Differences between the Rated and NC-17 Bad Education DVD?
 

I was wondering if anyone knows what the differences are between the rated R verison and the NC-17 version of Bad Education. I think the extras on both dvds are the same but something must have been cut on the rated R version.

I ask this because I went to Blockbuster and they only carry the R version. I ended up not renting it because I want to see the original theatrical version. Thanks.

A scene of 2 men having oral sex (simulated of course) is blurred out by a hollogramic circle a la Mulholland Drive.

Well, in this case, if I were to get this movie, I think I'd settle for the R-rated version.

You know Mike,you can always shut your eyes if you are scared of seeing two men get it on,you squeemish person you:)

I am sure had it been two women blurred out,you would have been greatly pissed off and demanded the uncut version only! Double standard anyone? :D

Great comment! I agree 100%

That's not actually the only difference is it? I seem to recall a great many scenes in the NC-17 version (the only one I've seen) that I simply can't believe would have made it into an R cut.

From dvdbeaver.com:

NOTE: Buyers beware...
We’ve just learned that the R-rated DVD of “Bad Education” is not cut, but visibly censored.


From www.woxy.com/boards/showthread.php?t=25831

Pedro Almodovar's latest was slapped with an NC-17. Good luck finding it in most rental stores in its uncut form. Sony is also releasing this in a more widely available R-rated edit, so pay attention to what you're getting! Edited to add: I've been told that the "Blockbuster" R-rated version does not have anything cut out of it, but there is a scene where a graphic moment has been digitally censored/blurred. Outside of that, the R-rated version is the same as the NC-17 dvd and still contains Almodovar's commentary and all the bonus features.

I agree 100% of course is a double standard, but I have absolutly no interest in seeing 2 men going down. but I love watching 2 women :eyebrow: I'm just weird I guess.

Thanks everyone for replying. I think will just rent the rated R version.

Well yeah. You know it!

Double standard? Nah, there's a difference between four melons and two bananas. :banana: :banana: You get twice the fruit with two women. :D

I would have to agree. I saw it in the theatre also and can't imagine digitally blurring a single scene to be enough to lower the rating to an R. Anybody have information from a reliable source?

Well here are the MPAAs rating reasons,notice what the NC-17 is rated for:)



Bad Education - Special Edition (2005)
Sony Pictures Home Entertainment
R Rated R for strong sexual content throughout, language and some drug use.
**


Bad Education (2004)
Sony Pictures Classics
NC-17 Rated NC-17 for a scene of explicit sexual content.


I think it is pretty stupid if just one scene can be the basis between the two ratings. Especially if the rest of the film is fairly explicit. But that is the MPAA for you.

well at least we don't have censored headbutts and horse killing like they do in the UK.

Right. Because it's better to censor the naked body and allow violence. :rolleyes:

You mean you have no interest in seeing the original director's version of a movie (and prefer a censored version)? Talk about homophobia! Any other topics you'd like censored out of your original movies, or just gay sex? You can't stand that gay people have sex in fictional stories just like straight people? Where do you get the dumb idea that movies are all about *you*?

The really pathetic thing about this is that the unblurred version wouldn't trigger more than an R under any hetersexual circumstances at all. No private parts are shown, and no explicit sex occurred in filming. The blur is covering one guy's thigh, and the other guy's forehead. :rolleyes:

Wow...seems like we've hit a nerve with adamblast here. God forbid that some people find gay male sex revolting. Is it not true that even women find gay male sex a bit disgusting?

There are a lot of women who find heterosexual sex a bit disgusting too, what's your point?

Funny thing is,this is not the first time the MPAA has had a hissy fit or gay-sex/oral between guys.

Latter Days was rated NC-17 for just such a sequence(despite not really showing anything!)..and an edited R version with alternate angles was created for home video.

Everything else in the film is the same,same running time and everything,but that sex scene is toned down abit.

Frankly I think one tiny thing being able to cause the rating to get 'that' restrictive is bogus. Unless it was actual hardcore,I don't see how it is NC-17 material if the rest of the film is suitable for an R rating?


Oh and for the squeemish of seeing guys get it on people out there. You do know their are straight people/guys who can watch such scenes and not be revolted..nor turned on and not feel the need to 'prove' themselves with insecure "Ewwwww,sick!!!!!!" type childish banter durring such scenes?

In other words,they are mature,open minded,secure in their sexuality and adult like:)

Jeesh some people can't take a joke. In fact I never even heard of the movie and don't have interest in seeing it anyway. I just wandered in hear.

Doesn't make it right and doesn't mean you're not homophobic.

It's also true that some women find gay male sex highly erotic. And?

DJ

Given Lowry's past history of statements that are more than extreme and offensive I don't think you should seek any logic in this particular case.


From a straight person that does not get offended from the homosexual overtones presented by Almodovar. (Pro-B)

And some people have moral clarity on the issue given to them by a Higher Power. Or is the idea of moral clarity considered bigotted in your eyes?

For example, in the extremely stupid TV show, The Jerry Springer Show, of which even the host is about as liberal as you can get, the audience usually reacts in a "Ewww" kind of way when two guys get it on on stage. So don't tell me that homosexuality is universally accepted in American culture.

...nor is homophobia.

Now, back to the original topic.

Pro-B