Why Not NC-17?

I have always believed that the NC-17 rating can be a viable aspect of the movie-making and movie-watching experience (“Missing at the Movies: a Rating That’s Just for Adult Viewers,” by Mark Caro, June 22). But that can only happen if it is embraced by the filmmakers and the audience. In this respect, Hollywood blew its chance at making NC-17 work. Not because of the NC-17 films it did release, but because of the films it didn’t release.

If “Henry & June” and “Showgirls” are the major releases we have to judge NC-17 by, we might just as well let it die. A few years ago, Hollywood had the chance to provide audiences two mainstream films with NC-17 material and ignored the opportunity. The films: “Eyes Wide Shut” and “Saving Private Ryan.”

Both of these R-rated films are considered “adult” films in the positive sense of the word. Complex themes, deeply conflicted characters, visually stunning. In addition, they pushed the boundaries on society’s taboos--”Eyes” with sex, “Ryan” with violence. Both are challenging films that are not for the faint of heart, and certainly not for children.

But, more important, they were mainstream product put out by the Hollywood studio system. Why weren’t these films rated NC-17? They easily could have been. Many people believe that they should have been.

TRI FRITZ

Pasadena