‘Blue is the Warmest Color’ Can’t Play Idaho Theater Due to ‘Obscenity’

Arthouse theater is the only screen in Boise that plays foreign, independent films

If Idahoans are hoping to feast their eyes on Cannes Palme d’Or winner “Blue is the Warmest Color” in a theater, they’ll have to cross state lines to do so.

The Flicks, a Boise arthouse that corners the market on foreign and indie pics showing in the area, won’t go near the NC-17 rated film due to the strict parameters of the Idaho Code, reports the Boise Weekly.

The  code that allows exhibs’ to serve beer and wine also forbids theaters from screening movies that are in violation of Idaho’s code on indecency and obscenity. The Flicks’ liquor license is tied directly to Idaho Code 23-614, which prohibits “acts or simulated acts of sexual intercourse, masturbation, sodomy, bestiality, oral copulation and flagellation,” and “any person being touched, caressed or fondled on the breast, buttocks, anus or genitals.”

And it’s no secret that the stars of Abdellatif Kechiche’s “Blue” are caught in more than one of those acts.

After the film’s award-winning bow in Cannes, speculation spread as to whether Sundance Selects would release a tamer cut in the U.S. to score an R rating and draw in a wider audience.

But Jonathan Sehring, prexy of Sundance Selects/IFC Films, said in a statement, “This is a landmark film with two of the best female performances we have ever see on screen. The film is first and foremost a film about love, coming of age and passion. We refuse to compromise Kechiche’s vision by trimming the film for an R rating, and we have every confidence that ‘Blue Is the Warmest Color’ will play in theaters around the country regardless.”

Idaho residents, however, will be able to see the film in the intimacy of their own homes when IFC releases it on VOD after the theatrical release.

PHOTOS: Top Grossing NC-17 Movies

Filed Under:

Want to read more articles like this one? SUBSCRIBE TO VARIETY TODAY.
Post A Comment 220

Leave a Reply


Comments are moderated. They may be edited for clarity and reprinting in whole or in part in Variety publications.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

  1. Chris says:

    “This is a landmark film with two of the best female performances we have ever see on screen…..”

    Seen on screen! Seen on screen! no SEE on screen. Use the past tense please. God so many mistakes on the internet.

  2. Noir says:

    More like people will just download it, probably prior to its release in theaters….

  3. Mark Green says:

    I used to own a movie theater (in Colorado). I had complete discretion about what films I would exhibit. This is 100% normal. Libraries around the country are also free to reject certain authors and volumes at the discretion of the top librarian. This is how the these systems operate. It’s the same with book stores as well as newspapers. Some media outlets celebrate certain authors and ignore others. This is how it goes and it’s very unfair. But it’s been that way forever.

    ‘Discrimination’ is normal and routine throughout the media. At the same time, ‘political correctness’ usually advances gay authors and their causes in modern America. Not always, I admit. Sometime the pendulum swings the other way.

    Are supposed to believe that female homosexual filmmakers are uniquely victimized in modern America or Hollywood?

    Absurd. False. Lie.

  4. I think the “Crab Claw” bar from John Waters magnum Opus “Pecker”, had some of the same issues. And that is way over in Baltimore.

  5. bk says:

    Granted it sux that Hollyweird keeps producing such garbage and that even though they’re hemorrhaging money and audience the deep pockets will continue to prop it up even if only dumbs down andbrainwashes a few sheeple..BUT that doesn’t mean we want the STATE being 1st amendment judge and jury on what’s appropriate material..and while granted it sux that gays n lesbians are a protected class being used in the gay agenda to destroy the family and while all traditional morals and values are under attack..I would say that this case a private theatre showing a movie to consenting adults probably locals themselves mostly is not really shoving it in towns people’s face or forcing anything on a family

    • GTD says:

      This wasnt made in Hollywood it’s a french film bk. No one that is in it or worked on it is even American. Hollywood didnt produce this “garbage” you speak of.

  6. BigDino says:

    Yea Son-of-Liberty!! Nothing says liberty like banning a movie from grown-up viewing because you don’t like the content!! Our forefathers fought tooth and nail to do specifically that!

    • BigDino says:

      Yes, the founding father’s fought hard for us to govern ourselves while protecting the INDIVIDUAL (the bill of rights, have you read it? It’s about individual protections) so why do you feel the need to govern others’ lives so much? Why do you feel the need to prevent a theater from showing something that has nothing to do with you, won’t affect you in any way? You don’t love the founding fathers (who were by the way not a politically monolithic group at all except when it came to the constitution which I doubt you have ever read)- you love your own opinion.

  7. no tyranny says:

    Good. Some in this nation still have a sense of morality to stand against trash like this. Those that endorse films like this live in the gutter and are the reason why this nation is headed down the toilet with both parties working together to lead the way.

    • BigDino says:

      Yes, the existence of this movie is the sole reason the country is headed down the toilet. There’s no other reason. This movie and movies like this and people who don’t believe in banning movies (because they believe individuals are accountable for their own moralities)- if only this didn’t exist, everything would be perfect.

      • GTD says:

        Hey Kent do you have any facts to back up your claim about dvd sales? Studies or something?

      • BigDino says:

        Hey did you read the article, probably not. The issue is the liquor license being attached to a local law that prevents the theater from showing this movie. You don’t have to be a “leftist” to disagree with this censoring tactic. No on is arguing that the theater should have to show this. You should really read the article…

      • James Kent says:

        Dino, You make the deceptive argument for the left. The mere existence of this movie is not at issue yet you lead with that. The issue is, Should the exhibitor give up his screen to this movie to push a political cause ? This has been the story of the movie industry since the left took over Hollywood.

        Whether by distribution or funding at the studio level, movies have been pushed with a leftwing message which could otherwise have just been ENTERTAINMENT. Viewers and exhibitors have been beaten up for a long time now and are sick of it and you are seeing the shrinkage away from Hollywood as a result.

        When given a choice vis a vis dvd, cable, download, audiences are voting for anything but the Hollywood left.

      • Noir says:

        I wish I could upvote this comment.

      • BigDino says:

        People who believe in pure liberty and NOT a person who deludes themselves to thinking they’re a patriot all the while censoring and banning everything they don’t like? One of those people?

      • no tyranny says:

        Thank you for admitting to be one of the ones I was talking about.

  8. BigDino says:

    Yea ‘Murca! Let’s limit a business’s liquor license based on our opinion of what we don’t want other grownups to see. Even though no one’s forcing us to watch this movie and it’s not being displayed in a public place, it’s our liberty to make sure that no one else sees it ever!! Because liberty for everyone else only exists when we decide that it meets our standards!!

  9. Rick says:

    Goodie, another pos movie.

  10. Tom Koter says:

    A civIl society should act with civility. Hats off to you Idaho!

  11. Meg says:

    From reading some of these comments, “So glad for Idaho to ban this,” or “I don’t want to watch this stuff on screen,” all I have to say is “Don’t watch.” It’s called freedom of speech and if someone can burn a flag then I don’t see how you can stop Hollywood media from showing naked woman and men and everything else under the sheets. It’s not their job or the government’s to moderate what is right for you. And it’s silly Idaho thinks it can do this during these times.

    • BigDino says:

      What does Obama’s thugs have to do with a French movie that you’re scared of? Why would they be beating my face in with M4s? Whatever you’re talking I should probably be happy that it’s an M4 and not a heavier gun (really you couldn’t think of a heavier gun?) Is this what you wish on people with that decent moral Christian heart of yours? I bet you save a lot of souls with that talk.

    • BigDino says:

      What a vivid, Christian imagination you have No Tyranny. I especially liked the part about you writing on a public forum to, ” Get on your hands and knees and prepare be face ground doggie style while cheering for more.” So you don’t want grown ups to have the ability to see a movie, as long as you have the right to talk about taking it doggie style on the internet? Tell me more about these morals of yours…the rest of your comment was so illiterate, but if you would please reiterate so that I can make fun of it, that would be nice. Thanks.

    • BigDino says:

      Beautifully put Meg!

      • BigDino says:

        Umm I’m not gay, but thank you for thinking so sexually that somehow, that was all you could process. That’s not obscene at all. You should really read the article because no one thinks that the theater should be forced to play anything. You made that up in your head. We don’t think the local ordinance should prevent the movie from being played. Did you get that or should I type slower? Third, I’m not a liberal at all, I am a social libertarian in its purist form, but I can’t expect someone like you to think past the concept of binary political ideology, that would be too hard for you. Anything else mate?

      • BigDino says:

        Did you miss the part in the article where it said the theater cannot show this movie for fear of losing its liquor license for showing “obscenity” (something as simple as fondling or caressing). No one has said theaters should be forced to play this; however, people are making the argument that this should not be banned. Big difference. You should try reading the article and comments.

  12. BigDino says:

    I am just curious because you used the word “sodomites.” You do know this movie is about two women who don’t have the parts you’re thinking of to do what you think they’re doing, right? I can see that you’ve definitely put a lot of thought into sodomy though, kudos to you. Also, this isn’t a Hollywood film- it was made in France (it’s a country across a big swimming pool called the Atlantic Ocean).

  13. BigDino says:

    Does the thought of grown-ups going to see a movie where two actresses pretend to be in love make you feel uncomfortable?? What else would you like to ban sweetie??

  14. This reprobate, landmark of a film needs to do elsewhere. Good for you Idaho!

  15. “This is a landmark film with two of the best female performances we have ever see on screen.”
    Oh no you did not just say that… you pathetic maroon.

    • BigDino says:

      “Pathetic Maroon”? Is that some sort of pitiful shade of red or are you just one of the many illiterates here who are not sure what exactly they are commenting about?

      • BigDino says:

        I am “young” (I’ll take it) and American. I love Looney Tunes. They don’t make ’em like they use to. I’m just humored by all the crotchety people trying to make decisions for everybody else- people leaving the most illiterate, ridiculous comments of all time. I respect people’s decision to dislike or even hate this movie; but don’t censure something from the general public because you think it’s good for someone else’s morality or decency.

      • Van Grungy says:

        You must be a younger person that did not watch any Loony Tunes as a regular cartoon.
        that or a non-American

  16. I believe it’s called “community standards.” They will vary in different locales.

  17. Freedom says:

    Good for us.

  18. Joel says:

    Thank you Idaho

  19. Robert says:

    Thank God for Idaho! We need more states like them.

    • Kristen Hruby says:

      I love Idaho. We moved there from LA in the early nineties to get away from the madness and a more friendly, neighborly state you could not find. We were welcomed into the community with open arms. Nobody asked about our politics or religion-they were just plain friendly. We have an autistic daughter and she was treated so kindly by all the teachers and kids at the local school. When she graduated from high school she got a standing ovation from the whole student body. Sadly we had to move because of my husband’s job but my heart will always stay with dear Idaho.

  20. Winston says:

    They are trying to corrupt our children. You need to find out who “they” are. I know but if the rest of you don’t do your research, our way of life will be gone before end of 2014. This is a great plan that is as old as time.

    • Les Legato says:

      Hollyweird and the Liberaltarded media support the so-called palestinians, you moron. They are NOT zionists.

      You on the other hand share the same insane nazi hatred of real jews and real zionists THAT THE LEFT AND THE JIHADIS DO, so grow up or STHU.

  21. TB says:

    Laws reflect community standards. That’s why the San Fernando Valley’s full of porn shoots, and Idaho won’t show movies that contain sexual acts. If liberals had their way, everyone would be forced to live in San Fernando Valley, so to speak. Fortunately, conservative communities offer a pleasant alternative.

  22. BigDino says:

    This is ‘Murca!! We limit other people’s ability to watch something we would never watch anyways, because we are more concerned with other people’s lives and morality more than our own!! Small government except for with things we don’t like! Guns! Explosions!! Fried Foods! Mom jeans! Bible verses we selectively apply without context!! Down with freedom of speech and press and religions we don’t like- because all of that is evil communism, socialism, fascism, Marxism, Islam, Buddhism, Secularism etc… On the real, thank goodness for VOD for anyone under age 40 in that state.

    • GSH says:

      We are against BIG government which not under direct control of the people being impacted by it’s governance, especially when it isn’t local, such as the out of control Federal Government. When the local government is in the control of the local population, the people have the right, and ability to form their communities in a manner which they believe benefits their lives. Keeping pornography out of the market place has proven to be highly effective in improving the lives of everyone in a community. Allowing pornography in the market place has proven over and over to be seriously detrimental to the lives of everyone in the community.

      • BigDino says:

        So it is okay for government to impose itself into your life as long as it is only at the local level? Big government is not exclusive to just the federal or state level. That is fine if you feel the need to limit what you see or is available in your own home, but for the local government to limit the ability of a grownup to go see a movie that they want to see, because the local government thinks it know better than that individual/group of individuals is over-reaching. Pornography is something very specific (I know you know what it is), this movie is 3 hours long with about a 6 minute sex scene. That is not pornography.

    • BigDino says:

      ML. Really? Is that what it’s called? “Circumventing seems like a big word for you to use.
      Freedom, see my comment above. People have the right not to watch this. They can hate it if they want, whatever. Simply for the sake of it existing as local government, it should be able to limit other people’s ability to offer a product (the liquor license being tied to the very loosely defined “obscenity law”) or limiting other people from watching something because you’ve deemed it to icky for consenting, legal adults to watch? That sounds like an over-reaching, intrusive local government to me.

    • BigDino says:

      Yea!! Misspelling insults because we’re illiterate and can’t think of anything but logical fallacies to fart out! ‘Murca!!

    • Ernie says:

      If a Vendor decides that he will not offer a Product, then I have no Problem with that. Nothing “Requires” a Theatre to show any Movie, any more than any Law “Requires” a Corner Grocery to sell Coca-Cola…The Vendor can offer the Products that he chooses to offer.

      • BigDino says:

        Is the vendor choosing not to offer this product or are they not allowed to offer it because obscenity laws are tied to the liquor license in their theaters? I respect people’s choice to not see the movie. I don’t respect limiting other people’s choices to see it because a group of people passed an ordinance that decided sex is too icky for other people to see. Also to all of the crotchety people out there. Pornography is something very specific. You keep using that word. I do not think you know what it means.

  23. Dave Morrison says:

    Good for them!! God Bless them and the Idaho law!

  24. Jay Hodge says:

    Unless the theater is government owned, it still needs to make a profit. Maybe the local market in that part of Idaho isn’t strong enough to make enough profit on this kind of movie.

    • no tyranny says:

      In addition unlike a BigDino on here understands a movie like this would possibly get the place boycotted by the conservative base thus placing them in an even more difficult situation.

      • BigDino says:

        The conservative base loves freedom so much it will boycott a theater for exercising its freedom? I think I understand just fine…

  25. Jk says:

    Do you think the movie would be so ‘award winning’ is the love scenes were of 2 overweight, short haired lesbians?? Don’t think so! What do you think Cannes film critics?

  26. I care about this movie. Only not very much.

  27. Candace says:

    This is one of the reasons this Christian woman moved from Southern California to Idaho. I love my new home of Idaho!!

  28. ronnie says:

    So you can’t watch anything that is sexual in nature in a theater that serves liquor, because anything sexual is considered obscene, but it’s okay to drink and watch someone’s head get blown off or body dismembered in a movie like Machete because there is nothing obscene about that? The double standard for sex and violence still continues

    • BigDino says:

      YEA!! BAN ALL MOVIES EVERYWHERE AND EVERYONE STAY IS SAN FRANCISCO!! Because, apparently, that’s where everyone who does not like imposing limitations on others is from!! With their proper grammar, and fancy books, and respect for people’s choices to not see the movie for moral reasons without wanting to ban it for everyone else.

    • Freedom says:

      please stay in san fran…where you won’t be confused by good behavior

    • GFM2013 says:

      Non sequitur…

  29. Fair and Warmer says:

    Good on ya Id!

  30. Charles Dykes says:

    Good deal Idaho!!! Proud to hear there are people who choose decency over the obscenity and smut laden products that are produced today. Maybe the remainder of our country will pick up on your efforts to ‘keep it clean’. I realize there are areas that are hopelessly filthy and knee deep in debauchery and probably will not change for anything. Again, glad to hear you folks are standing on decency!!

  31. Ya, disgusting, who wants to see real life… make a movie about liberalism, conservatism, money, oil healthcare… anything, god forbid you make a movie about real life! how dare you!!! Disgusting, no one in america wants to see a movie about the good in people!

    • BigDino says:

      That is a very vivid description. It sounds like you have some experience with that.

    • Freedom says:

      Could care less if you make a movie…just glad we have standards here. As for you, I suppose you would watch a movie of somebody watching paint dry eh! Just because it’s life don’t mean it needs ot be shared…

      • BigDino says:

        I’m a social libertarian and I don’t feel the need to govern every aspect of people’s lives because of “decency” or whatever. I don’t expect you to comprehend the difference between a liberal and libertarian, but I assure you they are quite different. I think you’ve slipped up in your argument here. “Self governance” implies that the theater should be able to play this movie without fear of losing its liquor license, “self governance” assumes that people should have the ability to see whatever movie they want without someone like yourself trying to prevent them from doing so, “self governance” implies that it is not the local governments job to pass laws on the loose translation of “obscenity” preventing a 3 hour movie with a 6 minute simulated scene from being shown. You are not being forced to see this, now don’t force yourself on people who want to, you hypocrite!!

      • BigDino says:

        Yea Standards!!! In Idaho, they are not limited to monitoring what is on in their own home, they’ll limit what everyone else has access to as well. BECAUSE STANDARDS! Why let people make informed decisions for themselves when the local government could do it for them?! Standards everybody! I love the derogatory language and swearing and name-calling from everybody complaining on here, it’s so hypocritical.

    • Stumpie says:

      Yes, show us the ‘good’ predators and hedonists, the sodomites and moral corruption…yeah the ‘good’ people.

    • oh i forgot the best selling thing in america, make a movie about people killing people, that will sell big time, you can just rehash that stuff, people here will buy, buy, buy… i know i do.

      • Freedom says:

        mmm…a movie of people pretending to kill each other, or a movie of two fat lesbo’s going down on each other…for real. Give me fake killing any day…does that make me a bad person? hahaha

      • GFM2013 says:

        That’s disgusting, and you’re personally gross…

  32. idahoguy101 says:

    Welcome to Idaho. The Flicks will play the R rated version whenever it comes out

  33. Christine Craft says:

    Idaho….a cultural wasteland

    • Mike Latoris says:

      Not only a uniform layer of filth but full victim disarmament zones so the Liberaltarded kunts can have a killing field and birth defect sexual perversion.

    • meesha says:

      Idaho. CULTURAL HOPE! I don’t go to theaters because the tickets prices are outrageous as well as anything in the concession stand. HOWEVER, I would go to The Flicks to support their decision. I remember when the first James Bond movie came out in the 60’s and it was “TABOO” for anyone under 21. Look how far we have come in protecting the innocence of our children.

  34. gotwood4sale says:


    Very well stated…thank you!

    Save our country. Remain active. Change a dozen minds. K-e-e-p the ball rolling. Vote TEA! Vote FREEDOM!


  35. kent says:

    Idaho sounds like a GREAT place live!

  36. Ryan says:

    I can assure everyone that Code 23-614’s enforcement in this case would be struck down as unconstitutional. But, the theater is free to run its business as it sees fit. I’m a little surprised by how ignorant most of the commenters on here are haha…not the colloquial meaning of ignorant where people use it in place of the word rude – most commenters are genuinely uneducated. It’s entertaining to watch people get so worked up at the idea of ONE, SINGLE theater in an entire state considering a showing of this haha.

    • Freedom says:

      nope, it is linked to the liquor license that the state would pull and liquor licences are worth a ton of money here. So, they could show thier move but never serve liquor again…so go back to law school.

    • GFM2013 says:

      Roger that, rubber duckie…

  37. Lotta says:

    Watch and do.

  38. Lotta says:

    Can’t wait. :-(

  39. Thank you that there are morals left in this world

  40. Dick Paetzke says:

    Why would anybody bother seeing it in any form?

  41. Jan Vones says:

    How is this news?

    Oreder the DVD from Amazon–it’s cheeper than two movie tickets anyway.

  42. Freeland_Dave says:

    I tend to agree with you but there is a saying in the media that to be successful you need to provide what the public wants. To me it is an indicator how bad things have gotten and how inappropriately tolerant and or ambivalent our overall citizenry has become. The problem here then becomes that it will never go away because people refuse or are reluctant to deal with the real subject head on. It really has nothing to do with religion at all and is everything about a minority forcing its will on everyone who thinks and believes differently.

  43. R Lange says:

    Amendment One — Freedom of Speech, Press, Religion and Petition
    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

    Amendment Two — Right to keep and bear arms
    A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

    The Second ensures the First — an easy way to remember.

  44. Freeland_Dave says:

    Only if we allow them to. That’s the beauty of freedom. You can believe what you desire, or accept and reject what you desire and can’t be forced to do it against your will. The devil doesn’t make anyone do anything. They decide that on their own free will.

    For me I don’t let fads or Hollywood (generic to mean the entire entertainment business around the globe) dictate to me what I am going to think and or do. I choose to make those decisions entirely on my own and could really care what others may think about it.

  45. JohnJGalt says:

    2nd Amendment? Perhaps you might want to purchase a copy of the Constitution and read it. Just a thought.

    • Freeland_Dave says:

      I was trying to comprehend his/her (it’s difficult to tell given the subject matter) comment as well. I didn’t see anything in the article that had anything to do with the Second Amendment at all.

  46. Alfred says:

    Everyone here seems to be criticizing Hollywood’s lack of morality. This is a French film that has nothing to do with Hollywood.

    • Freeland_Dave says:

      I see you have become proficient in picking fly specks out of pepper. “Hollywood” as has been used in these posts to air complaints about how the film industry all over the world has been behaving. Are you that obtuse that you couldn’t figure that out with your rather stupid comment? Sorry but you were the person that stupidly pushed my button and the comment isn’t really directed at you personally but every other person who can’t seem to comprehend something generically said versus something, place or thing, that is specific.

      • Laura says:

        TO the comment “cultural hegmony” boy don’t we take ourselves way, waaaay, too seriously!!!!

      • Jim says:

        To say “Hollywood” stands in for “global cinema” is to impose a cultural hegemony (not to mention a political economy) that completely fails to take into account the incredible levels of variation at play in a number of countries around the world that have worked to foster their own national cinemas that stand in deliberate contrast to Hollywood. It demonstrates a total lack of awareness of the political project of Abdellatif Kechiche’s films.

      • GFM2013 says:

        Be careful, FD… somebody’s panties are all bunched up…

      • Freeland_Dave says:

        the common sense truth says or tcsts for short.
        tcsts: I don’t know or really care. Some of them may be or they may not be. My comment about “Hollywood” encompasses the entire industry, foreign and domestic. Much better made or done by better actors is subjective and since I don’t intend to watch the film regardless of who made it, for me it isn’t important.

      • Alfred says:

        I am truly awestruck by your brilliance and erudition. So who is the pompous pedantic ass? GFYS and that was PERSONAL.

      • the common sense truth says:

        So nobody associated with Hollywood is bringing this to USA for distribution, promotion, etc? Is this not the typical stuff that comes out of Hollywood – only much better made and acted since it isn’t a product of Hollywood?

  47. I’m sure, after all the film critics are finished gawking over ti and snapping their fingers like 1950’s beatniks, both movie patrons will be slightly disappointed!

  48. Mary Johnson says:

    good, stand by your moral beliefs

  49. crystal says:

    God Bless Idaho……

More Film News from Variety