Home Forums Movies Why Did “Wolf of Wall Street” Get a Pass From the MPAA, When Feminist Films Don’t?

Why Did “Wolf of Wall Street” Get a Pass From the MPAA, When Feminist Films Don’t?

CREATE A NEW TOPIC
CREATE A NEW POLL
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)
Created
5 years ago
Last Reply
5 years ago
14
replies
930
views
12
users
babypook
2
Scottferguson
2
Alek4
1
  • Stardust
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 13th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #124567

    http://flavorwire.com/430289/why-did-wolf-of-wall-street-get-a-pass-from-the-mpaa-when-feminist-films-dont-a-conversation-with-jill-soloway/

    For the next few weeks we’ll all be talking about Martin Scorsese’s The Wolf of Wall Street, because it’s a big movie, and an awards contender, and, as our own film editor says, pretty damn good. I have not seen the film yet, but per Deadline Hollywood yesterday, it displays the usual Scorsese love of the expletive and even a little more sex than we’ve come to expect from him:

    The film begins with an assault of coarse language — c*cksucker, *beep* and lines like “who’s ever sucked a dog’s c*ck out of loneliness,” and *beep* this, sh*t that, c*ck, *beep* a**hole” — and within the first hour and 15 minutes, audiences will see two orgies; heavy drug use (smoking crack, snorting loads of cocaine); a father and son offhandedly discussing (at length) what’s au courant in women’s “bushes”; a woman performing oral sex on one man while getting rammed from behind from another; full frontal nudity of women; and lots of misogyny. There is also a scene later of a prostitute pulling a candle out of the rectum of a married Jordan Belfort (played by DiCaprio) who then drops hot wax up and down his back.

    And yet, it received an R rating, to everyone’s surprise. That light rating came about in part, Deadline Hollywood reports, to the presence of a “consigliere” named Tom Sherak who ran interference between Scorsese and the MPAA.

    The item did not escape the notice of the writer-filmmaker Jill Soloway, who also had a film come out this year called Afternoon Delight. The movie stars Kathryn Hahn as Rachel, a stay-at-home mom who meets McKenna, sex worker played by Juno Temple. As you can imagine, the premise gives rise to some “racy” situations (at least, by old-fogey-MPAA lights, anyway). And when Soloway went through the MPAA ratings process, she told me, she was forced to cut quite a bit from certain scenes. In one case, she had to cut words, or expressions of enjoyment — “oh yeah” type-stuff — from a scene in which Rachel watches McKenna do her job. “They wanted it to be less intense, less uncomfortable,” Soloway says. “And I went crazy trying to get that done.” In another, there was a problem with the length— which was under ten seconds— of a silhouetted sex scene, which was apparently too much for the MPAA folk.

    Afternoon Delight was, of course, a film which only saw limited release. And the MPAA’s system is theoretically optional, in the sense that theatres have been willing to disobey it. Even Soloway told me, “Director friends of mine said, ‘Let it be NC-17,’ what do you care?” But she had a contract with a distributor, and the contract said that she had to deliver an R-rated picture, so she ended up making cuts she didn’t like.

    Soloway, of course, didn’t have a consigliere like Scorsese. She was kind enough to discuss the frustrations of this discrepancy with me. What follows is a condensed and edited version of our discussions about the ongoing struggle to either reform or get rid of the MPAA.

    I’m not really that familiar with the MPAA process, but did you have any opportunity for a back-and-forth with them, on any of the cuts they asked for on Afternoon Delight?

    Yes. They just said, “too sexually intense.” Tony and Joan [Hey and Graves] are nice people, I like them. And you know, when I showed the film at Sundance, I also felt like some scenes were too intense, and I cut them down a little myself for the theatrical version before the MPAA even got involved. Which I sort of regret, because this is a political process and in a way if I had started with a more intense version I could have kept in what I wanted in the end, maybe.

    The fact is that when I watch the movie now and I experience that scene, something is materially missing. The [MPAA’s] cuts ended up making that scene worse in a way that I can feel— or rather, I miss what I used to feel— when watching it. The movie is not as good with those cuts.

    It’s too bad you didn’t have a consiglieri for it.

    Consigiliero, I would have wanted a woman!

    So obviously you sensed a theme to the cuts they asked for?

    I think it’s about the sexual agency of female characters. The scene portrays two women in a sexual situation connecting emotionally with one another. That might be what was “uncomfortable” for the MPAA. It’s infuriating, to encounter this editing-down after pushing through the many doors to get this movie made. I even won the Directing Award at Sundance, but that kind of lauding didn’t protect me from this organization’s opinion that sex from a woman’s perspective is somehow too dangerous. Did you see that thing about Evan Rachel Wood complaining that a scene where her character received oral sex was cut for the theatrical version of the movie?

    Yeah. I mean, I think your film is a better example because now that I’ve seen Charlie Countryman, but reports do not suggest the frame of the movie is self-consciously feminist, where as yours is.

    But it doesn’t matter, really, whether the film is feminist or not, it matters that what they cut is the one sex scene where she’s getting the oral sex! It’s about female pleasure making people uncomfortable, it’s insane. Particularly when you think about how much misogyny makes it through in other movies, how much violence, too. Is it weird that I even want affirmative action or reparations that reward women filmmakers for taking the risks of expressing authentic sexuality? I’m so mad that I was raised on the highly commercial, misogynistic characterizations of sexual women as disposable sluts or props for a man’s storyline, yet if I try to disrupt that portrayal, I have to minimize the parts that are “uncomfortable.” Uncomfortable for whom?

    Right, which takes us to Wolf of Wall Street.

    Yes, which made me so angry reading that Deadline Hollywood thing. I mean, look, I love Scorsese, and I bet The Wolf of Wall Street is a great movie. I remember seeing the trailer in a theater and having that stomach churn of, OK, if I see this movie I will have to do the switch-off thing that a lot of women have to do to enjoy a movie that glorifies misogyny. But even that isn’t what bothers me. What seems insane is that the MPAA allowed the scenes described — of a man is receiving oral sex from a woman while another man is having sex with her from behind — but I had to cut far less sexual material to get an R instead of an NC-17. That’s what’s infuriating.

    Well, and it’s obvious that there was some kind of double standard here for women.

    But it’s not just women, it’s for anyone who’s other, who isn’t helping glorify the myth of the straight white hero male. By their nature, indie films disseminate the voices of people who are not commonly heard— women, queer people, people of color. These are pieces of our culture that attempt to dismantle the straight white male perspective, but because they don’t have the political muscle of the studio backing or the consigliore to walk them through the MPAA process — the likelihood that they’ll have to cut out what’s “uncomfortable” is much higher.

    Do you have a solution?

    I hear people call out to abolish the MPAA. I’m not sure. I don’t want to censor Scorsese, that is not my solution. We live in an age where teenagers can watch all kinds of porn all over the internet, but the same gatekeepers, same systems are in place that made me have to sneak into a theater to watch Blue Lagoon. This system is so unevenly applied and it ends up just reinforcing all the sexist, gender-violent, women-hating stuff. So sure, maybe the system can be changed, but maybe it is just time for a new way.[/quote]

    Reply
    babypook
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 4th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #124569

    Well in this case I dont feel like holding back, so, the MPAA are complete, hypocritical, self-aggrandizing whackos who imo will never change. In fact, these ‘guys’ are getting worse. Their defense in the past, for some of their ‘decisions’ are enough to make me want to puke.

    Imo? Stop ‘protecting’ me. And stop trying to call the moral shots for our kids. That’s not your job.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Tyler [Last Name]
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 19th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #124570

    All that happens in the movie? *runs over the nearest movie theatre* lol JK

    FYC: Ready Player One. Sound Editing, Sound Mixing, Visual Effects, Original Score, Production Design, Director and BEST PICTURE (make it happen Oscars!!)

    ReplyCopy URL
    Scottferguson
    Participant
    Joined:
    Sep 26th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #124571

    I am generally more a glass is half full than half empty kind of guy.

    I think the R rating for WoWS is a positive thing. It is the most sexually explicit big studio R rated film release ever. Getting the R rating will make it easier for the Afternoon Delights of the future not to have to trim so much, since a precedent has been set. We’ll have to see what happens, but rather than condemning the R rating for Wolf, I think people should consider that it is a step forward. We’ll see, but people appealing in the future will have a case to make based on this precedent, and if indies don’t get equal treatment, they have the ability to sue under anti-trust laws.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Words Count
    Member
    Joined:
    Sep 26th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #124572

    I am generally more a glass is half full than half empty kind of guy.

    I think the R rating for WoWS is a positive thing. It is the most sexually explicit big studio R rated film release ever. Getting the R rating will make it easier for the Afternoon Delights of the future not to have to trim so much, since a precedent has been set. We’ll have to see what happens, but rather than condemning the R rating for Wolf, I think people should consider that it is a step forward. We’ll see, but people appealing in the future will have a case to make based on this precedent, and if indies don’t get equal treatment, they have the ability to sue under anti-trust laws.

    Most indie distributors won’t have the financial backing to sue the MPAA. They’ll censor their movies or release them unrated. No revolution is around the corner on this issue. I don’t understand the complaining by smaller productions considering that they could go VOD and release unrated for Mature Audiences Only (TV-MA) and keep whatever they want in the final cut.

    ReplyCopy URL
    DominicCobb
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 12th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #124573

    ^^Totally agree with Scott. The more films that aren’t sealed in the NC-17 ghetto the better.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Placeholder
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jan 10th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #124574

    Speaking of the MPAA, which I agree is a total joke, was anyone else surprised to see Walter Mitty get a PG rating? A serious live action film getting a PG is practically an endangered species.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Scottferguson
    Participant
    Joined:
    Sep 26th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #124575

    [quote=”Scottferguson”]I am generally more a glass is half full than half empty kind of guy.

    I
    think the R rating for WoWS is a positive thing. It is the most
    sexually explicit big studio R rated film release ever. Getting the R
    rating will make it easier for the Afternoon Delights of the future not
    to have to trim so much, since a precedent has been set. We’ll have to
    see what happens, but rather than condemning the R rating for Wolf, I
    think people should consider that it is a step forward. We’ll see, but
    people appealing in the future will have a case to make based on this
    precedent, and if indies don’t get equal treatment, they have the
    ability to sue under anti-trust laws.

    Most indie
    distributors won’t have the financial backing to sue the MPAA. They’ll
    censor their movies or release them unrated. No revolution is around the
    corner on this issue. I don’t understand the complaining by smaller
    productions considering that they could go VOD and release unrated for
    Mature Audiences Only (TV-MA) and keep whatever they want in the final
    cut.[/quote]

    I disagree. This precedent means a smart, top lawyer
    (hello, David Boies) could agree to work on contingency in a legal case
    (share in the damages) which would likely never get to court before the
    MPAA caves. This is a huge precedent, which the MPAA’s lawyers will
    tell them they can’t ignore in the future. I again say the R rating for
    Wolf is something to be celebrated and used by other films to get an R
    rating, however insider the change in rating was.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Beau S.
    Member
    Joined:
    Feb 10th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #124576

    Because the MPAA is a pathetic, embarrassing joke of an organization. That’s the only explanation.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Anonymous
    Joined:
    Jan 1st, 1970
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #124577

    MPAA is just like HFPA, the big fat joke.

    ReplyCopy URL
    babypook
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 4th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #124578

    MPAA is just like HFPA, the big fat joke.

     

    I wish that was all they were, a “joke”.Knowing who their bosses are is worrisome, at least to me,

    ReplyCopy URL
    Riley
    Participant
    Joined:
    Oct 11th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #124579

    I found out recently that both Blue is the Warmest Color and The Wolf of Wall Street were rated “12” in France.  Ha!

    ReplyCopy URL
    Gabriel
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jul 10th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #124580

    Blue is the Warmest Color had absolutely no business being an NC-17 film. The MPAA really are disgusting. And homophobic.

    Did anyone else hear about the R rating for the film G.B.F? Not a single F-word, no nudity or sex whatsoever, but apparently a film focusing on gay teens automatically warrants an R rating.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Eddy Q
    Participant
    Joined:
    Oct 13th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #124581

    I found out recently that both Blue is the Warmest Color and The Wolf of Wall Street were rated “12” in France.  Ha!

    France are extremely laid back with sexual content, and to a lesser extent violence. The French equivalents of English taboo slang are not considered as strong, so that’s not really an issue there. Even The Exorcist is rated 12 there!

    ReplyCopy URL
    Alek4
    Member
    Joined:
    Feb 19th, 2014
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #124582

    Have anyone seen the new game called Di Oscars? It’s about Leonardo Di Caprio and how he tries to win The Oscars, It’s very funny and supportive. Every game and movie fan should download it but it’s only available for Androd for now. I asure you that the game is very very addictive. Check it out! here’s a link:
    https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.Ant&hl=en 

    ReplyCopy URL
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Similar Topics
Brayden... - Aug 21, 2018
Movies
Honey - Aug 21, 2018
Movies
ENGLAND - Aug 20, 2018
Movies