Jump to content

Talk:List of NC-17 rated films

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jason's Lyric

[edit]

I don't see anywhere that it was NC-17, except for some trivia on IMDB.com alleging it was. 97.104.210.47 (talk) 04:20, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Genre

[edit]

Please add a Genre Column. The list of movies should have genre column. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.248.152.208 (talk) 09:14, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

[edit]

Would be interesting to mention on this page what is usually the impetus for re-rating a film. I assume it's always because the distributor wants to re-release a movie and perhaps get a wider audience, and never because the MPAA voluntarily decides to go back and review past decisions. Tempshill 23:59, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Breillat's Romance

[edit]

I'm wondering if Catherine Breillat's Romance was ever given an NC-17 rating. The article on it says that an edited version was given an R rating, but doesn't say if the original cut was submitted to the MPAA. Robert Happelberg 20:42, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

  • The MPAA's ratings database, filmratings.com, only lists an R-rated version, so the original cut was probably never submitted. (Also, I fixed the link to the movie in your comment; hope you don't mind.) —tregoweth 23:16, Oct 24, 2004 (UTC)

Pulp Fiction?

[edit]

As far as I know, this movie was never rated NC-17. The only source I could find supporting the claim was IMDb, which will print almost anything its readers send in and is very unreliable. --PenguinJockey 04:11, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Update: looks like I was wrong. The original NC-17 for Pulp Fiction is quite well documented -- I'll add it back and source it. PenguinJockey (talk) 17:10, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I saw one of your citations and I found it to be a very poor one. The main reason for being that it wasn't edited because it got an NC-17. Here's a quote from your citation, "Berger says that Tarantino shoots extra gore for the same reason.'On Pulp Fiction, we went through all the effects in advance,' says Greg Nico tero. 'Quentin told us, Just so you guys know, nothing personal, but probably nothing you build for me is really going to be in the movie.'". So I guess I should edit the page.Zakonwiki (talk) 21:38, 10 August 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zakonwiki (talk • contribs) 21:32, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unrated Films (UR)

[edit]

Is there a page of unrated films on wikipedia???

Should it be stated that it is quite ironic that this film is not yet rated got an NC-17 rating? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.45.241.151 (talk) 20:59, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Questions

[edit]

1. Some of the films here (Eyes White Shut Perfect Blue) are not listed as being originally NC-17 or X in the main source. Should they be taken out?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120663/parentalguide?ref_=tt_stry_pg Actually it is listed on here as being NC-17 97.104.210.47 (talk) 04:24, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

2. Should Color of Night be on the list? The article o it says it was originally rated NC-17.

Bobisbob 04:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup

[edit]

This page is full of redundant wikilinks. If an article is linked to once, it does not need to be linked again. I will work on this some other time, unless someone else wants to fix it. Mynameisnotpj (talk) 03:24, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I cleaned up until G. I noticed that a lot of the sentences were missing periods, so if I noticed it, I put them in, but I probably missed a lot. There are also several occurrences of years over and over again, but it is harder for me to remember which ones are there already and not. After I finish with this first sweep, I will come back and start over looking for those two things.
Well, that was a pain in the butt. I have gone through and gotten rid of most of the redundant wikilinks. What I need to do now is get rid of redundant years, wikilink a few movie titles and make sure that there are periods at the end of all of the titles. I will also be adding a tag for citations, as many movies are missing them. Mynameisnotpj (talk) 03:26, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
All of the movies have wikilinks now. I will have to go through and make sure that they all link to the right article. Then I have to get rid of redundant dates and add periods to a few sentences. Mynameisnotpj (talk) 17:05, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Clerks

[edit]

Clerks does not fit into the description of films listed on this page. It was originally rated NC-17 but changed to R but the film was not recut. 172.131.248.55 (talk) 06:18, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This list is for films that were, at point or another, rated as NC-17, and may have been either appealed to R, edited down to an R, or released as NC-17. Clerks fits that criteria. Socby19 (talk) 18:59, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Groove Tube

[edit]

Hello, i've read that The Groove Tube was originally rated X, does anyone know if this is true? —Preceding unsigned comment added by BenderRobot (talk • contribs) 13:52, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's true. Not applicable to this article, though. PenguinJockey (talk) 17:11, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rating Surrendered

[edit]

Now what does "rating surrendered" actually mean? And for what reason do NC-17 labeled movies often surrender that rating? 67.41.88.144 (talk) 19:55, 23 August 2010 (UTC) Temple University Class[reply]

"Rating surrendered" means that the film was originally rated NC-17 rating (or in rare cases R) but the film makers didn't wish to release the film with that rating so they chose to "surrender" the rating and release it as unrated instead. When you get a film rated by the MPAA, you are not required to release the film with said rating but may instead choose to release it unrated. The main reason films originally rated NC-17 movies would see their rating surrendered is that NC-17 has always had a stigma attached to it and certain theaters and newspapers will not show or advertise such films. NC-17 also means minors cannot view such films unlike with unrated films though individual movie theaters may decide to bar minors anyways. --67.103.38.4 (talk) 09:49, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Two Girls One Cup?

[edit]

Someone added a section for Two Girls One Cup, that online video. Was it even rated by the MPAA? Because I extremely doubt it was, and someone just added it. ALonelyWeeaboo (talk) 16:11, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Divide by whether or not it was released as NC-17?

[edit]

I think most people looking for a list like this are more interested in just the theatrical releases with an NC-17 as opposed to everything given the rating at some point. Most of the entries on this list were edited or contested to an R rating. Anyone else think we should split this article into two lists? Arcadina (talk) 01:47, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the list should be devided into two. We should have one list for films that where released as NC-17, either in theaters or on DVD/VHS/Laserdisc/Etc.. The second list should list films that where either the film was edited for an R rating (or lower), were once rated NC-17 but later rated R on appealed, or for which the rating was surrendered and the film released unrated. We don't have to have two separate article necessarily as we can have both lists on the same page so long as we properly describe each list on the page. --67.103.38.4 (talk) 11:08, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Midnight Cowboy

[edit]

Should Midnight Cowboy be on the list?

It was rated X in 1969, but re-rated R a couple years later.

Even though it never officially carried NC-17, it is significant for being the only X-rated Oscar winner, and X is the precursor to NC-17. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.221.183.199 (talk) 03:09, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Raid 2 and 300 rise of an empire?

[edit]

I think The Raid 2 should be on here because Gareth has stated that it was rated NC-17 and that he had to remove some frames of graphic violence. Is that true? Also 300 rise of an empire should be here because originally was to be rated NC-17 and there is no evidence of editing to secure an R rating. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.144.195.237 (talk) 23:38, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

31

[edit]

This one should be added to the list as originally rated NC-17, but edited to receive an R-rating

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/31_(film)#Rating

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on List of NC-17 rated films. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:49, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on List of NC-17 rated films. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:23, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Boogie Nights

[edit]

Shouldn't this be on here? Paul Thomas Anderson's original cut was rated NC-17 (I believe), and had to be submitted at least 40 times before the MPAA finally gave it an R rating. Cinefan Cinefan (talk) 13:05, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Difference between surrendered and kept

[edit]

I try to understand but what exactly is the difference between a surrendered and kept nc-17 rating? 4Corry11 (talk) 06:22, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Think of the rating like a literal certificate. "Kept" means they kept the rating certificate, and used the rating. "Surrendered" means that they "returned" the certificate, and the film was officially not rated. Trivialist (talk) 10:29, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I know I should've replied with this sooner but I'm still not sure yet. If the film was returned and not rated then why does it have the NC-17 rating? --4Corry11 (talk) 06:48, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If the rating is surrendered, it doesn't have an NC-17 rating anymore. Being on this list means that it received an NC-17 rating *at some point*. Trivialist (talk) 11:03, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you also what is the difference between edited for re-rating and re-rated R on appeal? 4Corry11 (talk) 02:43, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Edited for re-rating" means that, in an attempt to get a different rating, something was removed or changed, and the film was resubmitted for a rating. "Re-rated R on appeal" means that the film probably received an NC-17, and the producers appealed the decision, in an attempt to get a different rating. Trivialist (talk) 11:10, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Massive cleanup

[edit]

I performed a massive cleanup of unsourced or incorrectly sourced entries (see WP:IMDB for why we don't accept them as a source). Feel free to re-add any I removed that can be sourced. But given how out of control this list is, I elected to be liberal in removing entries. I'd also like to point out the title of this article is List of NC-17 rated films, not List of NC-17 rated films that were re-rated to get an R, and that perhaps such a list is a fool's errand as the list would never be complete as it's unlikely every instance of an NC-17 is likely to be admitted in an interview by producers/staff. I think keeping it as just a list of films actually rated NC-17 is far more desirable and resists the temptation for people to add any random film someone told them was originally an NC-17 title... —Locke Cole • t • c 04:21, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Trimmed more per WP:IMDB. —Locke Cole • t • c 05:38, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
So with some getting re-added, I see one source used was this one, which while it does say it was Edited For Rerate After Appeal, it's not obvious that the appeal means they got an NC-17 and went back for the R, or if they got a PG-13 and maybe added something to get to what they wanted. Any thoughts on that? And I'm still leaning towards the idea that it's just a bad idea in general to have movies that weren't ultimately rated NC-17 listed at all (as mentioned directly above). —Locke Cole • t • c 22:04, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Trivialist, Moneytrees, Tregoweth, Mynameisnotpj, PenguinJockey, Thelimiter, TarkusAB, The Mysterious El Willstro, Kil0mafil0, Tropical Storm Angela, Rlholden, Bluerules, Jonay81687, Brady108, and Thelimiter: Any thoughts about my idea above about limiting this list to films that received a final NC-17 rating? Also, there's an anonymous editor adding tons of entries of "re-rated" movies, and as mentioned in my comment above, the filmratings.com source doesn't appear to indicate what the original rating was, it seems we're just assuming it was an NC-17 going to an R (though I'll admit it seems less likely someone would try for an R from a PG-13; the problem is the source doesn't say it and we're making inferences). Obviously if it's decided to limit this to just NC-17 final rated films, that solves for the "re-rate" matter entirely. —Locke Cole • t • c 18:11, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should be limited to movies that received a final NC-17 rating. For one thing, it's easier to verify. Also, if a version was rated NC-17 but was never released with that rating, does it even matter? Trivialist (talk) 18:15, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also, if a version was rated NC-17 but was never released with that rating, does it even matter? Yeah, I'm not familiar with any articles actually that document things that didn't happen, come to think of it. I feel like, if something were notable enough to get documented in a magazine/book about how a movie was initially rated NC-17 and then the producers had to re-edit/shoot and appeal that's something that is more relevant in the production section of the article itself (assuming sources are reliable). I'll give this a day or two to see if anyone else chimes in, but otherwise I'll just make the change. —Locke Cole • t • c 19:49, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

@TarkusAB: I think I figured it out maybe. This link is used in our sources but fails. However, if you add "www." to the URL (this link) it now seems to work as expected. Let me know if you see the first failing/second working. It seems to be an issue with the non-www site redirecting to the www site and losing the query string in the jump.. —Locke Cole • t • c 20:13, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've also reached out to the MPA and actually got through to someone; in addition to asking if they can "fix" their site to maintain the query string during redirects from the non-www to the www site, I've asked if they might consider adding a search option for searching by certificate #. That, if implemented, should make it possible to direct link to a specific movie for our purposes. —Locke Cole • t • c 20:49, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, the first link failed, and the second worked. Thank you for looking into this. I agree it would be great if CARA implemented a search by certificate # or something similar, so we can bring up one film at a time. TarkusABtalk/contrib 02:29, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion to reorder the film list in chronological order

[edit]

I would like to suggest that the list of films be arranged in chronological order by release year rather than alphabetically. Chronologically organizing the films would offer better insights into how this rating has been applied over time and how the themes or styles associated with it have evolved. Haymo.inc (talk) 21:52, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Haymo.inc Clicking on "release" will show the films in chronological order. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 22:18, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_NC-17_rated_films&oldid=1244244288"