LAEM and Child Pornography Laws

The place for all of the old Live Action Evangelion Movie threads.
NAveryW
Insect Politician
Insect Politician
User avatar
Age: 27
Posts: 5062
Joined: Dec 21, 2006

LAEM and Child Pornography Laws

Postby NAveryW » Sun May 17, 2009 4:43 pm

Let's be honest: though the law may not expressly forbid photography of nude minors, it would not be legally wise to engage in such if you don't want a drawn-out trial that may prevent you from releasing your film for several years. Therefore, the only real options for adapting NGE's source material to live action in America are:

-Outright remove all explicit nudity of the 14-year-olds
-Change the ages of the characters
-Include the nudity, but do so through prosthetics and/or CGI

If I were in charge, I'd say the nudity is important enough to spend the money making a prosthetic Rei torso for Shinji to grope and CGI nipples and vulvae for the Reiquarium, but I rather doubt most other film makers would feel the same way. From a special effects artist's perspective, it would admittedly be rather odd being told that your job is to model a 14-year-old's vagina as realistically as possible to superimpose over a slightly clothed character's groin to give the impression of nudity.

Obligatory: in before "Roman Polanski should direct LAEM!"
"Today?... hmm... today... right... Um... I'm just gonna wing it." -Guess who

Gendo'sPapa
First Ancestor
First Ancestor
User avatar
Posts: 4226
Joined: Oct 24, 2006
Location: At the Movies
Gender: Male

Postby Gendo'sPapa » Sun May 17, 2009 4:51 pm

Answers to this query that would best suit a movie studio making a $150 million Evangelion "Product", commonly referred to as a "Franchise"-

A. Age the characters up to 17,18 or older, thus making the series more appealing to people who don't want to watch "Harry Potter in Sci-Fi".

B. Remove any concept and hint of nudity in the "franchise" so as not to make anyone feel awkward.


Let's face it, in animation it's cool to put hotties in skin tight outfits like plug suits and say they're 14. It's animation. In real life you put someone in front of a camera, put them in a skin tight suit and tell people they're 14 and you're only going to unnerve your audience...and lose profit.

Expect MANY changes to the characters beyond the superficial if these films happen.

NemZ
Token Misanthrope
Token Misanthrope
User avatar
Posts: 15804
Joined: Jun 28, 2008
Location: St. Louis
Gender: Male

Postby NemZ » Sun May 17, 2009 4:53 pm

Or keep the nudity but stage the shots so as to prevent the nudity from becoming explicit.
Rest In Peace ~ 1978 - 2017
"I'd consider myself a realist, alright? but in philosophical terms I'm what's called a pessimist. It means I'm bad at parties." - Rust Cohle
"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize that half of 'em are stupider than that." - George Carlin
"The internet: It's like a training camp for never amounting to anything." - Oglaf
"I think internet message boards and the like are dangerous." - Anno

NAveryW
Insect Politician
Insect Politician
User avatar
Age: 27
Posts: 5062
Joined: Dec 21, 2006

Postby NAveryW » Sun May 17, 2009 4:59 pm

NemZ wrote:Or keep the nudity but stage the shots so as to prevent the nudity from becoming explicit.
That's what I meant by "Outright remove all explicit nudity of the 14-year-olds".

I also forgot one option: say the characters are 14, but hire actors who are actually at least 18. Yes, it's happened before.
"Today?... hmm... today... right... Um... I'm just gonna wing it." -Guess who

Sailor Star Dust
Kept you waiting, huh?
Kept you waiting, huh?
User avatar
Age: 31
Posts: 22545
Joined: Aug 13, 2006
Location: Living in Houston, TX
Gender: Female
Contact:

Postby Sailor Star Dust » Sun May 17, 2009 5:02 pm

I was under the impression any nude scenes from the original series either be ignored altogether or what NemZ suggested:

NemZ wrote:keep the nudity but stage the shots so as to prevent the nudity from becoming explicit.


Actually the toothpicks scene from episode 2 come to mind, but the only nudity scenes I feel that'd be important enough to bother including is maybe episode 5 Shinji walks in on Rei stuff and or the Rei & Shinji EoE scenes. (Perhaps I'm forgetting something else that falls into the thematic nudity category.)
~Take care of yourself, I need you~

Gendo'sPapa
First Ancestor
First Ancestor
User avatar
Posts: 4226
Joined: Oct 24, 2006
Location: At the Movies
Gender: Male

Postby Gendo'sPapa » Sun May 17, 2009 5:02 pm

I think the mere concept of nudity in relation to young children is the very thing that will get a film an R rating.

And we live in an age where popular brand name Franchises like DIE HARD and TERMINATOR, series that have entered the pop culture mindset of almost every American young and old, are sanitized and given PG-13 ratings to reach wider audiences.

I highly doubt any studio would take a risk on a non proven "Franchise" like Evangelion and go any higher than a PG-13 rating. So nudity with underage characters in all shapes and forms is gone.

PS. Don't use WATCHMEN as a counter argument to PG-13, that's a film that was strictly always going to be a One Deal Film. Evangelion if made, is looking at 3 films.

NAveryW
Insect Politician
Insect Politician
User avatar
Age: 27
Posts: 5062
Joined: Dec 21, 2006

Postby NAveryW » Sun May 17, 2009 5:10 pm

Gendo'sPapa wrote:I think the mere concept of nudity in relation to young children is the very thing that will get a film an R rating.

And we live in an age where popular brand name Franchises like DIE HARD and TERMINATOR, series that have entered the pop culture mindset of almost every American young and old, are sanitized and given PG-13 ratings to reach wider audiences.

I highly doubt any studio would take a risk on a non proven "Franchise" like Evangelion and go any higher than a PG-13 rating. So nudity with underage characters in all shapes and forms is gone.

PS. Don't use WATCHMEN as a counter argument to PG-13, that's a film that was strictly always going to be a One Deal Film. Evangelion if made, is looking at 3 films.
The WETA interview said they would aim for an R rating, but of course that is not really in the hands of the special effects artists.

I'm sure this has been said many times, but to avoid an R rating near the ending would require so much revisionism that I can't imagine a single fan not being outraged.
"Today?... hmm... today... right... Um... I'm just gonna wing it." -Guess who

Gendo'sPapa
First Ancestor
First Ancestor
User avatar
Posts: 4226
Joined: Oct 24, 2006
Location: At the Movies
Gender: Male

Postby Gendo'sPapa » Sun May 17, 2009 5:24 pm

Sigh....R won't happen.

WETA is an effects company and they have no say in the actual distribution of the film. They're work is fully at the hands of the director who vision (unless he's someone really famous) will be fully at the hands of the studio.

WETA may want it to be R but unless a studio is willing to take the largest risk in film history:
Finance a $150 million film based off an anime with almost no valid brand name popularity outside of a small niche audience (this ain't Batman or James Bond) starring characters who are all in their early teens.

-An R ain't gonna happen.

+ Let's be real. Any live action adaptation of Evangelion is going to divert vastly from the TV series in terms of the last third of the story. Most likely any end to a Live Action Eva Trilogy will be more action based than the metaphysical present in EOE. You might get a CG animated (it's already animated... now it's just CG) Eva Unit 02 vs. Harpies. But no big naked Rei. No hand cream. No philosophical talks a.la. Matrix.

But you're bound to get some nice explosions. And hell, Rei might not even be part of Shinji's mom so the two can become a happy couple at the end.

Guyver Spawn
Donor
Donor
User avatar
Age: 26
Posts: 2642
Joined: Jan 14, 2009
Location: In the Shadow of the Abys
Gender: Male

Postby Guyver Spawn » Sun May 17, 2009 5:51 pm

They can always use 15 or 16 years old for the movie. Look like at Transformers and 17 again for a example. If they do cut out of nude scenes then they will always be on DVD.

Don't use WATCHMEN as a counter argument to PG-13, that's a film that was strictly always going to be a One Deal Film.


Zack said a sequel would happen if WB wants to make one. Since it fail to make over 300 million then it not going to happen anytime soon unlike 300 which has a sequel in works.
Avatar: Rick (Splatterhouse)
Xbox live gamertag: Guyver Spawn 27
PSN: Hellspawn28

NAveryW
Insect Politician
Insect Politician
User avatar
Age: 27
Posts: 5062
Joined: Dec 21, 2006

Postby NAveryW » Sun May 17, 2009 5:53 pm

Guyver Spawn wrote:Zack said a sequel would happen if WB wants to make one.
Without any source material? Wow, that's bold.
"Today?... hmm... today... right... Um... I'm just gonna wing it." -Guess who

Gendo'sPapa
First Ancestor
First Ancestor
User avatar
Posts: 4226
Joined: Oct 24, 2006
Location: At the Movies
Gender: Male

Postby Gendo'sPapa » Sun May 17, 2009 5:57 pm

A sequel to Watchmen was considered after the film started to draw so much excitement based on the marketing. It was not planned from the start.

300 Part 2 (300 and One?) is just cashing in on a surprise hit.

If an Eva film was to be greenlit the possibility of sequels would be planned in the film's production from the very start. Everyone involved would sign a multiple film contract. They don't do that with R rated series.

Besides, what kind of people want to think about seeing possible 14 year olds (even hypothetical 14 year olds) in live action nude on a film screen 50 feet tall?

Guyver Spawn
Donor
Donor
User avatar
Age: 26
Posts: 2642
Joined: Jan 14, 2009
Location: In the Shadow of the Abys
Gender: Male

Postby Guyver Spawn » Sun May 17, 2009 6:01 pm

They can do a Rated series if they want to but the only issue is the running time since they won't make a lot of money with a three hour R rated movie. We might only get one movie if the movie flops.

Besides, what kind of people want to think about seeing possible 14 year olds (even hypothetical 14 year olds) in live action nude on a film screen 50 feet tall?


Depends on who plays as them because a lot of people would :wink: look at Megan Fox in Transformers.
Avatar: Rick (Splatterhouse)
Xbox live gamertag: Guyver Spawn 27
PSN: Hellspawn28

NAveryW
Insect Politician
Insect Politician
User avatar
Age: 27
Posts: 5062
Joined: Dec 21, 2006

Postby NAveryW » Sun May 17, 2009 6:14 pm

I realize this is off-topic, but how the expletive can you have a sequel to Watchmen? It'd have to be made up without a story by Moore to base it on, which certainly wouldn't go over very well with fans.
"Today?... hmm... today... right... Um... I'm just gonna wing it." -Guess who

Gendo'sPapa
First Ancestor
First Ancestor
User avatar
Posts: 4226
Joined: Oct 24, 2006
Location: At the Movies
Gender: Male

Postby Gendo'sPapa » Sun May 17, 2009 6:24 pm

So Megan Fox is the type of actress we're looking for in a Live Action Eva? Wow.... we're aiming high. Not a good arguement.

As for a quick aside for the R rating (we're way off topic here)- R rated films are not huge money makers. Studios try to steer clear of high budget R rated films whenever they can. And if they do put money into them it's because A- it's a sequel to a surprise smash or B- the director is famous enough he can demand it.

Eva is a film that to do right in this day and age of wasteful studio money would require $150 million. Minimum. And when you include marketing you're looking at over $200, close to $250 mill. No one would finance a film that expensive and rated R if it at all covered sexual innuendo in children as much as NGE does.

For the record the ten highest grossing R rated films of all time are:
1. Passion of the Christ
2. Matrix Reloaded
3. Beverly Hills Cop
4. The Exorcist
5. Saving Private Ryan
6. 300
7. Wedding Crashers
8. Terminator 2
9. Gladiator
10. Pretty Woman

The two sci-fi films in there are both high priced sequels to surprise hits. Neither of which was planned to have a sequel (outside of the filmmakers hopes and dreams)

I'm just saying if you want R Eva. You're not gonna get it. The first high budget R rated franchise (sequels and all) to be put into production will either be a remake of an already proven cinematic property- like a fourth go round with Batman, or an adaptation of something HUGE in the general populace. Something which, as much as we love Eva, is far from the case.

NAveryW
Insect Politician
Insect Politician
User avatar
Age: 27
Posts: 5062
Joined: Dec 21, 2006

Postby NAveryW » Sun May 17, 2009 6:26 pm

Gendo'sPapa wrote:I'm just saying if you want R Eva. You're not gonna get it. The first high budget R rated franchise (sequels and all) to be put into production will either be a remake of an already proven cinematic property- like a fourth go round with Batman, or an adaptation of something HUGE in the general populace. Something which, as much as we love Eva, is far from the case.
Unless, of course, whoever is making it is more concerned with artistic integrity than making money.

Hah.
"Today?... hmm... today... right... Um... I'm just gonna wing it." -Guess who

Guyver Spawn
Donor
Donor
User avatar
Age: 26
Posts: 2642
Joined: Jan 14, 2009
Location: In the Shadow of the Abys
Gender: Male

Postby Guyver Spawn » Sun May 17, 2009 6:39 pm

PG=13 might work since The Dark Knight was at a hard level of PG-13 rating. The sequels would be hard to do though.

So Megan Fox is the type of actress we're looking for in a Live Action Eva?


No but I was using her since she play as a teen age girl in the movie when she is in her 20's.

I realize this is off-topic, but how the expletive can you have a sequel to Watchmen? It'd have to be made up without a story by Moore to base it on


Movie studios can do anything now these days. Nothing is impossible at Hollywood.
Avatar: Rick (Splatterhouse)
Xbox live gamertag: Guyver Spawn 27
PSN: Hellspawn28

Gendo'sPapa
First Ancestor
First Ancestor
User avatar
Posts: 4226
Joined: Oct 24, 2006
Location: At the Movies
Gender: Male

Postby Gendo'sPapa » Sun May 17, 2009 6:46 pm

Agh! If you can find a filmmaker who can personally finance a $150 million film and has artistic integrity then point him out to me please.

James Cameron is making AVATAR PG-13 to secure his budget.

Michael Bay most likely would love nothing more than to make a TRANSFORMERS where the robots do real damage to the innocent bystanders but understand that it won't recoup finances.

Martin Scorsese does films like THE DEPARTED to finance his still wished for film- SILENCE.

Steven Spielberg even had financing pulled on LINCOLN.

There's only one filmmaker in the world who can actually afford to make an expensive film like Eva devoid of assistance or influence from a major Hollywood studio. And you know who that "Artistic Filmmaker" is?

George Lucas.

Guyver Spawn
Donor
Donor
User avatar
Age: 26
Posts: 2642
Joined: Jan 14, 2009
Location: In the Shadow of the Abys
Gender: Male

Postby Guyver Spawn » Sun May 17, 2009 6:49 pm

I would say Guillermo del Toro but he is too busy at the moment. I say Alfonso Cuarón would be the best Artistic Filmmaker to hire at the moment since it looks like he is not too busy to direct anything.
Avatar: Rick (Splatterhouse)
Xbox live gamertag: Guyver Spawn 27
PSN: Hellspawn28

Gendo'sPapa
First Ancestor
First Ancestor
User avatar
Posts: 4226
Joined: Oct 24, 2006
Location: At the Movies
Gender: Male

Postby Gendo'sPapa » Sun May 17, 2009 6:58 pm

Since we're wishful thinking here I'll throw Stanley Kubrick and David Lean into that list of "Great Filmmakers Who Will NEVER Make An Eva Film"

Guyver Spawn
Donor
Donor
User avatar
Age: 26
Posts: 2642
Joined: Jan 14, 2009
Location: In the Shadow of the Abys
Gender: Male

Postby Guyver Spawn » Sun May 17, 2009 7:17 pm

If you seen the 3rd Harry Potter movie and Chidern of Men then I think Alfonso Cuarón would be great to hire.
Avatar: Rick (Splatterhouse)
Xbox live gamertag: Guyver Spawn 27
PSN: Hellspawn28


Return to “Live Action Evangelion Movie”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest