Watchmen Rated NC17

[Call_Me_Megatron]

Originally Posted by shadblz

you are saying the exact same thing I am saying.

here is my two cents.

What is Director's Cut?

PS. Did anyone see the CNN report from earlier regarding lowering the drinking age from 21 to 18. What is this world coming to?

As for me this is last comment i am making about this topic since the topic had been derailed.

No NC-17 for Watchmen as far as I know. But would like to see one.

The drinking age in many Canadian provinces is 19 and in Quebec it's 18. I don't see the problem with allowing a 19-year-old to drink. They can go fight a war at 18 yet can't have a drink until 21 in the USA? A little ridiculous if you ask me.

[Lord_Stewie]

Originally Posted by Call_Me_Megatron

The drinking age in many Canadian provinces is 19 and in Quebec it's 18. I don't see the problem with allowing a 19-year-old to drink. They can go fight a war at 18 yet can't have a drink until 21 in the USA? A little ridiculous if you ask me.

I have no problems with this either, and i know people who let their kids drink when there is a special occasion. I am just pointing out to other problems out there that should be taken care of first than thinking alcohol.

[Call_Me_Megatron]

Originally Posted by shadblz

I have no problems with this either, and i know people who let their kids drink when there is a special occasion. I am just pointing out to other problems out there that should be taken care of first than thinking alcohol.

Oh, OK. The way I read it was that you had some moral objection to drinking, which would be fine if you do. I was just pointing out that Canada has a lower age. Sorry for the confusion.

[ksc2303]

Originally Posted by shadblz

you are right on this. It is also a version of the film before the editing process took place, and its not the same version that the MPAA reviewed to give a rating to.

Maybe your thinking of a rough cut or workprint? Cause there is no movie before the editing process begins, just a collection of clips. Like others have said a director's cut can be anything the director decides is his preferred version of the film.

edit: you can go to mpaa.org and put in watchmen. The Director's cut is rated R.
Title: Watchmen: Director's Cut (2009)
Rating: R
Rating Reason: Rated R for strong graphic violence, sexuality, nudity and language.
Distributor: Warner Home Video
Other: Edited Version

[jw]

Originally Posted by Call_Me_Megatron

Oh, OK. The way I read it was that you had some moral objection to drinking, which would be fine if you do. I was just pointing out that Canada has a lower age. Sorry for the confusion.

I believe some european countries are like that as well

[Lord_Stewie]

Originally Posted by jwbbud

I believe some european countries are like that as well

Take the Netherlands for an example.

[sfmarine]

DC...Unrated...NC-17....NC-17 was a rating given to Showgirls lol. It was mainly for those types of movies. But ya...Watchmen is given to us in an unrated DC so it's probably as gruesome as it's going to get.

[GGX]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

\No, it doesn't. A director's cut is a version approved of by the director. Sometimes longer. Sometimes shorter.

Agreed

[Call_Me_Megatron]

Originally Posted by jwbbud

I believe some european countries are like that as well

I'm sure you're right, but I can only speak with authority on Canada (more specifically Ontario & Quebec) because I'm Canadian and am intimately aware of our drinking guidelines from when I was a teen. But I'm sure there are plenty of European nations that have drinking ages under 21.

[Canada]

Originally Posted by DMC86X

I dont think there is a difference. Still has a few sex scenes and a swinging blue wang.

1. Sex scene
1. Rape scene
and a swinging blue wang.

Should not be rated NC 17

trust me I've seen a few NC 17 films one being Crash, Watchmen should not be rated NC 17.

[adh56]

Not sure where they are getting the NC-17 rating from. I have the Director's Cut and on the back it says rated R, not even unrated.

[Call_Me_Megatron]

Originally Posted by adh56

Not sure where they are getting the NC-17 rating from. I have the Director's Cut and on the back it says rated R, not even unrated.

My guess is they are trying to dupe people into believing that they have a different cut than the one that was made available in July. That's the only reasoning I can come up with.

[Afrobean]

Originally Posted by sfmarine

DC...Unrated...NC-17....NC-17 was a rating given to Showgirls lol. It was mainly for those types of movies. But ya...Watchmen is given to us in an unrated DC so it's probably as gruesome as it's going to get.

NC17 is also sometimes given for violence and crude language. Clerks was originally rated as NC17 for language. Can't think of one for violence offhand though. It's gotta be WAY out there for violence, I think.

[Rik1138]

Originally Posted by shadblz

By not following the guidelines of a nongovernmental body such as the MPAA, then explain why is it that the law gets involved in this?. We get in trouble for that, and people lose their jobs because of this.

The _law_ doesn't get involved in this. Your theater management (or the corporate office) hire off-duty police officers to police their theaters, and test that their employees for properly following the rules set forth by the theater. You may notice, that if an employee is found letting a minor into an R-rated movie, they get in trouble _by the management_, not by the police. If it was illegal, they'd be arrested (like what would happen if a liquor store clerk sold alcohol to a minor). Since it's not a law (just the rules of the theater company and the MPAA), the officer notifies management about the problem (because that's what he's been hired to do).

Do you have cops in uniform in your theater on a regular basis? Watching for fights and such? If so, ask them if they are on duty or not. Most of the time they are not, they are sort of working freelance for the theater during their off time (this is allowed by the police department). In some areas, this extra police presence is necessary...

I'm not sure what theater you work for, but this is standard procedure for most of the major national chains (and I suspect many of the smaller chains and independents as well).

[LynxFX]

The movie ratings system is a voluntary system operated by the MPAA and the National Association of Theater Owners (NATO).

Pretty much says it all right there.

It is the same with the ESRB for games. Sadly there are people out there actually trying to make it law.

[Trogdor2010]

Originally Posted by Call_Me_Megatron

The drinking age in many Canadian provinces is 19 and in Quebec it's 18. I don't see the problem with allowing a 19-year-old to drink. They can go fight a war at 18 yet can't have a drink until 21 in the USA? A little ridiculous if you ask me.

Actually the reason that you need to be 21 to drink alcohol is that your liver isn't developed to take consumption of alcohol likely if you are under 21. By the way, many people that join a military service (army, navy, air force, marines) don't just go fight a war and even if they want, they require training that you will need to study for years. Most of the people I know from a military force are more of watching, searching, defense, not gun fights and wars like they do in most warfare video games. They are not the gun totting savages some two bit teen thinks, in fact, some 13 year old kids that play alot of shooters will more likely kill you than a disciplined U.S. soldier.

[Lord_Stewie]

Originally Posted by Trogdor2010

Actually the reason that you need to be 21 to drink alcohol is that your liver isn't developed to take consumption of alcohol likely if you are under 21. By the way, many people that join a military service (army, navy, air force, marines) don't just go fight a war and even if they want, they require training that you will need to study for years. Most of the people I know from a military force are more of watching, searching, defense, not gun fights and wars like they do in most warfare video games. They are not the gun totting savages some two bit teen thinks, in fact, some 13 year old kids that play alot of shooters will more likely kill you than a disciplined U.S. soldier.

plain and simple what megatron was saying if an 18 years old can start a war then they can drink... As far as I know 18 years can buy cigarette and that is much worse than drinking.

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by shadblz

plain and simple what megatron was saying if an 18 years old can start a war then they can drink... As far as I know 18 years can buy cigarette and that is much worse than drinking.

Cigarettes don't kill brain cells or impair your judgment though. Granted they give you lung cancer and cause addiction but they don't do the stuff to you that alcohol does.

[Lord_Stewie]

Originally Posted by Wolverine1980

Cigarettes don't kill brain cells or impair your judgment though. Granted they give you liver cancer and cause addiction but they don't do the stuff to you that alcohol does.

they don't do that, however aren't Cigs more dangerous though.

[Call_Me_Megatron]

Originally Posted by Trogdor2010

Actually the reason that you need to be 21 to drink alcohol is that your liver isn't developed to take consumption of alcohol likely if you are under 21. By the way, many people that join a military service (army, navy, air force, marines) don't just go fight a war and even if they want, they require training that you will need to study for years. Most of the people I know from a military force are more of watching, searching, defense, not gun fights and wars like they do in most warfare video games. They are not the gun totting savages some two bit teen thinks, in fact, some 13 year old kids that play alot of shooters will more likely kill you than a disciplined U.S. soldier.

Jesus pal, I was not in any way disparaging the men and women of the armed forces. I have the utmost respect for all of them. I don't know where you got the idea that I think soldiers are "gun totting savages" but if you can take that from "they can fight a war at 18 and can't drink until they are 21" more power to you. I would like to see the evidence that says "13 year old kids that play a lot of shooters are more likely to kill" than a U.S. soldier. I would suspect that data such as that does not exist since there is almost no measurable way to correlate violence in video games to violent behaviour in young males.

I would also like to see the evidence that says that the liver at 19 is too underdeveloped to handle the effects of alcohol. I have never heard anyone bring up that point, and I have met, and befriended, a lot of med & pre-med students at the university that I attend and work at. No one has ever brought this point up. Sure not all med students can know everything about everything to do with the human body, but they'd probably at least be a good starting point. So if you have a study, from a reputable person or institution, I would like to see it. If you are indeed correct then I have to question why many nations around the world, including my own, would put the welfare of its citizens at harm.