What is limp-tearing?

toddalmighty: What is limp-tearing?

Probably talking about handjobs that are too vigorous.

Well, duh. Everyone knows that sex (even if it is only implied) and nudity (even partial nudity) are evil. That, plus foul language, is what's really tearing our nation apart at the seams and hurting our most precious recourse - the children.

I'd rant on, but I have a Saw marathon to attend in about 26 minutes. Fun for the whole family!

King Something: Well, duh. Everyone knows that sex (even if it is only implied) and nudity (even partial nudity) are evil. That, plus foul language, is what's really tearing our nation apart at the seams and hurting our most precious recourse - the children.

yeah, he should have stuck with graphic violence, misogyny and maybe some drug abuse for the R rating.

Zack and Miri Make a Porno got an R rating...

P.S. Cohen isn't funny.

I'm not surprised considering I saw some people bring a young boy into Watchmen, not bat an eye at Comedian shooting a pregnant woman in the face, but then walk out when they saw Manhattan's giant blue junk.

The RIAA is chock-full of the worst kind of Christian.

Da Bum: toddalmighty: What is limp-tearing?

Probably talking about handjobs that are too vigorous.

Rent: This Film Is Not Yet Rated
It explains a lot about the MPAA subjectivity

With all that being true, many directors, I think, push the envelope to get free publicity and to ultimately sell the unrated DVD.

Wintermute6: I'm not surprised considering I saw some people bring a young boy into Watchmen, not bat an eye at Comedian shooting a pregnant woman in the face, but then walk out when they saw Manhattan's giant blue junk.

America is full of angry, humorless people who truly believe that Jesus's condemnation awaits in every crotch.

Bwahahahaha

I'm so gonna see this

Wintermute6: I'm not surprised considering I saw some people bring a young boy into Watchmen, not bat an eye at Comedian shooting a pregnant woman in the face, but then walk out when they saw Manhattan's giant blue junk.

Blue penis aside, shooting the pregnant woman was fine, but imagine the outrage if the Comedian had made her get an abortion.

HotLonelyTeenageGirl: America is full of angry, humorless people who truly believe that Jesus's condemnation awaits in every crotch.

No, America is the kind of filthy, sweaty, sex-obsessed repressed mentality that ruled Victorian England. Those farkers would shuck clothing as soon as the doors closed.

coyote71: Blue penis aside, shooting the pregnant woman was fine, but imagine the outrage if the Comedian had made her get an abortion.

He should've just winked at the camera, yelled out "FALCON PUNCH!", then let nature take it's course.

Since I learned about AstroGlide, disembowelment and limb tearing have decreased dramatically..

Yes, because the MPAA has never given a film an NC-17 because of straight sex, it must be an attack on the gay.

Everybody rambles on about the blue penis in Watchmen. I thought it was done in such a subtle way it was hardly noticeable. Did I miss some scene where they did an unnecessary closeup?

Spanky_McFarksalot: Yes, because the MPAA has never given a film an NC-17 because of straight sex, it must be an attack on the gay teh ghey.

FTFY.

/Or maybe you meant there is only one gay person.

ArthGuinness: Everybody rambles on about the blue penis in Watchmen. I thought it was done in such a subtle way it was hardly noticeable. Did I miss some scene where they did an unnecessary closeup?

I think they're talking about the trampoline scene.

ArthGuinness: Everybody rambles on about the blue penis in Watchmen. I thought it was done in such a subtle way it was hardly noticeable. Did I miss some scene where they did an unnecessary closeup?

You must have missed the part where he swirled it around like a fan to deflect the incoming enemy bullets.

You know, I would say that the MPAA wasn't looking at this the right way, but since almost every comment on the Watchmen movie was "OMG, BLUE PENIS!1!", maybe they know society just can't handle it.

ArthGuinness: Everybody rambles on about the blue penis in Watchmen. I thought it was done in such a subtle way it was hardly noticeable. Did I miss some scene where they did an unnecessary closeup?

Nope, you just encountered the Fark latent homosexuality exhibited by so many of its closeted members.

ArthGuinness: Everybody rambles on about the blue penis in Watchmen. I thought it was done in such a subtle way it was hardly noticeable. Did I miss some scene where they did an unnecessary closeup?

NO, you're just able to handle having a penis on the screen without becoming distracted by it.

ArthGuinness: Everybody rambles on about the blue penis in Watchmen. I thought it was done in such a subtle way it was hardly noticeable. Did I miss some scene where they did an unnecessary closeup?

The only time I think it was noticeable was near the end as he was walking down some stairs it had gained a bit of swagger.

ArthGuinness: Everybody rambles on about the blue penis in Watchmen. I thought it was done in such a subtle way it was hardly noticeable. Did I miss some scene where they did an unnecessary closeup?

Maybe you're so used to penises in your face that you just didn't notice it.

Sooner01: ArthGuinness: Everybody rambles on about the blue penis in Watchmen. I thought it was done in such a subtle way it was hardly noticeable. Did I miss some scene where they did an unnecessary closeup?

I think they're talking about the trampoline scene.

Sh*t I forgot about that. That looked like it hurt. Surely it would have resulted in blue balls if he didn't already have them.

ArthGuinness: Everybody rambles on about the blue penis in Watchmen. I thought it was done in such a subtle way it was hardly noticeable. Did I miss some scene where they did an unnecessary closeup?

Since nobody replied to this, I thought I'd just say yep, I agree.

King Something: Well, duh. Everyone knows that sex (even if it is only implied) and nudity (even partial nudity) are evil. That, plus foul language, is what's really tearing our nation apart at the seams and hurting our most precious recourse - the children.

I'd rant on, but I have a Saw marathon to attend in about 26 minutes. Fun for the whole family!

Not exactly true. Like the article states, tits, pussy, and ass are fine and modern lesbianism is fine, but cock has to be very limited(surprised Color of Night was R with the shots of Willis-dong on top of the pre-lipstick lesbian girl-girl action and sexual mindfark shiat).

King Something: Well, duh. Everyone knows that sex (even if it is only implied) and nudity (even partial nudity) are evil. That, plus foul language, is what's really tearing our nation apart at the seams and hurting our most precious recourse - the children.

I'd rant on, but I have a Saw marathon to attend in about 26 minutes. Fun for the whole family!

You might have a little bit of a point, but how many movies come out each year with long heterosexual sex scenes? And how many of those movies get slapped with an NC-17? See my point. Don't get me wrong. A naked Malin Ackerman was something beautiful to behold in Watchmen. But I just don't buy the whole "MPAA has something against sex" argument. I mean, they DO have something against sex, especially as opposed to violence, but they seem to get a little crazier about it when it's gay sex.

Caeldan: ArthGuinness: Everybody rambles on about the blue penis in Watchmen. I thought it was done in such a subtle way it was hardly noticeable. Did I miss some scene where they did an unnecessary closeup?

The only time I think it was noticeable was near the end as he was walking down some stairs it had gained a bit of swagger.

Did he just wash himself with Old Spice?

coyote71: Wintermute6: I'm not surprised considering I saw some people bring a young boy into Watchmen, not bat an eye at Comedian shooting a pregnant woman in the face, but then walk out when they saw Manhattan's giant blue junk.

Blue penis aside, shooting the pregnant woman was fine, but imagine the outrage if the Comedian had made her get an abortion.

What is truly sad about the state of our society is that, to some that is a joke, but I find what you said perfectly plausible.

I think a lot of these kinds of films use the "you don't know for sure unless you try" philosophy because the ratings are so secret so they put everything that they think even has a shred of hope of getting passed by the raters and then will pull whatever got the NC-17 rating.

iaazathot: Nope, you just encountered the Fark latent open militant homosexuality exhibited by so many of itscloseted members

/fixed

What's the difference between R and NC-17 anyway? They check ID at every movie theater I go to so you have to be 17 to get into both and I rarely ever see parents taking kids to these things. Bruno would probably be fine (probably get even more publicity) with an NC17 after the success of Borat.

assegai: What's the difference between R and NC-17 anyway? They check ID at every movie theater I go to so you have to be 17 to get into both and I rarely ever see parents taking kids to these things. Bruno would probably be fine (probably get even more publicity) with an NC17 after the success of Borat.

iirc, many of the major theater companies refuse to carry nc-17 movies. it would make distribution a biatch.

assegai: What's the difference between R and NC-17 anyway? They check ID at every movie theater I go to so you have to be 17 to get into both and I rarely ever see parents taking kids to these things. Bruno would probably be fine (probably get even more publicity) with an NC17 after the success of Borat.

Many large chains won't even show NC-17 movies, so they typically get relegated to the small independent theaters where nobody notices them.

I don't pay attention to ratings anymore.

They don't do what they originally were intended for.

G movies are still mostly the same.

PG movies have swearing in them.

PG-13 movies are essentially R movies now just without excessive searing, sex or gore. Taken is one of the most violent movies I've seen recently and it was PG-13. Zack and Miri just had lots of tits and dick/fart sex jokes yet it was rated R.

R... no one makes good R movies anymore unless they are raunchy comedies or horror flicks. Watchmen was the closest good R movie I've seen in awhile.

At least with an NC-17 tag I know I won't have to deal with people bringing their kids to the movie and there won't be stupid farking teenagers in there.

His shtick wore out half way through the "Borat" movie. Butt still, there's plenty of R rated buttsex in previous movies. "Deliverance" and "Pulp Fiction" come to mind, no pun intended.

assegai: What's the difference between R and NC-17 anyway? They check ID at every movie theater I go to so you have to be 17 to get into both and I rarely ever see parents taking kids to these things. Bruno would probably be fine (probably get even more publicity) with an NC17 after the success of Borat.

The problem comes from the fact that supposedly NC-17 rated pictures don't get distributed as much as R's. Similarly R rated pictures don't get distributed as widely as PG-13's and under. While I think that most film makers wouldn't mind as much, the studio heads that finance the movies, and are interested in making their money back, want any given movie to have as wide a release as possible, so as to rake in more dough.

matt2891: coyote71: Wintermute6: I'm not surprised considering I saw some people bring a young boy into Watchmen, not bat an eye at Comedian shooting a pregnant woman in the face, but then walk out when they saw Manhattan's giant blue junk.

Blue penis aside, shooting the pregnant woman was fine, but imagine the outrage if the Comedian had made her get an abortion.

What is truly sad about the state of our society is that, to some that is a joke, but I find what you said perfectly plausible.

God, it's true.

TheHighlandHowler: Rent: This Film Is Not Yet Rated
It explains a lot about the MPAA subjectivity

With all that being true, many directors, I think, push the envelope to get free publicity and to ultimately sell the unrated DVD.

Excellent, excellent movie.

assegai: What's the difference between R and NC-17 anyway? They check ID at every movie theater I go to so you have to be 17 to get into both and I rarely ever see parents taking kids to these things. Bruno would probably be fine (probably get even more publicity) with an NC17 after the success of Borat.

NC-17 means you can't get in unless you're 17 PERIOD.

Whereas R means if your parent is there you can get it if you're under 17.

Yes that means 5 year olds can go see the Departed and Watchmen and No Country For Old men.

I saw a couple bring a 1 year old into Hostel.

The Hills Have Eyes. Last House on the Left.

Both have gratuitous heterosexual rape scenes and both got the R rating.

Show consensual male-male sex, even if simulated and in a humorous fashion? That's an NC-17in'

assegai: What's the difference between R and NC-17 anyway? They check ID at every movie theater I go to so you have to be 17 to get into both and I rarely ever see parents taking kids to these things. Bruno would probably be fine (probably get even more publicity) with an NC17 after the success of Borat.

Nothing really, it's just viewed as almost p0rn. Doesn't mean it is. R can still have sex, violence, blah blah blah...but NC-17 has just enough for them to go well that can't be R.

/that and maybe places in Jesusland won't screen a NC-17

But his humour is only understandable to giggly twelve year olds - he won't have an audience to play to!

/hates SBC, can you tell?

While I think this country needs to lighten up on sexual content, I disagree with

Meanwhile the gratuitous tits of a movie not trying to say anything at all except "Straight men! Whoo!" like the abysmal College sail comfortably under the radar. Boys will be boys, not do them.

merely for the reason that breasts are not "genitalia" and thus cannot be considered on par with penii. If movies were showing vaginas all over the place (I'd go to the movies more often, for one) and were still getting R ratings, but movies showing cock were getting NC-17 ratings, I'd see this point. Which is not the case. So shut it, nancy.

tedbundee: While I think this country needs to lighten up on sexual content, I disagree with

Meanwhile the gratuitous tits of a movie not trying to say anything at all except "Straight men! Whoo!" like the abysmal College sail comfortably under the radar. Boys will be boys, not do them.

merely for the reason that breasts are not "genitalia" and thus cannot be considered on par with penii. If movies were showing vaginas all over the place (I'd go to the movies more often, for one) and were still getting R ratings, but movies showing cock were getting NC-17 ratings, I'd see this point. Which is not the case. So shut it, nancy.

So, is Bruno showing full frontal male nudity? If not, then his point still stands. Also, didn't Forgetting Sarah Marshall not have at least a few seconds of full frontal male nudity and still manage to snag an R rating?

tedbundee: While I think this country needs to lighten up on sexual content, I disagree with

Meanwhile the gratuitous tits of a movie not trying to say anything at all except "Straight men! Whoo!" like the abysmal College sail comfortably under the radar. Boys will be boys, not do them.

merely for the reason that breasts are not "genitalia" and thus cannot be considered on par with penii. If movies were showing vaginas all over the place (I'd go to the movies more often, for one) and were still getting R ratings, but movies showing cock were getting NC-17 ratings, I'd see this point. Which is not the case. So shut it, nancy.

this

matt2891:
Also, didn't Forgetting Sarah Marshall not have at least a few seconds of full frontal male nudity and still manage to snag an R rating?

Sarah Marshall had some very long shots of the main dude's junk. Walk Hard also had some very in your face male nudity.

The MPAA hasn't made sense in a long while. Check out This Film Not Yet Rated for all the gory details, which delves deeply into the farce of the current ratings system.