Two LGBTQ films were slapped with R and NC-17 ratings. Critics say queer sex scenes are treated differently
When adapting the 2019 LGBTQ romantic novel Red, White & Royal Blue for the screen, Matthew Lopez was careful to circumvent an R-rating. The film has a handful of sex scenes that stop short of full-frontal nudity — there's some bare butts and, naturally, shirtless men.
But it wasn't enough. Red, White & Royal Blue was rated R, meaning people under 17 would need to be accompanied by a parent or guardian to see it.
Another recent film with LGBTQ leads, the French romantic drama Passages, received an even harsher NC-17 rating, which would restrict people under 18 from seeing the film at all, and also keep it from playing in certain theatres.
294
Comments31
Part of society’s implicit notion that LGBTQ is inherently sexual in a way that heterosexuality (or being cis) isn’t. Telling kids that some kids have A mommy and a daddy is fine, two daddies is a kink that shouldn’t be mentioned. Ok well it’s either all inherently sexual or none of it is.
Exactly!
Deviance from the norm must be exaggerated in order to be rejected, otherwise it might be mistaken for appealing by the population.
Well said.
This problem comes from gay men too. I have read a couple of times how gay men dont "announce" that they are gay, because whatever happenea in their bedroom is their business, as if being gay meant only getting dick in the bed. That's a mentality that is taught in our world.
The MPAA needs to go anyway.
Movie ratings are based off antiquated bullshit.
A system that discloses what's in the movie would be better. You see an R-rated movie and that doesn't really tell you anything about it. Is it R-rated because you see boobs one too many times? Or because someone says "Fuck" a few more times than is 'acceptable'? Or is it because two men kiss? Or is it because 3/4 of the movie is graphic torture?
If there were (for example) icons for each category of "objectionable" thing, that were color coded green / yellow / red based on how many instances of that there are / how severe it is, it would let parents make actual informed decisions about what they want their kids watching (and additionally, let adults make informed decisions about what they want to watch).
If they exposed the specific reasons for each rating, that would expose how arbitrary it all is.
At a point, it is going to be arbitrary regardless.
How long do they pan over the boob? Do you see nipple? Is man chest worse? Is military violence different from gang violence? Are drugs used or glorified?
Every question you'd ask in regards to rating a new film is entirely subjective, depending on what you view as acceptable.
Honestly this is a big one that isn't brought up enough. There's a huge difference between the drug use in, say, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, and Requiem for a Dream.
They do that for TV shows and I think it works out pretty well. Knowing that it's TV-MA because of language vs. TV-MA because of nudity or TV-MA because of violence is a big game changer for many parents.
They do expose it, they used to even show a green slide at the start of every movie with the specifics for the rating:
https://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/2018-10-10-rated-r-trailer-warning-edited-500x333.jpg
Even switching to the same rating system as US TV would be a big step up.
We have something like that in the Netherlands. It’s called “Kijkwijzer” (loosely translated as viewing guide) and has icons for sexual content, violence, drug/alcohol use, scary content, bullying/intimidation, etc. and age advisories.
PEGI already seems to do the system with showing what content there is
The ratings do disclose why they got that rating. It's a bit basic, just says things like nudity, or sexuality, but it gives you an idea:
https://www.filmratings.com/Search?filmTitle=oppenheimer&x=0&y=0
Abolish ratings boards
I think there is a reasonable argument for "appropriate for young children," "appropriate for older children" and "appropriate for adults" as ratings. They don't have to be adhered to strictly or anything, but having had a young child, knowing if a film is G or PG can make a difference, not to mention PG or R.
It's all well and good until the rating board is populated with pearl-clutching prudes who think that LGBT is inherently adult content.
I'm not saying it's a perfect solution and I agree with you, I'm just saying we need a way for parents to know if their 6-year-old is going to be seeing people fucking and chopping each other's heads off before showing them to the movie.
Films should be thought provoking at times. "Whats that daddy/mommy?" Should often be a question asked after the movie ends. But it's gotta be in doses, you can't show a 6y/o kid all of the reasons a film is rated R all at once and expect them to process it enough to ask questions
they mention a long track record of harsher treatment of queer content but I wish they linked to that data or mentioned a couple comparisons for context.
A quick search finds this ... which states
And this from 2014
edit to add link
If someone has institutional access to the research article linked pls share the info!
Who needs institutional access?
Thank you for this. :)
Yeah, the MPAA is a bunch of fundies.
There's guidelines, and according to the text above, the first movie followed them.
But someone has to apply the guidelines, and also what's fine or not changes over time. Something being rated R is ultimately an opinion.
It'd be cool if there were actual standards, or at least an appeals process so a movie isn't limited to just the first review if they feel it's not accurate.
Films can be resubmitted, the South Park movie was submitted 6 times before the rating was dropped from NC-17 to R.
Oh, cool. Good to know.
There's a whole film about how arbitrary the MPAA rulings are called This Film Is Not Yet Rated, check it out
Ya, theyll get more views! I cant even count how many times ive seen Blue Is The Warmest Color.