MPAA censors...websites??

zombie84 · Post by **zombie84** » 2003-08-28 09:18pm

wasnt sure if this is more appropriate for news and politics but whatever. picked this up off the good people at the Diabolical Dominion:

THE MPAA OWNS YOU

Remember when the MPAA could only tarnish the face of cinema by requesting changes to the actual films themselves? Those were the good ole' days. According to CHUD.com the MPAA has determined that the website (yes...the WEBSITE) for House Of The Dead is too gorey, forcing them to take it down. Ridiculous? You bet. However, after rubbing their dirty hands in the May poster a few months back, nothing surprises me anymore.

Fucking MPAA. Its not enough that they tell adults what they can and cant see, now they're sticking their fucking noses in websites and shit. They shouldnt be allowed to do that, i mean its not even their jurisdiction right? If its not a motion picture they shouldnt be allowed to touch it. Fuck. Im so sick of these types of cunts.

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2003-08-28 09:19pm

They probably say 'take down the site or we'll fuck with your movie'

zombie84 · Post by **zombie84** » 2003-08-28 09:24pm

im sure they'll fuck with the movie anyway.

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2003-08-28 09:35pm

Wasn't the movie already rated? Exactly what power do they have now?

DPDarkPrimus · Post by **DPDarkPrimus** » 2003-08-28 10:04pm

Well, it's not like they messed around with a website of any redeeming value.

Vertigo1 · Post by **Vertigo1** » 2003-08-28 11:11pm

Actually, you should really thank the whiner crybaby fundies for why the MPAA is so damned anal with its ratings today. Hell, Ice Age got a PG rating for "Mild Peril" because the poor little scrat (the squirrel-rat cross-breed thing that had a thing for nuts) went for a little trip through the air off a cliff (Chuck Jones style) and got stomped on, zapped by lightning, and rammed himself into a wall.

(note: that didn't happen all at once, but throughout the movie)

Kiss my ass crybabies!

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2003-08-28 11:57pm

DPDarkPrimus wrote:Well, it's not like they messed around with a website of any redeeming value.

That's hardly the point though. It's the principle of the matter.

DPDarkPrimus · Post by **DPDarkPrimus** » 2003-08-29 12:28am

I know that, of course. I was simply making a statement that would be made by much of the Internet community.

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2003-08-29 12:34am

DPDarkPrimus wrote:I know that, of course. I was simply making a statement that would be made by much of the Internet community.

Yes. Which is unfortunate.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2003-08-29 12:43am

Obviously the MPAA ate their young. The movie bombed horribly, so of course they're going to take the opportunity to target it for easy pickings to attempt to dispel the obvious notion that they care little about violence in movies as opposed to nudity and coarse language.

DPDarkPrimus · Post by **DPDarkPrimus** » 2003-08-29 12:45am

Because we all know that tender scenes of love making cause our children to become violent.

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2003-08-29 12:53am

Durandal wrote:Obviously the MPAA ate their young. The movie bombed horribly, so of course they're going to take the opportunity to target it for easy pickings to attempt to dispel the obvious notion that they care little about violence in movies as opposed to nudity and coarse language.

It did? I thought it hadn't seen wide release yet.

Xenophobe3691 · Post by **Xenophobe3691** » 2003-08-29 01:23am

House of the Dead? When did that come out?!?

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2003-08-29 01:29am

Vorlon1701 wrote:House of the Dead? When did that come out?!?

It was shown at festivals for a fair while. I wasn't aware that it had seen wide release however. I heard it was coming out kind of soon though.

zombie84 · Post by **zombie84** » 2003-08-29 01:34am

It was shown at a San Francisco film fest but other than that, it isnt out yet.

Peregrin Toker · Post by **Peregrin Toker** » 2003-08-29 03:18am

Maybe those CAPalert folks are slowly infiltrating the MPAA??

Robert Treder · Post by **Robert Treder** » 2003-08-29 04:48am

neoolong wrote:
Vorlon1701 wrote:House of the Dead? When did that come out?!?
It was shown at festivals for a fair while. I wasn't aware that it had seen wide release however. I heard it was coming out kind of soon though.

It's being released on the 10th of October.

I gather the MPAA's reasoning is that if the official website for an R-rated movie is displaying content that, were it in a movie, would be rated NC-17, then that's bad. All they can threaten the filmmakers with is an NC-17 rating (contrary to somewhat popular belief, the MPAA cannot alter movies). But the filmmakers certainly don't want an NC-17 rating because NC-17 movies make don't make shit in the boxoffice, so they will do pretty much whatever they can to tone down to R. The filmmakers (if we can call them that) will undoubtedly prefer censoring their website to censoring their movie, so they'll comply, if they haven't already.
That said, the MPAA should go fuck itself, because it has no business rating anything other than the movie itself. The unfortunate thing is that the entire concept of rating movies based on a certain set of morals is cataclysmically retarded and entirely subjective. The MPAA can rate something however they want, since they can always claim that anything is offensive, insidious, or gratuitous. We're lucky they don't blackmail every movie.
The saddest part of the whole MPAA catastrophe is that the only reason they have such power is that people actually care about their ratings. The rating system is technically voluntary, that is, movies don't have to receive ratings. But there are droves of idiot parents out there who would rather let an idiot organization decide what their kids can watch instead of actually doing any research or parenting for themselves. This makes it so that filmmakers can't afford to not get their movies rated, which leads to them on occasion making edits to their art for the sake of prudes.

Sektor31 · Post by **Sektor31** » 2003-08-29 10:35am

Simon H.Johansen wrote:Maybe those CAPalert folks are slowly infiltrating the MPAA??

If that was true, then half the movies this summer would've been rated R.

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2003-08-29 08:22pm

The South Park movie is not technically "uncut"; they had to cut out some foul language because the MPAA was about to give it an NC-17 rating. FOR BAD LANGUAGE.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2003-08-29 08:35pm

Whoops. I confused House of the Dead with Rob Zombie's spectacularly awful directorial debut, House of A Thousands Corpses.

Peregrin Toker · Post by **Peregrin Toker** » 2003-08-30 03:27am

Uraniun235 wrote:The South Park movie is not technically "uncut"; they had to cut out some foul language because the MPAA was about to give it an NC-17 rating. FOR BAD LANGUAGE.

I think that only was the case for the American version - I don't think European censors are that draconian.

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2003-08-30 12:00pm

Simon H.Johansen wrote:
Uraniun235 wrote:The South Park movie is not technically "uncut"; they had to cut out some foul language because the MPAA was about to give it an NC-17 rating. FOR BAD LANGUAGE.
I think that only was the case for the American version - I don't think European censors are that draconian.

My understanding is that they can be, just for other stuff.

Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi · Post by **Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi** » 2003-08-30 01:21pm

Uraniun235 wrote:The South Park movie is not technically "uncut"; they had to cut out some foul language because the MPAA was about to give it an NC-17 rating. FOR BAD LANGUAGE.

Well, to steal from Kyle's mom: "Just remember what the MPAA says: Horrific, deplorable violence is okay, as long as people don't say any naughty words!"

Peregrin Toker · Post by **Peregrin Toker** » 2003-08-30 01:52pm

Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi wrote:
Uraniun235 wrote:The South Park movie is not technically "uncut"; they had to cut out some foul language because the MPAA was about to give it an NC-17 rating. FOR BAD LANGUAGE.
Well, to steal from Kyle's mom: "Just remember what the MPAA says: Horrific, deplorable violence is okay, as long as people don't say any naughty words!"

Reminds me of how unintentionally soul-scarring some 1960s kiddie matinee movies are when viewed with modern eyes...

2000AD · Post by **2000AD** » 2003-08-30 01:57pm

I thought R rating was worse than NC-17? Can someone do a quick run down of American film ratings?