as well. Some language, but mostly dir-tay talk.
And then there's the final shot... wow.
Trust me, it's NC-17 for a reason.
BTW, funny film.
Pretty much every sexual fetish is discussed (shown in some cases), and there's nudity as well. Some language, but mostly dir-tay talk.
And then there's the final shot... wow.
Trust me, it's NC-17 for a reason.
BTW, funny film.
09-14-04, 04:35 PM
#11
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
John Waters said he coulnd't get a better review than this
If you prefer to avoid spoilers, here's the part of the review he was referring to:
If you prefer to avoid spoilers, here's the part of the review he was referring to:
Because of almost nonstop rough, crude and profane language, full frontal nudity, sexual imagery, obscene gestures, scatological humor, casual portrayal and descriptions of deviant sexual practices, a glorification of freewheeling sex and some sacrilegious imagery, the USCCB Office for Film & Broadcasting classification is O -- morally offensive. The Motion Picture Association of America rating is NC-17 -- no one 17 and under admitted.
Last edited by Roto; 09-14-04 at 04:40 PM.
09-14-04, 09:06 PM
#12
DVD Talk Gold Edition
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: A little bit here and a little bit there.
Posts: 2,644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rated nc17 because it's probably good 
Anything that upsets the bleeding hearts of the mpaa sounds okay to me. I'm a john waters fan, sure his past few films have seemed watered down (get it, watered down) but i'll forgive him his mainstream trespasses as I know he'll never deliver me any evil. Dirty shame looks like a blast.
Anything that upsets the bleeding hearts of the mpaa sounds okay to me. I'm a john waters fan, sure his past few films have seemed watered down (get it, watered down) but i'll forgive him his mainstream trespasses as I know he'll never deliver me any evil. Dirty shame looks like a blast.
09-14-04, 11:12 PM
#13
DVD Talk Legend
The funny thing about the rating is that now I want to see it, whereas if it were R i'd never even consider it. The MPAA are a bunch of idiots. 
09-15-04, 07:25 AM
#15
Moderator
actually I am glad a NC-17 John Waters film is coming out, I am sick of the number of PG-13 (Hollywood safe) films that are being released this Fall, this rating screams out "screw y'all, here's an explicit adult comedy for the masses!"
09-15-04, 11:55 AM
#16
Moderator
Originally posted by brizz
The funny thing about the rating is that now I want to see it, whereas if it were R i'd never even consider it. The MPAA are a bunch of idiots.
The funny thing about the rating is that now I want to see it, whereas if it were R i'd never even consider it. The MPAA are a bunch of idiots.
09-15-04, 01:09 PM
#17
DVD Talk Legend
Originally posted by brizz
The funny thing about the rating is that now I want to see it, whereas if it were R i'd never even consider it. The MPAA are a bunch of idiots.
The funny thing about the rating is that now I want to see it, whereas if it were R i'd never even consider it. The MPAA are a bunch of idiots.
09-28-04, 12:50 AM
#19
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
I saw this over the weekend. Funny, but in a bad dirty joke kind of way. You snicker, then feel sort of embarrassed about it, which is, I'm sure, the reaction he was going for. I think Waters has finally gone completely senile, though. The film had no real story or structure, had no 3rd act to speak of, and degenerated into pure chaos near the end. The head injury causing sexual addiction plot was right out of a Gilligan's Island-type 60s sitcom (that is, a head knock causes behavioral changes and multiple head knocks occilate the victim back and forth between bi-polar states). Also, when he finally came up with the fetish that had never been done before it was an incredible disappointment. He had just simply run out of ideas. Most of his films anymore are simply excuses to string together his social commentary, which can be funny, but they really don't make good films. Now, this is coming from a huge John Waters fan.
One question, though. I've looked this up and never found any thing about it. One of my favorite things in watching John Waters movies is watching for the cameos of the old Dreamlanders. Jean Hill was fun to see, as was Channing Wilroy (he was one of the motorists. Not exactly sure which one, because I just saw his name in the credits). I was disappointed that Susan Lowe didn't make it and neither did new Dreamlander Traci Lords, in a film that seemed right up her alley. Perhaps John was too embarrassed to ask her to be in it or she just wants to put this sort of thing far behind her. The thing that struck me hardest was the cameo of Mary Vivian Pierce. She was Cotton in Pink Flamingos and is the only Dreamlander that has been in every one of John's films. She looks like she's had a stroke. One whole side of her face was completely drooped and her line was unintelligible. She was looking pretty rough in the last couple films, but now she really looks awful. Anyone know what's happened to her? So sad.
One question, though. I've looked this up and never found any thing about it. One of my favorite things in watching John Waters movies is watching for the cameos of the old Dreamlanders. Jean Hill was fun to see, as was Channing Wilroy (he was one of the motorists. Not exactly sure which one, because I just saw his name in the credits). I was disappointed that Susan Lowe didn't make it and neither did new Dreamlander Traci Lords, in a film that seemed right up her alley. Perhaps John was too embarrassed to ask her to be in it or she just wants to put this sort of thing far behind her. The thing that struck me hardest was the cameo of Mary Vivian Pierce. She was Cotton in Pink Flamingos and is the only Dreamlander that has been in every one of John's films. She looks like she's had a stroke. One whole side of her face was completely drooped and her line was unintelligible. She was looking pretty rough in the last couple films, but now she really looks awful. Anyone know what's happened to her? So sad.
