MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Penis, Penis, Whittling, Penis/Pelvic Mound, Penis?

Colin Farrell’s frontal nudity is cut out of A Home At The End Of The World completely because it’s just too distracting.

Ewan McGregor’s frontal nudity gets an NC-17 in Young Adam.

Two puppets with no genitalia get an NC-17 in Team America.

A middle-aged couple – again, full frontal – gets an NC-17 in A Dirty Shame .

Peter Sarsgaard has two frontal nudity shots but gets an R in Kinsey.

… poor peter ..

Be Sociable, Share!

40 Responses to “Penis, Penis, Whittling, Penis/Pelvic Mound, Penis?”

  1. thedoom says:

    The MPAA needs to make up their goddamn minds. And what’s the story behind Team America? Are Parker and Stone cutting scenes yet or are they appealing for an R?

  2. Mel says:

    Honestly….that’s exactly what I thought after the screening. poor….poor….peter. But it wasn’t just that as well, this movie was about “not just the act of sex” and I was confused how this could be R and nothing higher (based on some of the movies you mentioned in your post that did receive more “adult ratings”).

  3. BrotherhoodOfSteel says:

    The bloody MPAA just cant love the penis. Why must
    they FEAR the penis? Shocking. Just as shocking
    as rich white people’s reactions to the debate.
    Who knew they had such a HARD-ON for old white
    males in authority. Leaving me to wonder if the
    MPAA would appreciate older penises over young ones?
    Who knows? Whatever the case, Peter might be a
    grower not a shower. For his sake; let us hope so.

  4. bicycle bob says:

    They must either love his cock or think hes hungout like a 12 yr old. (or Steel)

  5. BrotherhoodOfSteel says:

    Bob, did someone forgot they participated in the
    Howard Stern “SMALL PENIS CONTEST?” Apparently
    they did, but that’s okay Bob.
    You just got to love a debate where all the pundents
    think that Cheney won, but his own lies have overshadowed
    the debate. HA HA HA HA HA!
    I love this country! Liar Liar Pants On Fire, Look
    Around, and Flail Even Harder…

  6. bicycle bob says:

    anyone that defends himself that much obviously has teeny penis issues
    its ok, steel. be yourself
    ask peter sarsgard

  7. BrotherhoodOfSteel says:

    Do you think I would be this brazen if I suffered
    from your predicament Bob? I dont think so.
    But good come back nonetheless.

  8. bicycle bob9 says:

    its ok, steel. u will get over ur short comings. i stress short

  9. BrotherhoodOfSteel says:

    Bob I never knew how guys with small pricks acted but thanks to your responses I now know that you guys are a bunch of mean angry republican bastards!
    ZING!

  10. bicycle bob says:

    they act like u. defensive and biting and a bit sad. sorry fella

  11. BrotherhoodOfSteel says:

    Bob, unlike the previous response, that comeback
    rather lacking in most departments.
    As Satine once said before she died of TB; “It
    all works out in the end.”
    You figure that one out chuckles.

  12. Mark says:

    You do seem really obsessed with Bike Man. Maybe its the small penis infatuation.

  13. BrotherhoodOfSteel says:

    Mark, just to let you know; It’s impossible to follow
    a man having a conversation with himself. Not to
    mention a man having very little reading comprehension.
    Come man; it’s clear whose who in this debate.
    Egads man. Egads.

  14. bicycle bob says:

    he is obsessed with his small weenie. its not made of “steel”

  15. BrotherhoodOfSteel says:

    I think we have ran this one into the ground.
    Shall we carry on?

  16. Mark says:

    I guess any guy that goes on and on over his small penis comment and names himself “Steel” will neve rget over it.

  17. BrotherhoodOfSteel says:

    Mark, glad to know that conversation with yourself
    continues to go on.

  18. Mark says:

    I feel the same way. Do you ever post anything worthwhile besides defending your small penis?

  19. BrotherhoodOfSteel says:

    Mark, again, what are you talking about? Do you
    ever post anything worthwhile? Where do these
    whacky statements of yours come from?

  20. bicycle bob says:

    mark no worries. hes a complete jackass with about as much views and depth as a dana carvey movie

  21. BrotherhoodOfSteel says:

    Bob, I do believe the same can be said for you
    as well as Mark. Except, Dana Carvey in Opportunity
    Knocks does not quite suck. But you Bob, you and Mark
    are the equivalent of a Jim Belushi movie.
    Oh, you thought you could win. How quaint.

  22. Mark says:

    Bobby, let it go. We all know Steel is trying to make up for the fact that he has small junk. Its obvious to us all. The more he defends himself the sadder it is.

  23. BrotherhoodOfSteel says:

    You two are easily the biggest bunch of dumbass
    I have come across on the internet outside of
    Chris Ryall. The sheer lack of grasping a damn
    point, really makes me wonder where on earth you
    two received a bloody education?
    Were you raised by wolves? Poor reading comprehension
    having wolves?
    Whatever the point; this must stop, because Poland
    really does not need this triffling shit all over
    this blog.
    So let’s all agree to disagree, and move the bloody
    hell on. Oy to the vey, indeed.

  24. bicycle bob says:

    so why u still complaining about ur small dick?
    u got a complex
    ur the kid who got picked on every lunch time weren’t u?

  25. BrotherhoodOfSteel says:

    Bob, you were the dumbass who all the teachers
    hoovered to due to his lack of any clear and consistant
    spelling. Listen, if you cant take the time to
    spell at ‘YOU’, then you really are one special
    kind of lazy bastard.
    You are also very dumb. War on Terror? Ha.
    I thought we were busy with all those other
    WAR ONs that went no where and did nothing.
    To think; Mark insults my posting when his best
    buddy has the spelling ability of a very SPECIAl
    Republican.
    You two, easily, need to try harder, or just shut
    up, and move on. If not I will keep on slapping
    you both down as if my name were Sam Madison.

  26. Mark says:

    Again he cannot get over his small pee wee dong. Maybe thats why you named yourself “Steel”. Did some guy make a comment to you and you have been unsure of yourself ever since? Seems like you have some issues. Talk to us.

  27. BrotherhoodOfSteel says:

    If only I had a small penis, then maybe I would
    be a scared white male Republican! HOO AH!
    Or…
    If I did have a small penis. It would be harder
    to hide these TWO HUGE BALLS! ZING!!!!!!!!
    Finally…
    Mark and Bob: Proud owners of two manginas!
    BALLS ON YOUR HEADS BITCHES!

  28. bicycle bob says:

    steely boy still can’t get ove rhis small piece of junk. its really unfortunate to be so lame. but what else does anyone expect from a liberal?

  29. BrotherhoodOFSteel says:

    Bob, the wolves who raised apparently made it impossibly difficult for you to understand the most basic of rudimentary reading comprehension. You dumb republican hick. Again, you must realize you are the one with the very tiny prick. Poor stupid lad. You are truly a Republican, because you are too stupid to grasp anything. I mean, anything. Now, you go ahead you big ruttin pile of stupid, and try to remember how to breate. Maybe use a straw if you using your mouth or nose seems to difficult, because you really do know how to suck.
    Bob, you make this way to easy.

  30. bicycle bob says:

    still harping on ur small penis?
    jeez
    u would think u would have got over this SMALL issue years ago
    i feel for you, scottie pippen

  31. BrotherhoodOFSteel says:

    Your lack of grasping what I mean by the Pippen/Ewing
    analogy just goes to show how out of it you are.

  32. Mark says:

    Steel has to be ten years old. Only that age group still harps on miniscule genitilia.

  33. BrotherhoodOfSteel says:

    MAKE IT STOP! MAKE IT STOP! AURGGGGGGGGHHHH!

  34. bicycle bob says:

    that what ur boyfriend says when u pleasure him?

  35. BrotherhoodOfSteel says:

    Bob, that’s just lame.
    It’s over. It’s all over.

  36. Mark says:

    Its been over for three weeks Baby Steel. You’re just obsessed with it. Time to move on or take elongate.

  37. BrotherhoodOfSteel says:

    How on earth can something be over when you are
    still talking smack? No smack, then it’s over.
    If not, then it’s not over. So let’s all be friends
    , agree to disagree, and move the hell on.
    Baby Steel, what does that even mean? Like the kids
    are going to get a Baby Huey reference in the 21st
    century you silly man.

  38. gombro says:

    This has to be the dumbest thread I’ve ever scanned through, and I’ve seen some dumb ones folks!!!!!

  39. gombro says:

    By the way, YOUNG ADAM got an NC-17 for the scene where McGregor goes down on Tilda Swinton, not for the dick shot. The dick shot in HOME AT THE END also made it into the R version. That shot was cut for reasons having nothing to do with ratings. DIRTY SHAME was NC-17 for “Pervasive Vulgarity” or something like that, not for any single image of frontal nudity. Same goes for TEAM AMERICA. By the way, you’ll remember that BAD EDUCATION is NC-17 and there’s no frontal nudity in that at all.
    This whole post started because David Poland wanted to make a cheap joke about Peter Sarsgaard’s-less-than-enormious penis. Well, you start with a sophomoric posting and you got the thread you deserved.

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon