More F-bombs than you can shake a stick at!

You know how low-budget indie productions (especially those being made by first-timers) have a reputation for F-bombs galore? I think I have one possible explanation for that, and a warning for others to heed.

I almost put this in the lobby, because this is mostly just a humorous way to laugh at my own foibles, but I chose to put it in "On the Set", because maybe others might learn from my mistake.

Okay, so when I was writing this beast, I intentionally kept F-bombs to a reasonable minimum, writing them into scenes only when I felt the character would truly find that the best word to use. Though I definitely wrote an R-rated movie, I made a point of not letting the curse-words get gratuitous.

Here's where things went askew. I fashion myself a director, not really a screenwriter. As a strong-point, it seems I have a knack for writing natural-sounding dialogue (or so I've been told). However, it's only natural-sounding in the flow of the conversation. As far as specific vocabulary is concerned, pretty much all of my characters sounded exactly the same (which is to say that they all sound like me).

Going into the shoot, I was aware of this problem, so the natural fix was to ask the actors to paraphrase things. Feel free to rewrite the dialogue; capture the essense, the main points, but put it in language that is more natural to you. On one hand, this worked exquisitely. On the other hand, F-bomb alert!

It's not that my actors are just constantly dropping F-bombs; they talk the same as most other people I hang out with. However, when you're shooting just one short conversation at a time, or even just one bit of a conversation, it's easy for one F-bomb to slip it's way in, going un-noticed. Only when the entire scene is edited together does it become appearant just how many of them there are.

And WOW, there are lots of them in "Antihero". I think we've set a record. :lol:

I'm capable of laughing at this, cuz I don't think it ruins the movie, but yeah, I would defintely keep a closer eye on this next time. Keep 'em to a minimum, kids. They don't just lose their effectiveness, but can be a little distracting.
 
From the MPAA? :weird:

That's far less than my experience. Go for the gold. :)

Well, I didn't get my infro straight from the MPAA, so maybe my source is wrong, but I'm assuming EW did their research. How much did you pay?

I thought I read somewhere that the fee for rating is dependent on the budget of the film. That's good for me.
 
Honestly, how many of you even care about the rating system in regards to your film? Is it really important it gets rated? I can safely say that the majority of everyone here doesn't have a film in wide distribution, nor are they seeing national theatrical releases. I don't mean that as an insult...I'm just saying most are micro-budget works with limited eyes seeing them.

I think it's only important when you know for a fact that your film will be on the level to get potential television time or major national release. If you are an indie filmmaker, and your film is going to see a limited local release and will be self-distributed...don't even bother with the MPAA.

How many adults who think to watch your movie are really looking at the rating?
 
As Michael said, only reasoon to get it rated is for theatrical release (if you are expecting to have one). Used to be some video stores wouldn't carry unrated, but the few that still exist now mostly do I think.
 
You can still have a private theatrical release in the UK without a rating. You can also get away with a public release without a rating if you contact the local council and agree it with the cinema in question.

To be honest I would imagine it's much the same in the US, in that there are plenty of ways of getting round the ratings requirement on a theatrical release.
 
Wait, so film makers have to pay the government to rate their movies? What the hell?

The MPAA is not the government. It is a private organization. There is no legal requirement to have your film rated; it's 100% voluntary...

HOWEVER, if you're looking at a theatrical release, the vast majority of theatrical venues will not screen an unrated film. On video, some of the largest non-theatrical renters/sellers (Blockbuster, Wal-Mart) sometimes have issues with unrated films.

It really isn't a problem for a low-budget indie unless it breaks big, in which case it still isn't a problem because you'll definitely have the bucks to secure an MPAA rating.
 
Yeah, looks like that article I read was either misleading, inaccurate, or I just misunderstood it. I downloaded the official forms from the MPAA -- least expensive fee is $3,000. Laaaaame.
 
Yep, as 2001 one said, the issue is many (most) theatres won't show your film if it's unrated. Your local indy/arthouse theatre sure. The local Regal, Carmike, etc... nope, most won't show NC-17 or unrated. They don't want to get picketed by the local church of whatever.
 
The MPAA is not the government. It is a private organization. There is no legal requirement to have your film rated; it's 100% voluntary...

HOWEVER, if you're looking at a theatrical release, the vast majority of theatrical venues will not screen an unrated film. On video, some of the largest non-theatrical renters/sellers (Blockbuster, Wal-Mart) sometimes have issues with unrated films.

It really isn't a problem for a low-budget indie unless it breaks big, in which case it still isn't a problem because you'll definitely have the bucks to secure an MPAA rating.

Ooh. In Australia the ACB is run by the government. I don't know if it's voluntary here as well or what. Either way, that's stupid.
 
Yep. ABC is the Australian Broadcasting Corporation and the ACB is the Australian Classification Board. Not really relevant to a discussion about American movies, but I was just surprised. I shall stop leading things off topic now lol
 
Either way, that's stupid.

Do you mean that charging a fee to rate a film is stupid?

On the surface it might seem so. However, you have to realize that the MPAA was proposed and organized by the studios themselves as an alternative to government censorship, which was pretty strict back in the day. Since it was formed, there have been a number of concerns raised regarding double standards and conservatism on the part of the ratings board, but all in all the system has worked reasonably well and has defrayed the need for yet another government bureaucracy, which can be a contentious issue in this country.
 
Yeah, having to pay is stupid. But hey, I'm not a film maker, so my opinion doesn't really mean anything :)

Didn't expect to see you round here... :P

I'm not a filmmaker either (yet) but I can sure as hell get mad if I felt it was a lot. To be honest I think it's a practical issue and certainly in the UK they do a pretty efficient job of it. But still, would be nice...

And I think our opinions mean something and you can't take that away from me, not now, not ever. Not for eternity. What we do in life echoes in eternity. Echoes are just sound returning home. Home is where the heart is. Opinions are the heart of us.
 
Back
Top