AfterEllen.com - Cuts Like a Knife: Basic Instinct 2 and the Bisexual Sex Scenes That You Won't See (page 2)

Or it could be that in this decidedly unfriendly political climate, a bisexual lead character was simply too risky for the hit-hungry makers of this mainstream film.

Or perhaps because representations of queer people in independent and mainstream film have become so much more common since 1992, a character's bisexuality is no longer considered controversial enough to exploit.

Stone told Pink News, “We shot the menage-a-trois (scene) and the girl was really beautiful and hot, this amazing French actress and the ratings board made us take it out. I guess it was too hot.” If assigned an NC-17 rating by the MPAA, the film could stand to make far less money in limited release (some theatre chains won't screen NC-17 films) and would be less likely to be carried by mainstream video stores like Blockbuster. Without the bisexual love scene, the film instead garnered the all-important R-rating.

The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), which has assigned ratings to films since 1968, has long been charged with having different ratings standards for films with queer content. In a article in The Advocate (January 21, 2003), a variety of people in the film industry recounted their battles with the MPAA over queer films such as Better Than Chocolate, Big Eden, The Monkey's Mask and Bobbie's Girl. Jon Gerrans, co-president of Strand Releasing (specializing in gay-themed films), observed, "To the conservative people on the board, gay and lesbian sex is one notch up on the acceptability scale from pornography."

It's worth noting that the first film to ever be rated NC-17 was Henry and June (1990), an arty exploration of the relationship between writers Anais Nin and Henry Miller—including their shared passion for Miller's wife, June. The film was originally rated X—a rating that GLAAD's Executive Director Richard Jennings formally asked the MPAA to reconsider.

In a letter to the MPAA, Jennings stated, "assigning an 'X' rating to films containing scenes of lesbian or gay lovemaking is discriminatory” and creates "a chilling effect, making it highly unlikely that lesbians, gay men or bisexuals will be depicted in intimate situations, and therefore as complete human beings, in mainstream Hollywood films."

Jennings also pointed out that films depicting violence against GLBT people – such as Q & A, Last Exit to Brooklyn, and After Dark, My Sweet—rated less stringently. Jennings wrote, "In our view, the violence and abuse heaped on gay characters in films promotes a climate in which many think it is acceptable to ridicule or attack lesbians and gay men. For the MPAA also to have a policy discouraging the showing of lesbians and gay men as complete human beings, with warm and loving relationships that include physical intimacy, is biased, discriminatory and unacceptable."

In regards to Basic Instinct 2, the same double-standard may still be at play nearly two decades later.

What has certainly changed since 1992 is the number and diversity of GLBT-themed films and television shows. Queer film festivals, queer film studies courses, entire bookstore sections devoted to queer representational politics have come to the fore in the last decade. Independent queer film continues to better funded and met with greater critical and popular response, and mainstream film continues to expand its inclusion of queer characters (although not always with good results).

In the last decade, films with queer content have been awarded Oscars (Boys Don't Cry, American Beauty, Monster, Brokeback Mountain), cable television has developed queer-centric programs (Queer as Folk, The L Word, Noah's Arc) and filmmakers, writers, and actors have come out and continued to thrive professionally.

Given the relative frequency of queer representation in popular culture today, perhaps there is less at stake with a film like Basic Instinct 2. This is aptly demonstrated by a recent review of the film in The San Francisco Chronicle (Friday, March 31, 2006). In her review, Ruthe Stein writes,

“As this scene (a hardly subtle riff on her infamous leg crossing in the first Basic Instinct) suggests, the sequel is one big tease. Maybe it's the 14 years that have passed since Catherine steamed up the SFPD or the move from freewheeling San Francisco to London, but she just isn't her old uninhibited self. Her bisexuality is only hinted at, blowing a ripe opportunity for hot sex between Stone and the sensuous as ever Charlotte Rampling as Dr. Glass' colleague, who takes a fancy to his new client.”

What might have once been regarded as a rare and important opportunity to accurately represent a GLBT person is today just another trashy film to be mined for sexy camp value. Perhaps expectations are lower now because they can be.

It's hard to say if there will be a Basic Instinct 3, particularly in light of the critical pummeling currently being taken by BI 2. It stands to reason that if the current sequel makes enough money—even if it's from the pockets of queer and straight viewers looking for a laugh—then a third film may be in the works. Whether or not Catherine Tramell's appetites are purely heterosexual at that point will likely speak volumes about the political climate of the day, and the progress GLBT people and filmmakers have continued to make.