HOLLYWOOD, CA—Director Larry Thomas expressed “extreme disappointment and dismay” Monday following the announcement by Jack Valenti, president of the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), that its ratings board had assigned a XXX rating to Thomas’ latest film, Oral Arguments 7: Back In Chambers.
“It’s outrageous and hypocritical, said Thomas, one of pornography’s most respected auteurs. “They told me that if I wanted to get it into theaters with an X, I’d have to edit out 11 minutes worth of double-dildo penetration, kick-fucking and in-twat perspective shots, not to mention the entire octuple daisy-chain scene. In other words, they wanted to compromise the cum-splattering artistic vision I’ve had for Oral Arguments 7 ever since I first conceived it three weeks ago.”
Thomas said he attempted to reach a compromise with members of the MPAA board, but they were unwilling to give any ground.
“It broke my heart, but I finally presented them with a version where I cut a majority of the 11 minutes in question, replacing all of the quote-unquote ’XXX’ material with standard-issue blow jobs, doggie-styles and cum shots. But I refused to cut the felching scene. That’s the key scene in the whole picture. I mean, come on, it’s 1997, and we’ve still got societal hang-ups about octuple-daisy-chain felching?”
Actress Chasey Lain, one of the stars of Oral Arguments 7, agreed with her director. “I’ve been in 90 XXX films and 50 Xers,” Lain said, “so I think I know the difference. And no way is this XXX material. [Co-star] Heather [Hunter] and I don’t even use anal ripcord beads.”
Lain also cited by way of precedent two of the previous movies in the Oral Arguments series. “Numbers three and five, those were just as raunchy, no question, and both were only rated X. Five especially, that was just nasty. I wouldn’t have taken [fellow actress and close friend] Janine Lindemulder to see that one, and not only is she a mature adult, she’s a serious fucking slut.”
Valenti remained adamant about the board’s decision. “We have neither the power nor the desire to regulate what directors like Mr. Thomas can or can’t do,” Valenti said. “Our job is simply to let the general public know how filthy a particular piece of smut is. The board was unanimous in finding Oral Arguments 7, in its unedited state, triple-X-hilarating, triple-X-citing and triple-X-plosive.”
While the MPAA could in theory grant the film a XX, that rating is rarely given and is even less desirable to filmmakers than XXX.
“A XX is just wishy-washy,” Thomas said. “If you try to toe the line and cater to both the casual, single-X porn-goer and the more specialized niche market of utterly depraved XXX-viewing scumbags, you’re just going to wind up getting nobody off.”
Thomas said he and his production company, Vivid Video, have no plans to release the “watered-down” version to movie theaters.
“We’re going to go straight to video with this one,” said Thomas. “And the video version will be a true director’s cut: Not only will I restore the material I cut for the MPAA, but I will add 10 minutes of never-before-seen footage of interracial anal, double-pussy penetration, big mamas and triple-dildo gang-bangs. Artistry comes first.”
