ROTTEN TOMATOES: Seth Rogen + Kevin Smith = NC-17

Seth Rogen + Kevin Smith = NC-17

Who would've thunk it?

by Fred Topel | June 27, 2008

Discuss Article | Blog Article | Email To A Friend

At a press conference for his latest R-rated comedy, Pineapple Express, Seth Rogen revealed that his next film might get the dreaded NC-17 rating. He stars in Kevin Smith's latest, Zack and Miri Make a Porno, which is fighting for an R.

"I would say it's pretty dirty language-wise," said Rogen. "It does not seem that dirty to me. To me, it literally does not even register in my brain anymore."

In the film, two friends find their friendship tested when they decide to make a porno. Rogen thinks it's the sexual suggestions that freak out the ratings board, who seem to be fine with the violence of films like Hostel.

"I don't know why. To me, it's a mystery that you can show these horrific things but not some sexual stuff which everyone does."

Or maybe it's just the word porno. "It is like the number one industry in the universe. It's weird."

Right now, all Rogen can do is wait for a verdict. "I don't know what to do about it. I'm taking suggestions. But yeah, when I watch the movie, part of me thought, 'Yeah, let's just go for an NC-17 rating,' but when I watch it, I honestly don't think it deserves it."

(1-20 of 58 posts) | Reply

DarthWonka writes:
on Jun 27 2008 06:15 PM

This could actually work out to their advantage, I think.

(Reply to this)

tomwaitsjr writes:
on Jun 27 2008 06:30 PM

Yah, but I think the bastards at Blockbuster don't stock NC-17.

Go Netflix!

(Reply to this)

insanemansam5 writes:
on Jun 27 2008 06:37 PM

Coming to a theater near you: Zack and Miri make an Adult film?

(Reply to this)

rockclmbr6 writes:
on Jun 27 2008 06:53 PM

Honestly, I'm surprised they let them keep the title, so I wouldn't be surprised if it got an NC-17. Which is ridiculous...for some reason in the U.S. sex is more harmful than violence according to the all-powerful MPAA.

Yeah, I've totally hated the MPAA since they gave Once an R rating. Then I saw This Film Is Not Yet Rated and now I hate them even more.

(Reply to this)

blattman writes:
on Jun 27 2008 07:47 PM

Kevin Smith is The Man! NC 17 or R, it will be great!

(Reply to this)

Skull&DavidCrossbones writes:
on Jun 27 2008 08:33 PM

In reply to this comment (#1819064)
the thing about that is: not only would that not be the title they originally picked, but also it would give Kevin Smith (who is a badass) a bad name because he gave in to the douchebags that are the ratings board.

(Reply to this)

halose7en writes:
on Jun 27 2008 09:01 PM

This must be payback for the MPAA giving Kevin Smith an automatic R rating on Clerks II - without so much as a single nitpicking complaint.

I'm sure that he won't rest until it's given the R rating, though. NC-17 is always considered the commercial kiss of death in film. So yeah, even if he needs to delete a few things (even change the title), you'll see this movie in theaters before long. I just wonder if it will be any good by the time the rating board is finished with it.

(Reply to this)

jgoliwas writes:
on Jun 27 2008 09:35 PM

K.SMITH ROCKS, ALWAYS HAS ALWAYS WILL!!!!

(Reply to this)

TheMovieWhore writes:
on Jun 27 2008 10:03 PM

I read about this a few days ago.

Honestly I say **** the MPAA take the NC-17 and market teh hell out the fact that is an NC-17 flick. For that alone it will becoam an instant cult classic and drive many adults to the theater just to see what the big deal is.

Anyone around here old enough to remember Behind the Green Door?

That movie drove people to the theater over the shock factor of the content.

That is why I am The Movie Whore and you are not.

Oh and guys fix your comment box Your sponsored ads cut off the box and I can't see some of what I am typing.

(Reply to this)

Spurple writes:
on Jun 27 2008 10:44 PM

I would really love to talk to these people at the MPAA. Just ask them one simple question. "How do you sleep at night?"

How can they honestly say that it is A-OK for people to watch films where human beings are constantly being tortured, but not one where they talk openly about sex?

Are they honestly suggesting it is better to be a murderer than it is to be an adult who has consensual sex with another adult?

And, TheMovieWhore, the problem with them "marketing the hell" out of it being NC-17 is that it doesn't change a thing. NC-17 doesn't change how many people want to see it, it changes how many theaters will play it. A lot of theaters, the ones that pride themselves on being a family environment, won't even play NC-17 movies. And when they do, it's very few screenings each day. They aren't going have 20 showings a day for a film they know only a percentage of people are capable of seeing.

(Reply to this)

Brad 3000 writes:
on Jun 27 2008 10:52 PM

Seriously, this was all over the internet at least a full week ago, if not two. What's next? A story about Guillermo Del Toro getting tapped to direct The Hobbit?

(Reply to this)

ffamilyguy writes:
on Jun 27 2008 11:44 PM

In reply to this comment (#1819035)
Yeah they do, it's called the Unrated Version!!!

(Reply to this)

Splitter writes:
on Jun 27 2008 11:44 PM

I say ***** it. Decency is all but dead in the film industry. Market that sucker as an NC-17. Market the HELL out of it being NC-17! Rogen and Smith are both bank. People will still go see the movie.

(Reply to this)

knowingtoast85 writes:
on Jun 28 2008 01:06 AM

For people wondering why violence is tolerated in huge doses by the MPAA board and something potentially beautiful like sex isn't, we need only consider the origins and purpose of the MPAA itself.

They're an organization meant to inform parents of the kind of content they can expect to find in a movie, should they take their kids to see it. Now, if I had a kid and we both watched a movie where some guy's head exploded like a wood tick, I'd have to tell him that's special effects. Ketchup. Whatever. It's just a movie.

However, if we were watching a sex scene, it's not "just special effects." Things would get uncomfortable and I'd have to explain what sex is and why people do it. I don't want to do that, because I'm a ****ty parent who can't handle it.

So in steps the MPAA, making the world safe for an antiquated perspective that endorses violence for purposes of conquest and expansion, and decries sexuality in order to keep the unmarried chaste.

(Reply to this)

RawIsRamsey writes:
on Jun 28 2008 01:14 AM

Wasn't the last NC-17 movie to a get a wide release Showgirls?

Bad rating or not, Kevin Smith still has the stigma of never getting a movie past $30mil, but Rogen has become a pretty big draw over the past few years, so who knows.

(Reply to this)

kissman24 writes:
on Jun 28 2008 01:41 AM

Well, if it gets NR-17, they might as well go back to the editing room and make it ultra-dirty.

(Reply to this)

astrangefish writes:
on Jun 28 2008 02:40 AM

In reply to this comment (#1820054)
Im sorry, but that is a pitiful excuse for the actions of the MPAA. Luckily i live in the UK, where common sense is starting to prevail (much like the rest of Europe)-sex is seen as something that is natural, that we all do and part of evertday life, whereas horrific violence (hopefully!) isn't, and films are being rated to reflect that (Films with sexual content, and i don't mean porn, are getting lower ratings, and gun happy-people killing people over nothing-violent films are getting higher ratings. Perhaps if the MPAA adopted this approach America wouldn't be the most violent western country where pornography (which is crap and objectifies women as sex objects for men) is a young person's introduction to sex, instead of thoughtful, well-made, entertaining films. End of rant, fish out.

(Reply to this)

cartwrightStuff writes:
on Jun 28 2008 02:44 AM

Man i really pity you lot in the states with your MPAA i don't think i could cope with such censoring.

(Reply to this)

astrangefish writes:
on Jun 28 2008 02:53 AM

Also, to tell a child that violence and murder in films is just 'special effects', when it looks real to ADULTS, is a piss-poor reason to let them watch it!

(Reply to this)

Young Turk writes:
on Jun 28 2008 03:20 AM

In reply to this comment (#1820054)
Amen.

(Reply to this)