
The Weinstein Company next month will challenge the preliminary NC-17 rating that the MPAA slapped on Blue Valentine, the Derek Cianfrance-directed drama that is a potential Oscar contender for performances by Michelle Williams and Ryan Gosling. An appeal was expected since Deadline broke the news that the film was dealt a rating that places restrictions on its theatrical run and its ancillary life as well. The hearing will be held in November, and Harvey Weinstein will be represented by attorneys Alan R. Friedman of Kattin Muchin and David Boies of Boies, Schiller & Flexner. The film will be platformed in December to qualify for Oscar consideration.
This morning, Harvey Weinstein issued this statement: “We want to express our deepest gratitude to our colleagues in the industry and in the media for their recent outpouring of support for Derek Cianfrance’s Blue Valentine after the film surprisingly received an NC-17 rating from the MPAA. We are taking every possible step to contest the MPAA’s decision. We respect the work of the MPAA and we hope, after having a chance to sit down with them, they will see that our appeal is reasonable, and the film, which is an honest and personal portrait of a relationship, would be significantly harmed by such a rating.”
Weinstein has made a career of exploiting the taboo rating on films to get attention for them, but the rating given Blue Valentine was a surprise to many who’ve seen it. The film has impressed in festival runs that began at Sundance last January (it was acquired by Weinstein shortly after), followed by Cannes and then Toronto. Cianfrance’s drama tracks through flashbacks the slow corrosion of the relationship between a young couple, and the rating was given for a drunken attempt at sex between the married couple after they head off for a night in a hotel in an attempt to repair their relationship. The scene is certainly painful to watch, but I’ve seen much worse get an R rating. At the hearing, Friedman will likely be accompanied by Cianfrance or Gosling. They get 15 minutes to plead their case, and they will show footage from several films that had comparable scenes and got the R rating.
An MPAA spokesman said they don’t comment until a rating is accepted, but he noted that “every film is screened by a group of what the majority of American parents would rate the film.”
If they are unsuccessful with the appeal, the filmmakers can either edit the scene and resubmit, or release unrated. Per the MPAA, the appeal is heard by a board composed of distributors, exhibitors and industry people who’ll either uphold or overturn.
MPAA Gives Ryan Gosling-Michelle Williams Drama ‘Blue Valentine’ Dreaded NC-17


I thought you weren’t allowed to show footage of other films in such appeal proceedings… has that changed or am I just mistaken?
I hope it does not suffer the same fate as the film, L.I.E. That film was given an NC 17 rating, (call it as it is, an X rating), and it kept if from many theater chains. The distributor Lot 47 embraced the rating and used it to get press, etc… A very smart move, but not enough for a big, past a 1000 or so screen release. Maybe that’s enough for the Weinsteins. The MPAA is the anti christ!
The ‘problem’ sex scene is a bore. So is the pic.
Harvey is a genius. Releasing the news about the NC17 and the trailer simultaneously. Garnering all this attention for a solid if uninspired drama. It’s a nice reminder that old school hustling still has a place in the industry
The NC17 rating shouldn’t exist.
An MPAA spokesman said they don’t comment until a rating is accepted, but he noted that “every film is screened by a group of what the majority of American parents would rate the film.”
Anyone who’s seen “This Film Is Not Yet Rated” is more than aware of what an utter line of sh*t that is…
Honestly….
So why hasn’t anyone mentioned the reason for the rating? Is it because Gosling goes down on Williams and makes her squirm with pleasure? Or is it because of the violence in the film?.. oh ya, I forgot, we are allowed non-stop brutal violence but just no natural sex as obviously sex is much more dangerous then a gun shot to the head. America needs to evolve and come out of the closet when it comes to their ratings systems, which only reflect it’s society in general.
This is a beautiful and honest film and in now way should the film be tainted by the mpaa’s incoherent and incompetent rating system .
Seriously, David Boies? The guy who argued Bush v Gore and against Proposition 8 enforcement? It comes to this against the MPAA?
The brothers best win.
Don’t forget, he also defended Napster, and I don’t have to tell you how that turned out for Shawn Fanning.
As a matter of fact, the fall-out from THIS FILM HAS NOT YET BEEN RATED did cause the MPAA to re-evaluate its stance on comparisons, and they are now permitted within reason.
That said, I too wish Harvey would embrace the NC-17. The stigma will never be washed away until a quality film goes out with it, and VALENTINE doesn’t seem like the type of picture that would go to 3000 screens anyway.
Who can wash away the stigma that is Harvey du Vin?
How is it in this day and age when TMZ has a dude hiding in everyones trash can and bathroom is this MPAA completely anonymous? That we allow these zealots to enforce their outdated morality and derail movies that people spend their life and life savings to create..
Good point! Time to pull back the IronHollywoodCurtain
Chad,
That is such a tired argument. And it’s not true. I know it’s fun to rip on this supposed double standard in America, where we turn a blind eye to graphic violence but are terrified of our own naked bodies, and there’s always some college intellectual who gets all excited and says it comes from our puritanical roots, and well…
Bullshit.
Seriously, go tell George Romero, Rob Zombie, and Adam Green that violence gets a free pass in conservative America. As much as the Hollywood elite likes to think everyone between the coasts is a gun toting redneck, it ain’t true.
We only like violence if it’s enacted by Will Smith against an alien. The minute you make that violence ugly and real, you’re in just as much trouble as you’d be for showing a woman receiving oral sex.
Please sir, don’t lose sight of the issue here. The issue is not repressed sexuality. The issue is the censorship of American film, and it isn’t even censorship to serve anyone’s supposed moral grounds, it’s censorship for the sole purpose of rationalizing the ratings board’s existence. If they weren’t around to fuck up our most challenging movies, what purpose would they serve? To aid parents? Please.
If the R-rating is there so parents know their kids shouldn’t see the film, if it’s in place so there are only adults in the theater, why do we continue to force our filmmakers to censor their own R-rated films? Does the MPAA now think they need to shelter adult moviegoers as well?? The whole thing is really disturbing to me, and I hate to see the issue simplified as far as saying, “oh, but if it were a gunshot to the head nobody’d care, not in George Bush land!” Don’t be a tool.
WHEN THE HELL ARE ALL THE STUDIOS GOING TO PULL TOGETHER, QUIT SUBMITTING EVERYTHING TO THE MPAA ON GENERAL PRINCIPLES, AND COLLAPSE THE WHOLE DAMN FASCIST ENTERPRISE ONCE AND FOR ALL?
The MPAA is relevant because Hollywood allows it to be relevant. And then they bemoan it. In the past this town did a decent job of policing itself on “morality,” we don’t need a committee to do it.
This is such a tired marketing strategy that Harvey has used soooo many times in the past. He needs some new material.
There are some censorial taboos, I’ve never understood. For example, why is it that a woman can strip completely, have straight, Lesbian, or even oral sex on both men and women and it’s easy to get an “R” rating…BUT let the same studio show a man’s penis and it automatically gets an NC-17 rating. Is there ANYONE in ANY theater who has never seen a penis? Why does this offend the MPAA rating board? Two men kissing as in “Brokeback Mountain” or “Heights” and Hollywood screams “TABOO”! Yet, thousands of men can be killed and bleed from every part of the body as in the first thirty minutes of Spielberg’s, “Saving Private Ryan” and it becomes ‘art’. Can someone tell me which is more disturbing? I’d rather let my kids watch Jesse Bradford and James Marsden kiss for 15 minutes than have them see a head blown off with a grenade.
Hope this doesn’t bore you, but after 60 years in broadcasting I’ve come West to find backers for a few history-based projects that would make great films. What does an unknown producer do to bring his proposal(s) to the attention of people like Harvey Weinstein? I’ve got all my facts right – hope you have the patience.