
David Schwimmer tells me that whether Millennium Entertainment is successful or not in overturning the R rating that the MPAA has given his upcoming film Trust, he will not alter the scenes that prompted the rating on a film about a family trying to deal with every parent’s nightmare: their 14-year old daughter is lured into a rendezvous by an online predator who rapes her.
The ratings board objected to a scene in which the father (Clive Owen), out of his mind with anger and a desire for revenge, plays back the attack in his mind. The images are disturbing. Schwimmer said the scene is powerful, but he was careful in how he shot it.
“There is no nudity, no overt sexuality other that what needed to be implied for a scene in the hotel room where we learn that a rape took place,” Schwimmer told me. “I think the scene was tastefully handled.”
There is profanity. While the ratings board gives leeway to scenes of violence, a couple of F-bombs is the surest way to get an R. That is something The King’s Speech director Tom Hooper discovered after a scene in which Colin Firth uses the word repeatedly to help overcome a debilitating stutter.
Like Hooper, Schwimmer said he won’t alter his film if the appeal is rejected. He feels it will rob the picture of any chance of being taken seriously by young audiences if he makes the changes the ratings board suggested. He also fears that an R rating will stop young audiences which could benefit from the lesson in the film, if they are reluctant to attend with a parent.
“The idea that Clive’s character should respond by shouting ‘Fiddlesticks’ is just not real,” Schwimmer said. “Let’s face it, kids have heard and seen it all. What I find frustrating is there are plenty of films that get PG-13 that are the so violent. There is a double standard. You can’t show nudity or hear the F-word, but you can show people being blown to bits and chopped up. Maybe a public forum will show that the ratings system needs to be updated to reflect the times. It is quite old.”
Millennium’s Avi Lerner will argue the case before the appeal’s board on December 22. He makes his appeal after the ratings board overturned an NC-17 that was given Oscar-contender Blue Valentine. Schwimmer acknowledges that nobody expects a message movie from Millennium. “I tricked them, they heard Clive Owen, Catherine Keener and Viola Davis and said yes,” Schwimmer joked. “Actually, I don’t see Trust as a message movie, it’s a drama that taps into a pressing issue that is important for young people to be able to see.”
The film hits theaters April 1.


Wow another out of touch MPAA ruling… what’s that 3 in a row: Hatchet II, Blue Valentine and Trust. Let’s hear it for the puritans trying to make a comeback. I don’t know what’s worse though: The MPAA being so fucking OLD and out of touch or the fact that theaters chains (like AMC) bow to their fucking censor happy will. (I said fuck three times in this rant… do I get an R)
appeal and it will be overturned, relax and enjoy Christmas!
Go Schwimmer. Go Hooper. And go Ebert. The rating system needs a redo.
Fight them, David! They are a bunch of out-of-touch housewives who refuse to join the 21st century. I’m sick of artists being asked to compromise their work.
I don’t understand why none of these studios has challenged the ratings system in court. What the MPAA does with such arbitrary ratings is clearly tortious interference with fair business practices, and the fact that they are essentially a for-profit entity (it costs $10,000 to get a film rated), makes them guilty of antitrust. One expensive lawsuit and the whole system either goes away or gets cleaned up with one sweep. We got rid of the Hayes office, we can do the same with the MPAA.
The MPAA is the studio’s lobbying organization and the ratings are a form of self regulation. I’m not a lawyer, but how do you file an Antitrust suit against yourself?
Why is being rated R now the kiss of death? rape is a serious issue and I’m not sure that should be rated pg-13, but i have not seen this film. I can understand the nc-17 issue, but being rated R — is not a negative or is it now?
Clive Owen still has career?
The MPAA rating system exists so the government doesn’t get involved in rating movies. It’s an industry self-rating itself. The MPAA created the high price tag as another barrier of entry for anyone who doesn’t have the cash to get a movie rated.
Studios will not let it go away and its members must be as uptight as the lowest common denominator to prevent it from be forced to by the Feds. If anything, the whole studio system is guilty of collusion.
For the majority of films where a rating doesn’t matter (how many 13-17 year olds are really going to pay money to see The King’s Speech???) most distributors would rather take the abstract ridiculousness of the MPAA than have to adhere to a concrete rubric of how many of certain words and what particular types of scenes and what parts of body parts, etc. can be shown or suggested or whatever.
And with such clearly defined standards we would have to accept as a culture that those who control the purse dictate how certain pieces of art are constructed according to the bottom line. That breast goes out and that word gets cut and on and on….
Or we could all, as Ebert suggested last week, admit that there is hardly a cultural difference between the average 13 and 17 year old these days (at least comparative to when the ratings were adopted) and stop using age as the object of fear.
I think the MPAA ratings board are a bunch of inveterate tools, but c’mon, Schwimmer is also a tool for trying to lump this in with “King’s Speech” and “Blue Valentine.”
This isn’t a stuffy monarch saying naughty words in speech therapy, it’s not a man going down on his wife — this is the rape of a fourteen year old girl, for God’s sake. I could barely even stand to type those words — and Schwimmer’s going around talking about how “tastefully” he filmed it? Dude, the word “tasteful” does not belong in any discussion about the rape of a 14 year old girl.
Schwimmer is trying to piggyback on Harvey Weinstein and the legitimate outcry over the “Blue Valentine” and “King’s Speech” ratings and get some free PR for his little movie; it’s very off-putting.
Schwimmer is afraid his important film won’t get seen? Maybe everyone could just stay home and watch the story on Law & Order SVU or one of the many other shows that already covered the same subject matter.
Why does everyone continue to perpetuate this myth that the MPAA allows violence and gore but not sex? It ain’t true! Just ask Rob Zombie, Eli Roth, Alexandre Aja, Adam Green, or George Romero. Violence and gore are only allowed in modern movies if it’s in a historical context like Private Ryan or Braveheart. Why do you think the Weinsteins chose not to even bother with a theatrical release of Inside? Not a single nipple or dirty word in the whole film, but it descends to a level of brutality that wold have had the MPAA pooping their pants. This liberal conspiracy theory of the puritanical organization afraid of their own naked bodies has to end. In reality it’s a puritanical organization afraid of EVERYTHING!
If they made it PG it may as well go on Lifetime which is where the same storyline has played out about a million times. It’s not exactly a cutting edge never-seen-before expose of a topic people aren’t aware of. The poster for the film is certainly intriguing and Clive Owen and Catherine Keener are usually good bets so I’ll see this but anyone who thinks Schwimmer didn’t know what he was getting himself into has their head up their ass. He’s been in the business long enough to know what kind of dialogue gets you an R rating. And certainly making a movie about child molestation is never an easy ride for a filmmaker. Hounddog anyone?
Dave Schwimmer still has a career?