There are also good bits on the current NC-17 rating and a few words on “Red State”. For those of you who follow the news here, none of this will be new information, but it’s still a very nice interview and well worth the read. Kevin does indeed confirm here that “Red State” is very close to acquiring funding, and that they WILL (if they have to) make snips to “Zack And Miri Make a Porno” to get that R-rating, depending on the results of next week’s Appeal screening. Here’s a couple snips:

Tell me about where you are with RED STATE.


KS: RED STATE, the Weinstein Company didn’t want to do it, didn’t want to finance it, which is the first flick we ever gave them that they didn’t want to finance. They were like, “We don’t get it.” It’s not strictly a horror film. It’s not an easy film to market. And it’s a challenging film, it’s a little different.


Capone: All I’ve heard about it is that it deals with fundamentalism.


KS: Yeah, yeah. So they passed on it, and I got it back. And then we went on to ZACK AND MIRI, so I hadn’t thought about it for a while. But once we got into post on ZACK AND MIRI, then I started getting back to work in terms of finding the money for RED STATE, and I think we’re getting very close to securing some independent financing for it.


Capone: Okay good. I’m hearing that you’ve currently got an NC-17 rating for ZACK AND MIRI from the MPAA after a couple of submission, and now you’re entering the appeal process. Where are you with that?


KS: I’ve seen some reports on it that make it out to be something more than it is. It’s just a simple case of …every time you make an R-rated comedy, chances are you’re going to butt up against what’s acceptable. So we knew going in chances were that they were going to flag he movie; it’s got the word PORNO in the title. So I submitted first cut–one hour, 45 minutes. And they said “This is NC-17,” and they gave me two specific areas to look at. I said okay, so I cut 12 minutes out of the movies, and that was after our first test screening, so most of that was stuff that was flat anyway, so I took that out. In that cut, we addressed their issues as well. We resubmitted it, and they said, “Well, you’re close but there are these two moments that you should focus on in terms of length.” One they wanted out completely–a 14-frame shot that they were like, “This can’t make it.” It wasn’t even a second long. And they were like, “Maybe you can work with the sounds in it or something.” So I did trims in the other section; there was a lot of thrusting they wanted taking out, and then the other section I worked with the sound, but left the shot in–it’s 14 frames, it’s not even a second! Let it run. They still said it was NC-17. I wasn’t frustrated, I wasn’t mad, I was just like “I feel like I’ve gone as far as I’m comfortable going; let’s take it to the next stage,” which is the appeals part of the process.


I’ve been through the appeals process before, once on CLERKS, where we got an NC-17, had an appeal screening, got it overturned to an R. And once on JERSEY GIRL, they gave us an R rating, and we tried working with them in terms of the cuts, but they felt that this conversation between Ben [Affleck] and Liv [Tyler] in the diner about masturbation, which was a really clinical conversation about it, was just beyond the pale for them. They felt it pushed into R-rated territory, which I found strange. So we said, let’s take it to the appeal part, had the appeals screening, did our dog-and-pony show where you get up and make your defense for the film, and the MPAA talked about why they feel it’s R. And they overturned that one without us having to make a cut. So that’s basically what we’re doing here. It’s not like it’s some great fight against censorship. I haven’t blogged about it, I’m not out there screaming “Oh my God, they’re violating my fucking civil liberties or my rights as an artist.” It’s just part of the process. And on August 4, we’ll screen again, I’ll show it to the appeals committee, I’ll get to make my case and cite precedent as to “These movies have done something similar.”


Capone: I’d heard that you were in the process of gathering your supporting material.


KS: We had to put together the examples. Because they used to not let you cite precedent; now you can. So we’ll do that, and the MPAA will make its case for why they think it is NC-17. And then the appeals committee will decide. You have to win by two-thirds majority, or something like that. But the simple fact is that if it doesn’t get the rating, if they still maintain an NC-17, then I’ve got to go in and take the notes, because contractually I have to deliver an R. And honestly, even if they were like, “Hey man, you can go out as an NC-17,” I just feel like it would set the movies up for disappointment because I don’t feel that it’s truly earned an NC-17. It feels like a hard R to me, but if I was going to see an NC-17 movie, I’d want to see something that I couldn’t see in an R-rated movie. But there’s nothing in this movie that I feel like is any further beyond he pale than I’ve seen in any other R-rated movie, even any other R-rated movie that we’ve done. But you know, sometimes you get lucky, sometimes you don’t. With CLERKS II, I sweated that movie going to the MPAA because the donkey-fucking scene is going to get us an NC-17, and it didn’t. We submitted it, they gave it an R, and that was that. We got lucky then; this time, we didn’t get so lucky. Hopefully we’ll get the overturn, but if not, I’ll go in and trim until we get the R.

Check out the entire Capone/Kevin Smith interview over at Aint It Cool.