The Entertainment Industry And What Is Deemed Risque

[Alex]

So recently the MPAA banned the Sin City poster with Eva Green on it

Spoiler

Personally I don't see what the big deal is about. Yes her breasts are partly exposed and you can (barely) make out a bit of nipple but she's not doing a sexual pose or anything.

I find this strange because you can easily find a public poster of Miley Cyrus licking a mirror/grinding on something. Or Katy Perry naked with convenient things covering parts of her body and various other pop stars doing similar things

My question is why does the entertainment industry have a lopsided, flip flop way of looking at images (especially of women) that may be deemed arousing/sexual. It seems perfectly acceptable to have a pop star (who's main audience are teenagers) partly nude, doing a sexual pose on a big board. But when a poster has a women wearing a gown with a bit of exposed breast showing for a film that is for adults that's to much??

 

[Jack-Hammer]

As with most things that are considered risqué or indecent, there's a vast degree of inconsistency. For instance, take the drinking laws in the United States. Not exactly the same thing, but I think you'll get where I'm going. By the age of 18, the federal government considered me old enough to legally engage in sexual activity, graduate from high school, hold a full time job, buy a pack of cigarettes, have a say in who I want running the country by voting and enlist in the military. So, I was old enough to legally screw, smoke, vote, work or go in the army to possibly get my ass literally blown off but I couldn't walk into a 7-11 and buy a six pack of Sam Adams or plop myself in a titty bar to watch a dancer shake her stuff. It doesn't exactly make sense when you think about it.

As a red blooded heterosexual male, I find Eva Green to be mouthwatering in that poster; as I would imagine quite a few heterosexual males would aside from myself. The first Sin City was Rated R as is this one, meaning that it's definitely not a film that's aimed towards younger audiences. I'm quite sure that quite a few under the age of 17 will see the movie due to coming with an older friend or relative. Compared to the wide array and easily accessible amount of pornography on the internet, the poster is tame as far as overt sexual imagery goes. However, that's a big reason why I personally find it sexy: the sheer quality of the robe or shirt she's wearing and the slight indentation of her right nipple is tantalizing.

I suppose that along with just about everything else, what's considered risqué to some is a typical day in the life of others. As Alex alluded to, TV censors seem to have little problem with a music video in which Miley Cyrus is sitting on top of a prop of a wrecking ball swinging back and forth without a stitch of clothing on while the camera angle she's being filmed and the position of her arms keeps you from seeing all the naughty bits. I flipped through and caught one of the episodes of the MTV show Awkward a few days ago and I was surprised when one of the characters openly said "goddamn" without being bleeped while words like shit or fuck were bleeped out. Different organizations in entertainment seem to have different perceptions as to what crosses the boundaries.

 

[klunderbunker]

I looked at the poster, drooled a bit, read the post, looked at the poster again, shook my head to get my senses back, and then noticed something that isn't discussed: the gun.

Notice that there's no criticism of the gun, or the violence in the movie but rather something you might be able to see if you look closely enough. This is a long running trend that continues to astound me: sex is completely not ok, but violence is often praised. Sin City was a violent movie but you don't hear people complain about that. You can see long shootouts, gore, murders and all sorts of violence in a variety of films, but people freaked in Titanic when a woman laid on a couch with her breasts exposed so a man can draw her because it was considered immoral and too far.

It's the bizarre state of our society: some things are considered terrible by some, but at the same time it's perfectly fine for others. Unfortunately the film board gets to determine what is ok and what isn't ok and their stance is what goes for everyone. I also find it interesting that a large gun fight is ok, but swearing while shooting isn't ok, though that's a different discussion.

In short, it's the strange set of priorities that Hollywood has, and Heaven forbid a beautiful woman gets to show off her beautiful figure, but those guns she's holding and likely shooting aren't worth discussing.

 

[#tamale]

I can understand the complaint, but you are putting entire entertainment industry under one umbrella in regards to comparing what Miley Cyrus does to the people behind Sin City.

The MPAA has mostly denied overtly sexual movie posters due to the demographics of movie goers. We as young males can look at that poster and say "awesome", but parents can look at this poster and be uncomfortable with a poster like that for their children to see next to the upcoming Pixar/Disney film. It also grants other studios the opportunity to showcase their posters without having a poster of this nature near theirs causing controversy.

As far as Miley Cyrus or Katy Perry go, they are not governed by the MPAA, but by the RIAA. What the music industry allows may not be the same as the movie industry.

The poster is hot, but if it doesn't follow the guidelines provided by the MPAA then it shouldn't be allowed.

 

[jacdnwarrior]

Eva Green is a sexy bitch. I loved the poster but let's face it it won't be in the theater chains or on billboards because kids seeing 'boobies' will adversely affect them.

This is old news. The MPAA has always had an issue with sex but not violence. Protests against women being naked, raped and/or killed in films or shows (e.g. Game of Thrones) is commonplace but no one cries when men get slaughtered left right and center in the films. Nudity in films will lead to women being ill treated, men die every day no one cares. We live in a world with stupid people making stupid decisions that affect others.

 

[Alex]

You know what KB said about the gun actually took me by surprise. I didn't even register the gun and the undertones to violence. I mean we do seem to live in a society where extreme violence is ok but nudity (or anything resembling beauty/elegance) in any form whether it be sexual or not is considered inappropriate. I think that says a lot about society

I can understand the complaint, but you are putting entire entertainment industry under one umbrella in regards to comparing what Miley Cyrus does to the people behind Sin City.

The MPAA has mostly denied overtly sexual movie posters due to the demographics of movie goers. We as young males can look at that poster and say "awesome", but parents can look at this poster and be uncomfortable with a poster like that for their children to see next to the upcoming Pixar/Disney film. It also grants other studios the opportunity to showcase their posters without having a poster of this nature near theirs causing controversy.

As far as Miley Cyrus or Katy Perry go, they are not governed by the MPAA, but by the RIAA. What the music industry allows may not be the same as the movie industry.

The poster is hot, but if it doesn't follow the guidelines provided by the MPAA then it shouldn't be allowed.

I know that the MPAA and RIAA are different but it's the general consensus of media. WWE, TNA and ROH are all different yet similar. One may do things differently to the others but at the end of the day they're all in the same medium so it makes sense to compare.

I understand how some parents would be uncomfortable at the poster but I feel we as a society need to educate our children that there are different forms of nudity. There's a difference between Kate Winslet being drawn nude in Titanic and Sasha Grey *********ing in one of her videos. Yes they're both nude but it's WHAT someone is doing that is what should be deemed inappropriate. Don't forget there are several paintings from the Renaissance with lots of nude women that were seen as perfectly fine for the time and they weren't doing anything except standing/sitting.

Back to the violence issue how many parents don't mind buying their kid a game like Gears Of War when there's a big macho man on the front with a big ass gun pointed at another character. But as soon as it's something like Bayonetta it's deemed inappropriate even though the box art doesn't show anything to overt except maybe a teasing pose (Likewise with Lollipop Chainsaw)