MovieChat Forums > El infierno (2010) Discussion > NC-17 Scenes?

NC-17 Scenes?

posted 12 years ago by sqrrlface
10 replies | jump to latest

Which scenes got it the rating? It was rated NC-17 for "some graphic violence and explicit sexual content". Well the MPAA hates doggystyle so that explains the explicit sexual content but some graphic violence? I read in the parents guide of a dog eating someones hand and a scene in which someones head is blown off but I did not see those scenes in the film. The only scene I can think of that even comes remotely close to being "NC-17 material" is the scene which the guy has his tongue cut off, hands cut off with a chainsaw, and then shot in the head! And that sounds a lot less worse than in the film.

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] tonyp3101 11 years ago

It had to be the scene you mentioned; that was the most graphic and violent in the movie. I didn't even think twice about the sex scenes, they were not any more explicit than most R-rated films out today but the chainsaw...that was just sick (even though realistic, I'm sure).

[–] thousand_yard_stare 11 years ago

It was a nasty scene and I don't have a problem with it being restricted to adults, but I've seen much worse in R-rated films. If you're a parent, you can take a ten-year-old (or younger) to Hostel: Part II, but you can't take a seventeen-year-old to this. Doesn't make sense. The realistic nature of the scene and setting is probably what bothered the MPAA. However, it does not come close to the reality of narco violence, which is worlds beyond "NC-17".

As for the sex scenes, they seemed pretty tame to me but the MPAA did mention "explicit sexual content" so presumably that factored into their decision. The first scene went on for a long time and you saw them change positions with no camera cuts, which may be a no-no with the MPAA.

I'd like to see the distributor appeal for an R if this ever goes out in theaters. I doubt they would have too much trouble getting it. Great movie.

[–] hoyo-mont 9 years ago

MPAA hates doggystyle

[–] ucfmatt 9 years ago

Although the chainsaw torture scene was highly disturbing I don't think that was enough to warrant the NC-17. I'm guessing it was the sex which was considerably more graphic than your typical R-rated love scene. If a realistic sex scene has more than a few thrusts it can earn an NC-17. The scene in this movie went on for awhile.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ajeleth-romanov 9 years ago

Well in Mexico a "C" rating means no one under 18 can see it so I would say it is equivalent to the NC-17 in the U.S.

[–] duzzyfunlop84 9 years ago

Gimme a break. The NC-17 rating is utter nonsense.

Sure there is violence. But a movie like Reservoir Dogs gets away with an R rating, you're damn right the NC-17 on this is crap. And the sex lol...let's just say your average teen comedy has WAY more sex than this.

[–] darythg 9 years ago

I find it disturbing that Sex scenes has more impact on the NC17 rating than graphic violence. What exactly do we want to teach people? That inflicting pain is better that pleasure?

[–] willgld785 8 years ago

Just finished watching it and there is absolutely nothing in it that warrants the rating. Nothing was explicit at all, especially the short sex scene, which was no more graphic than what you see on cable. I can't even figure out why this got a rating, since I don't believe it was ever released in theaters here.