Going into the theatre, I had mixed expectations. This is, after all, a movie about the porn industry. It could be very graphic, shallow, poorly lit. It most certainly would have a nauseating soundtrack. The tickets were free and it was the premiere event, so the food would be good-- and I went. I was thoroughly amazed to see a very creatively produced film, whose formal perks were as interesting as its content. I was entertained by and sympathetic toward the characters, who were multi-dimensional and intense. Mostly, I was impressed by the film's visual aesthetics-- I'm not referring to the sex scenes here, though there was ample representation of that action-- I'm talking about the piecing together of a beautifully shot film. But besides that, the soundtrack was refreshingly hip and the actors gave excellent performances. This is a Showtime feature that has exceeded its medium's limitations,producing a movie that is given more justice in the theatres than where it will deign to be exhibited- on TV.
Add a Review
-
adare28 April 2000
-
Anyanwu1 March 2003This film is/was every bit as good as Blow and Boogie Nights(better than Boogie Nights). How this did not get a distributor and had to be shown on Showtime I'll never know. For what ever reason the brother's Estevez were dealt a disservice. This should have been seen on the big screen. I'm sure I will find out but there has to be something behind the scenes as to why this did not get a distributor. The movie was good and the reason it did not get put out was just wrong.
-
pluto-117 April 2001"Rated X" is a solid good film by the Martin Sheen sons (Emilio Estevez and Charlie Sheen). It would have been a better film for me, however, if the editing and/or story line were a little clearer about the characters motivations in the final act of the film. You can clearly see how much the brothers love each other and yet one threat over the phone sets Jim Mitchell out to kill Artie Mitchell - it just didn't seem to fit for me. The film did show how out-of-control Artie was getting near the end, but still I just couldn't buy Jim's explosion at the end - going hunting for his brother with a rifle. Just two scenes before the end you see Jim and Artie as close brothers, one where Jim saves Artie from drowning and the other with Artie in a hospital bed saying he is going to clean up. And a minute later a single threat on a phone and boom, Jim grabs the rifle. I didn't feel the emotional transition taking place in Jim from loving brother to murderer of his brother.
Another difficulty for me was keeping track of all of the woman in the film. It was hard to keep track of which wife or girlfriend each one was when they popped up in a scene.
I thought Emilio's direction was very good. The close close-up's, the bizarre angles - all enhanced the emotional verisimilitude. However, some minor things: I would have liked to have seen more two-shots with Emilio and Charlie acting together - I think one would have had a better chance to see the characters reacting to each other. I know it is harder to shoot, but I think it helps the characters develop better if you have a couple of longer scenes where you can see both characters reacting to each other at the same time - rather than edited together close-ups to make the conversation.
The production & wardrobe designers deserve praise for the accurate portrayal of the 60's and the 70's. I was growing up in Ohio at that time, so I didn't see the extreme fashions of the hippest crowds in San Fran were wearing, but the wardrobe definitely felt accurate to me, as did the sets. There is nothing worse than being jolted out of the story by an obvious flaw - like a 1980's car in a 1968 scene - I caught no such errors.
They both put in inspired performances - no doubt they are drawing from some of their own experiences as brothers. Again, it would have been more fun to see them in more long two shots - but it was great watching them all the same. I also enjoyed the performance of Terry O'Quinn as their father.
I gave it a 7 out of 10, a good film. -
mmalooly19 September 2000I just finished the QC of Rated X for the up coming DVD. I was pleasantly surprised by this film. The acting was impressive, and the story of the Mitchell Brothers kept my interest. The greatest praise I could give this film; after viewing it I wanted to learn more about the facts behind the Brothers story. This movie is worth a look, unless the subject matter would offend.
-
DennisLittrell7 May 2007Emilio Estavez directed this, but one wonders why. It doesn't take a genius to realize that a movie about two porn movie directors is not going to win any Academy Awards. What was Emilio thinking? You can play it as tragedy. You certainly can't make heroes of these guys. I guess what he was thinking was this was a part of America from the sixties to the nineties in the twentieth century--this was the reality and let's tell the truth. but somebody else might say, why bother? Most critics and viewers would call this a prize turkey, but...but is there some redeeming social value? Charlie Sheen and Estavez star as the brothers Mitchell, two entrepreneurial guys who stumble from the free love scene of the sixties in San Francisco to the cash cow of the first widely distributed porn movies, including the infamous "Behind the Green Door." Maybe there is a kind of free speech angle here, with the porno boys fighting the good fight against censorship and Big Brother. On the other hand, there is a didactic tale here about how success corrupts and how sex, drugs and rock and roll--forget the rock and roll; this is almost pure sex and drugs--how sex and drugs may lead you to make a movie called "Sodom and Gomorrah" which may suggest that you ought to be starring it in.
Charlie Sheen is very good and so is Estavez. His direction is also not bad. The movie moves right along and the degeneration of the brothers is well expressed. Megan Ward had a chance in a supporting role here, but she failed miserably, possibly because how could she feel any connection with a role that made her the quasi-tolerant, quasi-suffering wife of a man who makes his living pandering to lust (and indulging his own) while smoking, drinking and snorting anything he can get his hands on? Not pretty. However, I wouldn't be surprised if someday in the distant future, long after I am gone, that in some social science class at say Cal Berkeley this movie is played as augmenting an anthropological study of a certain segment of our population in the later part of the 20th century. The students can see this as a film documenting the moral corruption of a nation following Vietnam and the Nixon administration, perhaps even anticipating the moral corruption we see today.
But I would advise you to skip this unless you are a big Emilio Estavez fan, in which case this is a must see, or if you are a Charlie Sheen fan, and then it is worth seeing because this is one of his better performances, and you've got to see these guys in their bald domes and their side burns and authentic seventies attire. To be honest, I've seen people win Academy Awards who weren't half as good as Sheen was. Naturally this won nothing.
(Note: Over 500 of my movie reviews are now available in my book "Cut to the Chaise Lounge or I Can't Believe I Swallowed the Remote!" Get it at Amazon!) -
Tinyhippy21 September 2001Although this film has an off-putting title, people may actually be quite surprised at the content. Yes, it is about the porn industry, but has other subjects and deeper meanings. The Mitchell brothers (Sheen and Estevez) are in business together as San Francisco's porn kings. Controversy follows as the general public do not approve of them. Apart from the frequent sex scenes at the beginning of the movie, this film escalates into a deeper subject of family feuds. You find that you don't particularly like the characters, but are still interested in what happens to them. It is a rather sad ending. The film, in it's directorial aspect, is very well done.
Although not the best film Estevez has directed, I was glad to have seen it. -
calebm74 November 2005This movie is a representation of James Mitchell's Justification for for first degree murder of Artie Mitchell. Artie was not murdered because he had a drug problem. Artie was murdered as a power move for his brother to take control of all the brothers finances. This movie was awful because it helped a murderer look good while depicting the deceased as a wild crazed lunatic. Personal I feel Artie Mitchell's character better resembled a mixture between James and Karen's personalities. This movie seemed to be an accurate representation of the utter chaos in the last two weeks of Art's life. This movie was based on a story written by David Mccumber who wrote a Rated X based on the testimonials of Artie's Ex-Girlfriends, his mother and his murderer. I Caleb Mitchell feel slandered but apparently my dad was a public figure, so anyone can say anything, it doesn't matter
-
Boggman6 October 2005Real life mainstream actors/brothers Emilio Estevez and Charlie Sheen take on the amusing and twisted underground characters/brothers of Artie and Jim Mitchell in "RATED X".
Artie and Jim Mitchell were at the forefront of the San Francisco porn revolution in the early 70's. The owned their owned theater, made their own X rated films- and lived a life of abundant excess.
When they created/produced/wrote and directed "Behind the Green Door", they found themselves thrust in the spotlight - and made millions. Unfortunately, their success suffered a serious backlash- and while somewere able to pick up and recover - others only found themselves thrust deeper into a life a drugs, despair, and eventually murder.
The movie takes an unflinching look at a classic time in American Hostory, and the story of the Mitchell Brothers is quite amusing and saddening at the same time.
A great directorial debut for Emilio Estevez and some fine acting by both actors (especially Sheen in the final half of the film) make this an entertaining "diamond in the rough".
Recommended! -
Coventry24 November 2004This film kind of is Emilio Estevez' comeback after a dreadfully slow decade of kiddies' stuff and inferior TV-productions. Estevez and his brother Charlie Sheen portray the Mitchell brothers, Jim and Arnie. From the early 70's until the early 90's these boys ruled the Californian porn industry and opened their own San Franciscan nudie theater and strip club. As usual in this type of biopic films, we first get to see a whole series of highlights (like their big breakthrough porn film 'Beyond the Green Door') before the 'drama' kicks in. Both brothers put industrial amounts of dope up their noses and their relationships all go to hell. This isn't an immensely impressive film because you've all seen it before slightly better in epics like 'Boogie Nights' or even 'The People vs. Larry Flint'. Still it's worthwhile thanks to the performances of Estevez, Sheen and a few members of the supportive cast like Terry O'Quin (The Stepfather) as Mitchell senior. If you're a fan of Sheen or Estevez (or both) this is definitely worth a peek. They both look deliciously rancid. Not highly memorable, but amusing while it lasts which is a bit too long by the way.
-
smatysia14 January 2001CONTAINS SPOILER: Not really a bad film, better than I had expected it to be. Sheen and Estevez are accomplished actors, and that shows here. The women in the cast were very good, also, Tracy Hutson, Megan Ward, Danielle Brett, and Nicole de Boer. I've had to spend some time in San Francisco on business the last 15 years or so, so I was aware of the ads for the O'Farrell Theatre, and, I think there is another Mitchell Brothers theatre or club or something there in the Tenderloin. I was also aware that one of the brothers had killed the other, but didn't remember which one. Oh, well, back to the film. Estevez succumbed to the temptation to use far too many distracting director techniques, and that detracted from the film. And the bald pates on the brothers looked way fake. I don't know if they wore wigs or shaved their heads, but the bald areas were too sharply delineated from the hair. Overall, the film is worth watching when it comes on cable.
-
The history of pornography is no more interesting or more apt a subject for cinema as singing nuns, one man's fight against the Nazis or even gladiators fighting for their liberty. Here we have one of life's small true story made even smaller by being produced by bumbling amateurs (the first film about bumbling amateurs - the Mitchell Brothers couldn't light a fire - made by bumbling amateurs?) who have nothing much to say other than "aren't porn people a queer bunch."
(Show biz is queer enough as it is - so you can imagine how queer the pimples on its backside are!)
True, the story of Behind the Green door and ill-fated Mitchell brothers is an interesting enough counterculture tale, but it can be told almost completely in a couple of paragraphs to the generally interested, and in maybe a page to the X-rated fan. This film knows it has two plums to pull out of the cake and one will do for a grand climax - but what falls in-between is plain boring and meaningless.
(Wives of porn directors like the money but don't like the business that money comes from do they - who would have thought?)
What on earth prompted Emilio Estevez to think that he should make this in to two hours? But let us forgive him a bit because he is a beginner and they often fall in love with their own work.
Boogie Nights (clearly the inspiration for this film being made) wasn't a great film - but it was very good and contained lots of ideas. This has no zest or drive and next to no ideas. They should show the two together in a double bill - to show how bad Boogie Nights could have been in the wrong hands.
Take away the sex part of the film and you have a script could have been written by the Dukes of Hazzard script writer on an off day. Rated X is neither sexy nor interesting - nor even a good time passer. Most actors on the screen look bored throughout and you will probably be as well. -
dromasca16 September 2002This is one of the many films in the series that materializes America's fascination with its own sub-culture - violence, drugs, pornography - all coming closer to mainstream in the complex American landscape of the 70's and 80's. It's well done and acted, and I liked it. The true story of the Mitchell brothers, pioneers of porn and live nude shows in San Francisco is told in a linear manner, without too many stuff like 'free speech' justification, as in 'Larry Flint'. The Mitchell guys consider their business just a business, and are not concerned at any point with its human or moral implications. The relationship between the brothers is the central theme, and it is well rendered by the two main actors - Charlie Sheen and Emilio Estevez (who is also directing).
Some more logic in the script would have made a memorable movie. Some of the familiar relations, or the Mafia involvement seem to be just lost in the action. It is however a good film, and I am amazed by the negative comments of other viewers in IMDb, and by the lack of more critical feedback. Maybe the theme is still hard to digest for the American critics, I do not know. An 8/10 on my scale. -
The Mitchell brother's story is made for the movies. It has everything that would make a intriguing film: sibling rivalry, rags to riches story, excess, madness, skin etc, etc. So what went wrong? Take two brothers who shouldn't be in this business to begin with, The Sheens. Emilio Estevez tries to do a P.T Anderson and fails miserably. We know that the Sheens' acting abilities are feeble, but putting one of them behind the camera and both of them in front just screams out disaster. In addition it doesn't help that Meredith's screenplay is well below par. But just take one look at the writer's other work and you'll get the notion. As mentioned this story had all the potential in the world to become a great film, but put someone with a name and no talent behind it and the result is hideous. Do yourself a favor and don't watch this movie.
-
Schlockmeister30 May 2001Harrowing is the word that comes to mind when trying to describe this movie. A fascinating look at two brothers, raised by a man who could have take parenting lessons from The Great Santini and being thrust into the world of 1970s porn and drugs. Yes, the porn angle of the story is very fascinating and is probably the reason most will see this movie, but I found it to be a riveting look at the older brother - younger brother relationship in the case of two men who led very enmeshed lives. Jim (the older brother) was always taught to take care of younger brother Artie and he did that all of his life, even kicking drugs on his own to show Artie that it could be done. Artie, meanwhile spirals down deeper into addiction and sexual excess and uses Jim's continued smoking as an excuse not to get straightened out. The ending scenes are very sudden and surprising, as they must have been when they really happened, but was this Jim's one last attempt to take care of Artie when nothing else seemed to work? This movie uses the not uncommon now technique of odd camera angles and color to put the viewer into the disoriented mindset of a person on drugs and perhaps on the edge mentally and emotionally. It was really showcased well in "Natural Born Killers" and has kind of been done already to death. But it does serve the story here. Recommended, and as a chaser after this downer of a movie, rent "Babe".
-
Gubby-Allen25 June 2002A constant barrage of cocaine, drinking & sex may have made it realistic but didn't make it interesting. I also hope it weren't meant as a turn on, as it failed miserably there. A film about porn but without the slightest inkling of any porn in it at all. Even allowing for the time scale there were still chunks of story missing like wives departing not to be seen or mentioned again. But Emilio Estevez was good & it was just fractionally better than Boogie Nights as it had some sort of story & character. Just not much.
A low 4/10. -
On paper this looks like a good idea - a film about the pioneer pornographic film-making brothers Jim and Artie Mitchell, starring film-star brothers Charlie Sheen and Emilio Estevez. There might well have been a great film made out of the story, but the finished product simply lacks a governing intelligence with anything dramatically exciting or insightful to say about the tale.
Estevez directs from a script to which three writers are credited. The piece takes a very formulaic television bio-movie approach to its subject matter. We begin at the end, with Artie threatening to kill Jim, then zap back to their boyhood and then forwards in chronological order through their establishing themselves in the adult movie business, battling for their 5th amendment right to make and exhibit their films, hit big time with the feature Behind the Green Door, stand up to the mob, get over-ambitious in their film-making and fall to pieces through drinks, drugs and broken relationships. Jim manages to pull himself together but Artie goes off the rails, and ironically Jim ends up shooting his errant brother dead.
There's an attempt to show that the brothers learned the value of sorting out problems with a gun early on, although this is never linked to the wider gun culture in American (an approach which might have been intriguing). The final scenes are emotionally affecting but too much of the film plods by and left this viewer with a feeling that both the milieu had been better portrayed and the techniques better utilized elsewhere. The film lacks the epic feel of a descent into the pit which makes Boogie Nights so powerful; the flashy cutting, integration of music and showy set pieces all feel a bit second-hand - Scorsese, MTV, even Spielberg circa Jaws are referenced but apart from an impressive tracking shot following one of the wives from one brother in the swimming pool to another sniffing coke upstairs, nothing ever flies out of the screen - it remains steadfastly movie-of-the-week stuff.
The problem is perhaps ultimately in the subject matter: porn films have such a visceral effect with their meat shots and money shots that unless we are actually going to go there and see those things, it is very difficult to convey the intensity of the environment in a non-porn drama. Boogie Nights managed it through the quality and originality of the writing, acting and film-making; everything in Rated X is perfectly respectable (perhaps that is part of the issue?), but nothing really powerful or astonishing occurs. Nothing more is to be gained from the film than reading the short wikipedia entry on the Mitchell Brothers, and imagining better films like Boogie Nights and The People Vs Larry Flint. -
vlagal4 January 2002Don't know what Mr. Estevez was thinking; but he wasn't thinking about the script. The script is so full of holes; scenes that start and don't end, whole story lines that are set up but don't get resolved. This is just awful. The worst part is that both the Sheen brothers do a pretty good job of acting, it's just that the story never really goes anywhere and the fancy photography doesn't make up for it.
-
This film is Based on a True Story about the rise and fall of the porn filmmakers:The Mitchell Brothers (Played by Charlie Sheen & Emilio Estevez). The Mitchell Brothers made a famous porn film titled "Behind the Green Door". Once they become successful, they have to go through the American government, the mob, the woman's in their lives and even each other to create a San Francisco Porn Dynasty but the drugs and their intense relationship puts them apart.
Directed by Emilio Estevez (Men at Work, The War at Home, Wisdom) made a terrific if wildly uneven drama that, it was never release in theaters. Instend it got debuted in showtime entertainment network.
DVD has an bright Pan & Scan (1.33:1) transfer and an fine-Dolby Surround 2.0 Sound. DVD has an surprisingly amusing commentary tack by real-life brothers:Sheen and Estevez.
The french Canadian DVD has an sharp non-anamorphic Widescreen (1.78:1) transfer and an good-Dolby Stereo 2.0 Sound. This DVD is only in french with no subtitles.
This is an unfocused but extremely well made film. Watch for film director:Peter Bogdanovich appears in a cameo as a film school professor. A must see for the performances by Sheen & Estevez. (****/*****). -
Despite the real interesting story which I advice to read from the book (this movie doesn't make a good portrait of it) the direction of the film was horrible. Was necessary to move around the camera so much? Like the worst MTV video. Just because there wasn't much of happening the director thought that is the way to entertain an audience. Don't think so. Often the movie was incredible boring. The acting, specially regarding Sheen, was terrible. I don't reccomend this movie. Choose instead "Boogie Night", which has a very good professional direction and better, much better acting. I wonder if someone could get a compensation for have bought the film on DVD (that's me!)
-
CULTEGUY22 March 2003It's been a while since I've seen this, so I'll keep it short. I saw the film, and read the book. I guess the idea of making the film came a little too close to the "Boogie Nights" success. Both brothers, however, show that they are good actors, even if Charlie's trying a little too much to be Hunter S. Thompson (unless the character was actually like that.) It's a good movie about the porn industry whereas "Boogie Nights" wasn't really about the porn industry, which was used mainly a subplot (or one of many... I loved that film, I just don't think these two movies should be compared-- this is a straight bio-pic.) The demise of the Mitchell brothers wasn't the demise of porno. But, it should be noted, the demise of film making (for real) in porno. They tried like hell to make real films, and probably could have (some might say, with the budget, should have.) So the characters made a fairly respectable film that came along a bit too late.
-
richerikp27 September 2020Directionless movie made worse by estev's hopeless amateurish direction.
-
SnoopyStyle21 July 2018In 1991 San Francisco, a disturbed Jim Mitchell (Emilio Estevez) is sitting alone in the dark. In 1960, Artie and his protective older brother Jim are brought up by their hard father (Terry O'Quinn). In 67, film student Jim is filming a political protest but he's more taken with a naked hippie chick. He starts filming porno bringing in younger brother Artie (Charlie Sheen) who marries Meredith (Megan Ward). They are porno pioneers and make the ground-breaking Behind the Green Door starring newbie Marilyn Chambers. Drug addiction slowly drives Artie crazy.
There may be a compelling story about these real life pioneers. I am not happy with the directing from Estevez. The movie looks ugly and cheap. Maybe he doesn't have the budget but there is no imagination in this at all. It's distracting how bad it looks. The characters are ugly which doesn't help one bit. It's night and day when compared to a great movie like "Boogie Nights". I'm sure Showtime was intrigued by the lurid subject matter but the quality is simply not there. -
bluesdude10 March 2005Maybe I'm rating this movie a little bit higher than I should. But there were some good moments for me in this film. I have no problem with Charlie Sheen or Emilio Estevez, they have both done some good stuff in their careers (and a few good movies too). Not to mention Denise Richards! Anyway, I just wonder if Tracy Hutson regrets playing Marylin Chambers in this film and doing a nude/sex scene. Seeing as how she is now on the squeaky clean ABC show "Extreme Home Makeovers". She is incredibly hot and I love to see her on the Home Makeover show, especially when I happened to remember that she was naked in "Rated X". I think this film is entertaining. Of course it is not even in the same league as "Boogie Nights", not even close...but if you are a porno movie fan, you might enjoy this story of a couple of the pioneers of the genre. If nothing else you will enjoy Tracy Hutson's awesome body. Which we may never seen in a film again. Too bad.
-
selfparody2 March 2005I am not a fan of the brothers who dominate this flick, but they seem to play against type well enough that this doesn't matter.
Everyone who'd watch this movie knows about the Mitchells at least slightly, so I'll talk more about the way they're rendered here: Emilio renders Jim Mitchell as basically the more mature older brother and Arty is, of course, the free-wheeling schmuck Jim feels indebted to. They make what is essentially "Vanilla Porn" in the sense that apparently none of the more non-mainstream fetishes usually (probably often rightly) considered perversions are visible, like pedophelia, corpophelia, bestiality, rape or snuff is included. And as a result of living something that is considered a societal fringe in the Seventies, they have a drug-induced downfall. Who would have seen that coming?
Still, to me, the downfall is played with enough reality (Arty seems to remain slightly sympathetic even during his depths, except for when he expects a spouse is doing someone behind his back) and I'd say sympathy that it felt like a fresh experience to me. But that's just me: I don't watch too much aside from nerdy stuff.
Frankly, I think that it beats Boogie Nights because there's no Mark Wahlbergs or Burt Reynolds around, and most important, no Paul Thomas Anderson. Estevez isn't the most humble guy, but at least he didn't approach the material in such a seemingly "I'll make sure everyone pays attention to how well I directed this thing instead of how good the story or things that happen in it are supposed to be." There's nothing really elaborate like that painful three minute opening and not the ton of cutesy dialogue. It's a much more bare-bones production, which I usually like.
Plus, I like the commentary track. God help me, but I do. -
smcd-56 November 2000I must admit that I was pleasantly surprised when I watched this movie. Emilio Estevez has produced a movie that is both interesting and visually creative. I liked the cinematography...different and totally appropriate for this movie. And, Charlie did a truly fantastic job as Artie Mitchell! Especially as he moves further into the world of drugs and alcohol addition. I was really amazed at Charlie's acting ability on this one. Emilio was also very good in his role as Jim Mitchell. Charlie and Emilio...you've produced a fantastic film! Very impressive!