Getting a PG-13 rating:Ruining movies? - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Pellaz · 08-01-2004, 10:05 AM

This has gotten to be such a pet peave of mine. Movies that seem in each and every way that they should be rated R, but are toned down just enough to get a PG-13 rating.

Is the 13-16 year old crowd THAT much a marketing force to make this happen? The relaxation on what is allowed in a PG-13 movie should mean that it shouldn't be a matter of parents taking their 10 year-olds causing the need, I'd think.

This was mainly pushed over the edge with me when the upcoming Aliens vs Predator turned out to garner a PG-13 rating.

I don't think an R rating in and of itself makes a movie any better. I don't think that saying fuck more than once, showing nudity often, or being very bloody makes a movie any better. I DO think that many sacrifices get made to a movies tone, story, and content that are detrimental to it in the quest for a PG-13 rating. Anyone else fed up with this?

bob32 · 08-01-2004, 12:14 PM

I think the movie should be shown the way the director wanted it to be shown. Instead of the way the studios want it to be shown, so they can make extra money by having a more "teen-friendly" rating.

I can't think of many examples of PG-13 and (would be) R movies that this happens to, but I know it happens all the time with R and (would be) NC-17 movies. That's why on DVDs you see so many "Unrated Versions" of movies. But these are usually comedies, so cutting out scenes doesn't exactly hurt the plot.

Baldrick · 08-01-2004, 12:25 PM

I don't even care about 99% of the movies in the theatre anymore - I'll care about what they do on DVD. It's not unusual for the big Hollywood films to have almost a completely different "Directors" or "Uncut" version of it available. I can't wait to see AvP, but won't be going to the theatre for it. I'll wait for the inevitable uncut special edition DVD.

Chronicles of Riddick is a great example. It was apparently made to be a very philisophical, story heavy, three hour movie. Considering I think Riddick is one of the most interesting new action characters to be created in a while (I'm a sucker for the anti-hero schtick), I was very happy! But Universal decided they needed to turn it into a summer popcorn action flick for the masses - and butchered it. They are now working on the directors cut for the DVD, so we can see it as it was meant to be seen.

Destrox · 08-01-2004, 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Baldrick
Chronicles of Riddick is a great example. It was apparently made to be a very philisophical, story heavy, three hour movie. Considering I think Riddick is one of the most interesting new action characters to be created in a while (I'm a sucker for the anti-hero schtick), I was very happy! But Universal decided they needed to turn it into a summer popcorn action flick for the masses - and butchered it. They are now working on the directors cut for the DVD, so we can see it as it was meant to be seen.

That is awesome news!

As for the thread, I was saddened they did this with King Arthur. They removed alot of the bloody scenes just to give it a PG-13 rating.

whocarz · 08-05-2004, 02:10 AM

I have to agree with Destrox on the King Arthur thing. It was a damn good movie, but what the fuck? In my mind, you can't have a realistic portrayal of combat without blood and gore. The movie went unrated until about a week before it opened, and I saw the pg-13 rating and I immediately knew it was for the money. Another thing I'm sick of is movies that are "based on a true story", but they are almost completely untrue, and that movie was so historically inaccurate, it's laughable. But that's a whole other topic.

I was also surprised when I saw a commercial for AvP the other day (on one of the rare days I happen to watch tv) and saw it slapped with the pg-13 rating. That's blasphemy to me. I enjoy Aliens and both Predator movies, and both franchises have always had an R rating. But now the bigwigs are so money hungry, they have to butcher a movie just to get the teenie bopper dollar. Pathetic.

Booray · 08-05-2004, 06:20 AM

I didn't realize AvP got a PG-13 rating. That's just stupid. The previous movies in both series should've set the standard of how the movies should be done and it shouldn't be toned down.

It just occurred to me that I saw both Aliens and Predator in the theater when they came out (when I was 12 & 13 respectively). Guess they didn't give much of a problem back then to kids hitting R movies.

BigGov · 08-05-2004, 07:40 AM

The thing about AvP that MIGHT have let it through is because the violence is mostly made up between two completely made up aliens, no humans involved. Kinda like Pokemon except cooler.

That is why I prefer people who just don't give a shit about the MPAA or other worthless organizations. People like Trey Parker and Matt Stone.

kutulu · 08-05-2004, 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by BigGov
That is why I prefer people who just don't give a shit about the MPAA or other worthless organizations. People like Trey Parker and Matt Stone.

I loved how they gave the MPAA the finger with their movie.

thesupermikey · 08-05-2004, 11:25 AM

When i got to college, i was blown away by how many people (18-23) would not watch 'R' rated films. Or how may people would walk out of a movie if they said 3 'bad words'.

PredeconInferno · 08-05-2004, 11:31 AM

Baldrick, Pellaz:

I agree with both of you whole-heartedly.

I find that going to PG-13 movies ruins the story for more than just toning the movie down. What I am referring to is the people that go to see a PG-13 movies. Namely: 13, 14, and 15 year old kids. Why does this anger me? Well, the last PG-13 movie I went to, there were four children in the row in front of me dumping popcorn on eachother, skittles were hitting the floor (imagine a serious part of a movie then the sound of a hundred or so skittles falling on a concrete floor).

Baldrick, one MAJOR reason I like the special DVDs is, yes, the movies are seen the way they were MEANT to be seen. Another reason, I don't have to deal with all the idiots that come to the movies and end up sitting in front of me.

One time, a woman burst out lauging (near hysterics) when Katsumoto killed himself in "The Last Samurai."

Church · 08-05-2004, 11:36 AM

AVP is only PG-13?

Fuck...

Stompy · 08-05-2004, 11:54 AM

Ah yes, PG-13 is a curse.

If AVP is PG-13, the movie WILL be stupid. I promise you that. ANY horror/thriller movie that is PG-13 WILL be horrible. I was actually planning on seeing this until I realized it was PG-13

Remember The Ring? Yeah, that was PG-13. Believe it or not, kids in the 13-16 age group LOVE movies like these.

I know a few people who are 13-16 and they love this crap. It's obnoxious to see them clamor over stuff like House of the Dead (rated R), saying it's a good movie

whocarz · 08-05-2004, 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by PredeconInferno
One time, a woman burst out lauging (near hysterics) when Katsumoto killed himself in "The Last Samurai."

I really liked "The Last Samurai", and when I watched it in the theater, these two fat harpies sitting behind me started laughing when Katsumoto's son charged the guardsmen and was shot down on the bridge. I felt like leaping on them and beating their heads in. GAH!

skinnymofo · 08-05-2004, 06:04 PM

i thought aliens and alien 3 were both pg13? they (atleast to me) seemed to be a lot more toned down and less thriller with more just plain old alien killing, barely showing the action
I didnt realize AVP was rated so low, ive been waiting for this movie for so long i had lost hope on them making it in late 90s. kinda like terminator 3 where they talk about it for ages and then it comes out another 10 years later.

Booray · 08-05-2004, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by thesupermikey
When i got to college, i was blown away by how many people (18-23) would not watch 'R' rated films. Or how may people would walk out of a movie if they said 3 'bad words'.

Do you go to a religious affiliated college, because I just can't imagine college-age kids giving a crap. I never saw anything like that when I was in school.

Talon Valdez · 08-05-2004, 08:27 PM

I was thinking about that AvP thing yseterday when I realized something. If they made Alien today, it could probably get a PG-13 easily. So perhaps this won't be so bad. I then shot down my own argument by rewatching Predator 1 & 2. Oh well, the sad thing is that I will still end up paying money to go see AvP, even after all this.

skinnymofo · 08-06-2004, 03:18 PM

I was looking through a free seattle news paper today THE STRANGER, and they had an add inside giving out 2 free tickets to see AVP next thursday. Just a heads up to seattleites

frankx · 08-08-2004, 06:14 PM

I know it's perfectly obvious, but the movie studios have discovered that unfortunately-all-too-important 13 to 17 yo demographic, and what an incredible moneymaker it is. Giving a damn about what adults might want to see always takes a backseat to gross profit. Movie theaters are always jam packed with teens and preteens nowadays, and that's pretty much why adults wind up paying hard earned money to see bullshit like "Dude, Where's My Car?" and "Little Nicky" and feeling like they've been crapped on by the major studios when they leave the theater.

I have waited to see AVP for quite some time now (probably since I saw Predator 2 in the theater a looooong time ago - rated R, BTW) and I am in agreement that a PG13 rating equals a death knell for any sort of integrity for this movie. It's yet another of the myriad of reasons that I've pretty much stopped patronizing the local frankenplex, but that's another story.

Cynthetiq · 08-09-2004, 08:13 AM

eh... i dont' see any harm in it.

if it's a good movie it will stand on it's own.

gdr2004 · 08-09-2004, 11:21 AM

They need to tone it down and get the PG rating. That's where the money is ;-)

Nafter · 08-09-2004, 04:52 PM

Maybe its just me, but i like a bit of swearing/bloodshed/sex in my films, it pains me when a new film (AvP being one) has a 12 rating (uk), you just know everythings going to be toned down and niceified for the teen audience, with ~bad films the only things goin for it are these things sometimes heh. A well made film will be good whatever the rating as long as maker doesnt allow it to comprimise his creativity, but if the maker is restricted by the studios forcing it to be a lower rating the film can suffer as a result as the orginal thought for the scene cant be used, and has to be changed to fit the rating.

Would it be hard to release 2 versions a "directors cut" and a normal version, with differnet ratings? I dont know a lot about the film industry so dont know if its possible, would it cost a lot more etc, but i like going to the cinema, the whole experiance of it and waiting months for the dvd aint fun. I tend to prefer the directors cuts and im sure a lot of people are with me.

Cynthetiq · 08-10-2004, 07:57 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Nafter
Maybe its just me, but i like a bit of swearing/bloodshed/sex in my films, it pains me when a new film (AvP being one) has a 12 rating (uk), you just know everythings going to be toned down and niceified for the teen audience, with ~bad films the only things goin for it are these things sometimes heh. A well made film will be good whatever the rating as long as maker doesnt allow it to comprimise his creativity, but if the maker is restricted by the studios forcing it to be a lower rating the film can suffer as a result as the orginal thought for the scene cant be used, and has to be changed to fit the rating.

Would it be hard to release 2 versions a "directors cut" and a normal version, with differnet ratings? I dont know a lot about the film industry so dont know if its possible, would it cost a lot more etc, but i like going to the cinema, the whole experiance of it and waiting months for the dvd aint fun. I tend to prefer the directors cuts and im sure a lot of people are with me.

if they did release it as such it would be over time otherwise it would cannabalise sales. That's why they do it for DVDs usually. A few have seen theatrical releases like Donnie Darko, Apocolypse Now, Star Wars... but it's usually too expensive.

an article on that subject.
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthr...=directors+cut

Cynthetiq · 09-07-2004, 05:22 AM

this was written up over the weekend...

Quote:

from the September 03, 2004 edition - http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0903/p12s01-almo.html

Cracks in the ratings leave parents in the lurch
Movies rated PG-13 vary widely in content, leading to calls for reform
By Kim Campbell | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

The PG-13 movie rating turns 20 this year, but the mood surrounding the anniversary is hardly celebratory. Two decades after the decision to close the gap between PG and R-rated movies, critics and family advocates are charging that an overall ratings reform is in order. Their efforts are fueled in part by parental concern and at least one 2004 study suggesting that the PG-13 movies of today are approaching the content of the R-rated movies of 10 years ago.

To better help parents monitor an expanding universe of media, some observers are calling for a uniform rating system that covers everything: movies, TV, and videogames. Others suggest changes to the current ratings, such as an R-13 category or even an A for adult movies that aren't pornographic, as a way to address the problematic rating at the center of the debate.

"The PG-13 rating has been the heart of most of the complaints and most of the problems with the rating system, particularly in the last 10 years," says Michael Medved, a cultural critic and host of a syndicated radio talk show. "Most American parents have never fully registered the essential difference between PG and PG-13. In fact, I think you could say the rating was deliberately designed to obfuscate."

Back in 1984, PG-13 looked like a good answer to the problem of more nudity and violence slipping into PG movies. The 1984 film "Sixteen Candles" was rated PG, for example, even though it contains a shower scene in which a woman is shown topless. But it was another 1984 film that galvanized the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) to add the extra rating it had already been considering - the Stephen Spielberg-George Lucas project "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom." That movie earned a PG rating despite the fact that a scene showed a man's beating heart being removed from his chest.

Since then, Hollywood has become more enamored of the rating. At the box office, PG-13 movies are now more common than R-rated ones among the top-grossing films in the United States. Of all the movies released between January 2000 and August 21 2004, 108 earned more than $100 million, and of those 62 were rated PG-13, and 20 were rated R, according to Exhibitor Relations Co., a box-office tracking firm in Los Angeles. (By way of comparison, between 1990 and 99, of the 128 movies that earned more than $100 million, 46 were rated PG-13, and 45 were R.)

Movie critic Roger Ebert, in an e-mail, says Hollywood isn't directly influencing how movies are categorized, but that "there has been steady, relentless pressure over the years to expand the scope of what is permissible within PG-13."

Some parents say they don't typically rely on ratings alone. Instead, they scan local papers and the Internet (where they can find independent reviews on sites like www.screenit.com and www.kidsinmind.com) for additional information.

Maige Becerra of Manhattan reads The New York Times, the New York Daily News, and the Village Voice to determine whether her 13-year-old daughter, Renee, will be permitted to see movies such as the 2003 remake of "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" (that was a "no") or the recent R-rated "Garden State," which the two attended together.

"I don't let Renee watch Rated-R movies unless I know a little bit about the content," she says. Her daughter says sometimes she will just wait until a movie comes on HBO and sneak a peek anyway.

A few things automatically earn a movie at least a PG-13 rating: drug use, or the "single use of one of the harsher sexually derived words, though only as an expletive," according to the MPAA website. If more than one of these words is used, or is used in a sexual situation, then it's an automatic "R." But the rating board, which includes parents, can change that rule if, by a special vote, it "feels that a lesser rating would more responsibly reflect the opinion of American parents."

Mr. Medved argues this is the wrong approach. Instead of making a determination based on instances of swearing and the like, the board should base it on the underlying message. He points to the movies "Gone in Sixty Seconds" and "The Fast and the Furious," both of which were rated PG-13. "It seems to me that a movie ought to get an R rating if it actively encourages car theft ... [or] drug use, or alcohol use."

Today, the MPAA ratings are facing closer scrutiny by academics. A study by the Harvard School of Public Health recently pointed out signs of "ratings creep." The study addresses all the current MPAA ratings, and found in particular that PG-13 is approaching the average roster of foul language, violence, and nudity of the R-rated movies of a decade ago. Authors of the study argue that with more media synergy - such as movies and video games coming out on the same day, but with different ratings - a unified rating system across entertainment media is necessary.

"The Harvard study to me is less relevant than parental reaction," counters Jack Valenti, retiring MPAA president and CEO, in a phone interview. The current ratings - including PG-13 - are working fine, he argues, because parents say so. The outcome of an annual survey by the MPAA found in 2003 that 76 percent of parents with children under 13 said they found the current ratings system is "very useful/fairly useful" as a guide for deciding what movies children should see. Twenty-one percent said it is not very useful.

The system may not be perfect, says Mr. Valenti, but with that many parents approving, it seems unwise to change anything. "I'm not claiming that this is the finest we can do," he says. "This ratings system has survived, it has stood up ... why change it so long as parents find it useful?"

Critics argue that if the system were working as it should, there wouldn't be so much discussion about the need to improve it. But they also encourage parents to seek out as much information as they can about movies, pointing out that what may be appropriate for one 13-year-old, for example, may not be for another.

In an effort to help parents, five alternative-ratings groups joined together in July to form the Coalition for Independent Ratings Services.

"Parents need so much information to even try to begin to raise our kids well," says Lori Pearson, lead critic for movie ratings site kidsinmind.com. "And though I have nothing bad to say about MPAA, because they've been doing a fine job all these years, I really think that we need to look at the system and reevaluate it."

Lasereth · 09-07-2004, 05:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynthetiq

eh... i dont' see any harm in it.

if it's a good movie it will stand on it's own.

Some movies are good before they receive a MPAA rating. Once they get the rating, if it's R, half the time directors will cut out parts of the movie to get a PG-13 rating simply because a lot of moviegoers won't be able to see it. A once good movie is butchered by cuts and edits to make it fit for younger audiences. The MPAA is an idiotic organization...some movies get an R for swearing and others get PG-13 with massive violence and some nudity/sexual content. Sorry, I guess reading Roger Ebert's columns every week has left a bitter taste about the MPAA in my mouth.

-Lasereth

radioguy · 09-11-2004, 02:11 PM

It seems that every movie that comes out now is rated PG-13. That bugs the hell out of me! Sometimes, I want to see more action/violence or see more nudity. Everything seems to be toned down now. All the teen comedy's are PG-13 now. Teen Comedy = Nudity!! = R rating. Come on directors, don't give into the MPAA just to make a movie more "socially friendly".

Blistex · 09-14-2004, 04:41 PM

Anyone see orgazmo? It got an NC-17 while movies with actual nudity and violence get PG-13.

I think it's just who the MPAA likes gets the rating they want.

p.s. does anyone remember that Christian Movie review site that used to be linked on fark? That site always cracked me up.

Lasereth · 09-14-2004, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blistex

p.s. does anyone remember that Christian Movie review site that used to be linked on fark? That site always cracked me up.

Some people actually use that site. Yes, it's freakin hilarious. I'm pretty sure it's still up and running.

-Lasereth

inharmony · 09-14-2004, 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pellaz

This has gotten to be such a pet peave of mine. Movies that seem in each and every way that they should be rated R, but are toned down just enough to get a PG-13 rating.

Is the 13-16 year old crowd THAT much a marketing force to make this happen? The relaxation on what is allowed in a PG-13 movie should mean that it shouldn't be a matter of parents taking their 10 year-olds causing the need, I'd think.

This was mainly pushed over the edge with me when the upcoming Aliens vs Predator turned out to garner a PG-13 rating.

I don't think an R rating in and of itself makes a movie any better. I don't think that saying fuck more than once, showing nudity often, or being very bloody makes a movie any better. I DO think that many sacrifices get made to a movies tone, story, and content that are detrimental to it in the quest for a PG-13 rating. Anyone else fed up with this?

Have to agree totally. In fact, I just mentioned this very topic to my friend after seeing AVP. We both agreed, would've been much better more gore etc. to compare with original movies of both Alien and Predator.

08-01-2004, 10:05 AM	#1 (permalink)
Pellaz Addict Location: Texas	Getting a PG-13 rating:Ruining movies? This has gotten to be such a pet peave of mine. Movies that seem in each and every way that they should be rated R, but are toned down just enough to get a PG-13 rating. Is the 13-16 year old crowd THAT much a marketing force to make this happen? The relaxation on what is allowed in a PG-13 movie should mean that it shouldn't be a matter of parents taking their 10 year-olds causing the need, I'd think. This was mainly pushed over the edge with me when the upcoming Aliens vs Predator turned out to garner a PG-13 rating. I don't think an R rating in and of itself makes a movie any better. I don't think that saying fuck more than once, showing nudity often, or being very bloody makes a movie any better. I DO think that many sacrifices get made to a movies tone, story, and content that are detrimental to it in the quest for a PG-13 rating. Anyone else fed up with this? __________________ " ' Big Mouth. Remember it took three of you to kill me. A god, a boy, and, last and least, a hero.' "

08-01-2004, 12:25 PM	#3 (permalink)
Baldrick We are everywhere... Location: Barrie, Ontario	I don't even care about 99% of the movies in the theatre anymore - I'll care about what they do on DVD. It's not unusual for the big Hollywood films to have almost a completely different "Directors" or "Uncut" version of it available. I can't wait to see AvP, but won't be going to the theatre for it. I'll wait for the inevitable uncut special edition DVD. Chronicles of Riddick is a great example. It was apparently made to be a very philisophical, story heavy, three hour movie. Considering I think Riddick is one of the most interesting new action characters to be created in a while (I'm a sucker for the anti-hero schtick), I was very happy! But Universal decided they needed to turn it into a summer popcorn action flick for the masses - and butchered it. They are now working on the directors cut for the DVD, so we can see it as it was meant to be seen. __________________ You can be young only once, but you can be immature for the rest of your life...

08-05-2004, 02:10 AM	#5 (permalink)
whocarz Jarhead Location: Colorado	I have to agree with Destrox on the King Arthur thing. It was a damn good movie, but what the fuck? In my mind, you can't have a realistic portrayal of combat without blood and gore. The movie went unrated until about a week before it opened, and I saw the pg-13 rating and I immediately knew it was for the money. Another thing I'm sick of is movies that are "based on a true story", but they are almost completely untrue, and that movie was so historically inaccurate, it's laughable. But that's a whole other topic. I was also surprised when I saw a commercial for AvP the other day (on one of the rare days I happen to watch tv) and saw it slapped with the pg-13 rating. That's blasphemy to me. I enjoy Aliens and both Predator movies, and both franchises have always had an R rating. But now the bigwigs are so money hungry, they have to butcher a movie just to get the teenie bopper dollar. Pathetic. __________________ If there exists anything mightier than destiny, then it is the courage to face destiny unflinchingly. -Geibel Despise not death, but welcome it, for nature wills it like all else. -Marcus Aurelius Come on, you sons of bitches! Do you want to live forever? -GySgt. Daniel J. "Dan" Daly

08-05-2004, 06:20 AM	#6 (permalink)
Booray Stumbling to the end Location: Atlanta, GA	I didn't realize AvP got a PG-13 rating. That's just stupid. The previous movies in both series should've set the standard of how the movies should be done and it shouldn't be toned down. It just occurred to me that I saw both Aliens and Predator in the theater when they came out (when I was 12 & 13 respectively). Guess they didn't give much of a problem back then to kids hitting R movies. __________________ Persuaded, paraded, inebriated, and down Still aware of everything life carries on without

08-05-2004, 07:40 AM	#7 (permalink)
BigGov WoW or Class... Location: UWW	The thing about AvP that MIGHT have let it through is because the violence is mostly made up between two completely made up aliens, no humans involved. Kinda like Pokemon except cooler. That is why I prefer people who just don't give a shit about the MPAA or other worthless organizations. People like Trey Parker and Matt Stone. __________________ One day an Englishman, a Scotsman, and an Irishman walked into a pub together. They each bought a pint of Guinness. Just as they were about to enjoy their creamy beverage, three flies landed in each of their pints. The Englishman pushed his beer away in disgust. The Scotsman fished the fly out of his beer and continued drinking it, as if nothing had happened. The Irishman, too, picked the fly out of his drink but then held it out over the beer and yelled "SPIT IT OUT, SPIT IT OUT, YOU BASTARD!"

08-01-2004, 12:14 PM	#2 (permalink)
bob32 Crazy	I think the movie should be shown the way the director wanted it to be shown. Instead of the way the studios want it to be shown, so they can make extra money by having a more "teen-friendly" rating. I can't think of many examples of PG-13 and (would be) R movies that this happens to, but I know it happens all the time with R and (would be) NC-17 movies. That's why on DVDs you see so many "Unrated Versions" of movies. But these are usually comedies, so cutting out scenes doesn't exactly hurt the plot.

08-05-2004, 11:25 AM	#9 (permalink)
thesupermikey I got blisters on me fingers!!! Location: In my stressless expectation free zone.	When i got to college, i was blown away by how many people (18-23) would not watch 'R' rated films. Or how may people would walk out of a movie if they said 3 'bad words'. __________________ If you are not outraged than you are not paying attention! "Reality has a well-known liberal bias" - Steven Colbert

08-05-2004, 11:31 AM	#10 (permalink)
PredeconInferno Reclusiarch Location: Unfortunately Houston, TX	Baldrick, Pellaz: I agree with both of you whole-heartedly. I find that going to PG-13 movies ruins the story for more than just toning the movie down. What I am referring to is the people that go to see a PG-13 movies. Namely: 13, 14, and 15 year old kids. Why does this anger me? Well, the last PG-13 movie I went to, there were four children in the row in front of me dumping popcorn on eachother, skittles were hitting the floor (imagine a serious part of a movie then the sound of a hundred or so skittles falling on a concrete floor). Baldrick, one MAJOR reason I like the special DVDs is, yes, the movies are seen the way they were MEANT to be seen. Another reason, I don't have to deal with all the idiots that come to the movies and end up sitting in front of me. One time, a woman burst out lauging (near hysterics) when Katsumoto killed himself in "The Last Samurai." __________________ Samurai in Training Knowledge is power. Guard it well.

08-05-2004, 11:36 AM	#11 (permalink)
Church Tilted F*ckhead Location: New Jersey	AVP is only PG-13? Fuck... __________________ Through counter-intelligence, it should be possible to pinpoint potential trouble makers, and neutralize them.

08-05-2004, 11:54 AM	#12 (permalink)
Stompy Banned from being Banned Location: Donkey	Ah yes, PG-13 is a curse. If AVP is PG-13, the movie WILL be stupid. I promise you that. ANY horror/thriller movie that is PG-13 WILL be horrible. I was actually planning on seeing this until I realized it was PG-13 Remember The Ring? Yeah, that was PG-13. Believe it or not, kids in the 13-16 age group LOVE movies like these. I know a few people who are 13-16 and they love this crap. It's obnoxious to see them clamor over stuff like House of the Dead (rated R), saying it's a good movie __________________ I love lamp.

08-05-2004, 06:04 PM	#14 (permalink)
skinnymofo Addict ed to smack Location: Seattle	i thought aliens and alien 3 were both pg13? they (atleast to me) seemed to be a lot more toned down and less thriller with more just plain old alien killing, barely showing the action I didnt realize AVP was rated so low, ive been waiting for this movie for so long i had lost hope on them making it in late 90s. kinda like terminator 3 where they talk about it for ages and then it comes out another 10 years later.

08-05-2004, 08:27 PM	#16 (permalink)
Talon Valdez Upright Location: Georgia	I was thinking about that AvP thing yseterday when I realized something. If they made Alien today, it could probably get a PG-13 easily. So perhaps this won't be so bad. I then shot down my own argument by rewatching Predator 1 & 2. Oh well, the sad thing is that I will still end up paying money to go see AvP, even after all this. __________________ It begins and ends with this...You simply can't care what the answer will be.

08-06-2004, 03:18 PM	#17 (permalink)
skinnymofo Addict ed to smack Location: Seattle	I was looking through a free seattle news paper today THE STRANGER, and they had an add inside giving out 2 free tickets to see AVP next thursday. Just a heads up to seattleites

08-08-2004, 06:14 PM	#18 (permalink)
frankx Psycho Location: The Tip of the Boot	I know it's perfectly obvious, but the movie studios have discovered that unfortunately-all-too-important 13 to 17 yo demographic, and what an incredible moneymaker it is. Giving a damn about what adults might want to see always takes a backseat to gross profit. Movie theaters are always jam packed with teens and preteens nowadays, and that's pretty much why adults wind up paying hard earned money to see bullshit like "Dude, Where's My Car?" and "Little Nicky" and feeling like they've been crapped on by the major studios when they leave the theater. I have waited to see AVP for quite some time now (probably since I saw Predator 2 in the theater a looooong time ago - rated R, BTW) and I am in agreement that a PG13 rating equals a death knell for any sort of integrity for this movie. It's yet another of the myriad of reasons that I've pretty much stopped patronizing the local frankenplex, but that's another story. __________________ Louisiana: We're Not ALL Drunken Cajun Wackos, But That's Our Tourism Campaign

08-09-2004, 08:13 AM	#19 (permalink)
Cynthetiq Tilted Cat Head Administrator Location: Manhattan, NY	eh... i dont' see any harm in it. if it's a good movie it will stand on it's own. __________________ I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not. What's the best nation in the world? DO-NATION!

08-09-2004, 11:21 AM	#20 (permalink)
gdr2004 Crazy Location: CA	They need to tone it down and get the PG rating. That's where the money is ;-)

08-09-2004, 04:52 PM	#21 (permalink)
Nafter Insane Location: The Eng	Maybe its just me, but i like a bit of swearing/bloodshed/sex in my films, it pains me when a new film (AvP being one) has a 12 rating (uk), you just know everythings going to be toned down and niceified for the teen audience, with ~bad films the only things goin for it are these things sometimes heh. A well made film will be good whatever the rating as long as maker doesnt allow it to comprimise his creativity, but if the maker is restricted by the studios forcing it to be a lower rating the film can suffer as a result as the orginal thought for the scene cant be used, and has to be changed to fit the rating. Would it be hard to release 2 versions a "directors cut" and a normal version, with differnet ratings? I dont know a lot about the film industry so dont know if its possible, would it cost a lot more etc, but i like going to the cinema, the whole experiance of it and waiting months for the dvd aint fun. I tend to prefer the directors cuts and im sure a lot of people are with me. __________________ I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain."

09-11-2004, 02:11 PM	#25 (permalink)
radioguy Registered User Location: Texas	It seems that every movie that comes out now is rated PG-13. That bugs the hell out of me! Sometimes, I want to see more action/violence or see more nudity. Everything seems to be toned down now. All the teen comedy's are PG-13 now. Teen Comedy = Nudity!! = R rating. Come on directors, don't give into the MPAA just to make a movie more "socially friendly".

09-14-2004, 04:41 PM	#26 (permalink)
Blistex Psycho Location: Tiger I Turret	Anyone see orgazmo? It got an NC-17 while movies with actual nudity and violence get PG-13. I think it's just who the MPAA likes gets the rating they want. p.s. does anyone remember that Christian Movie review site that used to be linked on fark? That site always cracked me up. Last edited by Blistex; 09-14-2004 at 04:46 PM..