It’s always an interesting conversation when one talks about nudity and sex and it’s relationship to “art”. Sometimes it is art… and sometimes it’s just smut that producers slap the “art” label on to pretend it’s credible. So which one is “9 Songs“? I don’t know, I haven’t seen it. But I guess it was “Artful” enough to convince the British Film Board to ok it’s release in theaters. The good folks over at Artistic Delusions brought this to my attention:
The British Board of Film Classification has taken a very bold and positive step in the classification of cinema by allowing Michael Winterbottom’s new film 9 Songs to be released in cinemas with an R rating, without any cuts. They said that sexually explicit images can be screened to those over 18 if they are “exceptionally justified by context.” “The Board has concluded in this case that adults should be free to choose whether or not to see the film.”
To be honest, after reading the synopsis, I don’t think the movie even looks all that interesting:
9 Songs takes place in London in the autumn of 2003. Lisa is an American, studying in London for a year. Matt, a glaciologist, meets her at a rock concert at the Brixton Academy and falls in love with her. The film follows their domestic and physical relationship and includes music from the concerts they go to together: Black Rebel Morotcycle Club, The Von Blondies, Elbow, Primal Scream, The Dandy Warhols, Super Furry Animals, Franz Ferdinand, Michael Nyman. At Christmas, Lisa leaves London and returns to America.
Excuse while I yawn, but this sound dreadfully boring. All this “controversy” about the nudity and sex is probably the only thing that’ll get ANYONE to see it. Still, it’s interesting to see how people are responding to it.
