|
|
Post by jhar26 on Feb 10, 2015 18:39:48 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by robertaxel on Feb 10, 2015 20:20:18 GMT -5
This has all the makings of a 'Showgirls' type camp classic... One parody already making the rounds:
|
|
|
|
Post by jhar26 on Feb 11, 2015 4:19:22 GMT -5
I think this thing will sweep the next raspberry awards.  Hollywood censors will no doubt have been in a "you can't do this, you can't do that" mode up to a point where all that you are left with is a guy in a zorro mask tickling the armpits and belly button of a girl with a feather. Of course you can work around that. In fact movies that suggest things are often better than the explicit ones. It would take a genius director and a brilliant scenario and cast to make this work though. |
|
|
|
Post by erik on Feb 11, 2015 9:55:33 GMT -5
Quote by jhar26 re. FIFTY SHADES OF GREY:
Some of this happened back in 1961, when director Stanley Kubrick's film of Nabakov's LOLITA had a crippling problem getting distributed because of the hot nature of the source material. In that era, Kubrick couldn't show a whole heck of a lot in terms of the erotic nature of the relationship between Humbert Humbert (James Mason) and Lolita (Sue Lyon), so he had to imply a lot. Of course, this let the audience make the connection for themselves in a mischievous, and even blackly comic, fashion (IMHO).
|
|
|
|
Post by jhar26 on Feb 11, 2015 10:08:00 GMT -5
Quote by jhar26 re. FIFTY SHADES OF GREY: Some of this happened back in 1961, when director Stanley Kubrick's film of Nabakov's LOLITA had a crippling problem getting distributed because of the hot nature of the source material. In that era, Kubrick couldn't show a whole heck of a lot in terms of the erotic nature of the relationship between Humbert Humbert (James Mason) and Lolita (Sue Lyon), so he had to imply a lot. Of course, this let the audience make the connection for themselves in a mischievous, and even blackly comic, fashion (IMHO). Yes, I love that movie. But Kubrick IS a genius director of course. To be fair, according to a review in my newspaper the "50 Shades of Grey" movie IS better than the book. |
|
|
|
Post by erik on Feb 11, 2015 10:22:17 GMT -5
What makes this weird is how anyone in Hollywood thought FIFTY SHADES OF GREY could possibly be made into a movie, given the scalding nature of the book itself, without it being slapped with the adults-only NC-17 rating (the old version of that was X). But then, there was always LAST TANGO IN PARIS back in '72.
With respect to LOLITA, Kubrick remarked that, had he realized how much of an imposition the moral restrictions would place on what he could or could not show of that film's relationship, he might not have made the film at all. As it stood, though, just the way he implied it (shot in a sort of glossy black-and-white fashion, and with a Nelson Riddle score to boot [Bernard Herrmann was the first choice, but turned it down due to creative differences]), was enough to make LOLITA a runaway box office hit. But the thing with Kubrick is that so many of his films were misunderstood upon first release; and it usually took some five to ten years before people really "got" them, regardless of their content.
|
|
|
|
Post by profblues on Feb 14, 2015 11:03:05 GMT -5
and to think they gave Midnight Cowboy an X-rating and an Academy Award for Best Picture.  ahhh that wacky Hollywood. |
|
|
|
Post by erik on Feb 14, 2015 12:33:33 GMT -5
Quote by profblues:
Yes, and the only time they ever gave an Oscar to an X-rated film. However, it wasn't the last time they nominated an X-rated film: A CLOCKWORK ORANGE still had the 'X' rating on it when the Academy nominated it as Best Picture in 1971 (eventually, the rating went back down to 'R').
|
|
|
|
Post by robertaxel on Feb 14, 2015 13:12:42 GMT -5
Both of those films may not even rate an 'R' today...
|
|
|
|
Post by erik on Feb 14, 2015 18:46:30 GMT -5
Quote by robertaxel re. A CLOCKWORK ORANGE and MIDNIGHT COWBOY:
If done differently, then they might not be 'R'-rated films, I agree. But I do think the violence of A CLOCKWORK ORANGE is still fairly hair-raising, not in a blood-and-guts sort of way, but in a way that is decidedly unsettling in the way Kubrick inserted a lot of hard-edged satire to go along with the "toll-choking" and "the old in-out, in out".
|
|
