AvP wasn't bad, it just had "hot sauce" added to it!

PG-13 is what I call mild hot sauce. I want "burn your mouth" hot sauce. So unless it's a drama or a certain kind of movie I would rather a movie be R.

This whole thing is just so fucking stupid. I have no problem with a Pg-13 rating, it was a good idea and I'm glad it exists. The thing I find stupid is the studios making a movie a certain rating to get more money. Just make the fucking movie, then get it rated. That's what happened woth AvP. They were worried about the rating so they didn't make the movie they should have. This could be the death of artistic integrity.

Artisitic Integrity was put to rest during a quiet ceremony decades ago. It is survived by Corporate Greed and Special Effects.

I honestly didnt see much aliens vs predators when i saw it.. did i miss something? :P sorry this movie was an ok flick, but really was a let down.

AMEN! today's PG 13 is the same as the R from 20 years ago which is why I truly can't understand the stigmata attached to it or the NC 17 rating.

"AMEN! today's PG 13 is the same as the R from 20 years ago which is why I truly can't understand the stigmata attached to it or the NC 17 rating."

Are you fucking kidding? Today's PG-13 is yesterday's PG. Obviously Temple of Doom would be PG-13. Jaws would almost certainly rate an R if released today due mainly in part to the death of Quint. The Terminator released today would still be R. Robocop would still be R. American Werewolf would still be R. Predator would still be R. Dawn of the Dead would still be involved in a rating's war. Things have only been toned down.

I made home made BBQ sauce the other day. Can I add that?

It was very good.

Interestingly, in england, films like the terminator and apocaplypse now have been re-rated from 18's to 15's.
Bad Boys 2, lauded as such a 'hard' R, only got a 15 over here.

Conversely, Riddick, a pg-13 in america, is a 15 in england (and is the same cut as far as i am aware).

Make of that whatever you like, but in the meantime i'm going to side with chappers on the 'are you fucking kidding' thing.
I still find it extraordinary that 'Raiders' is still a PG. I don't care if there's smoke and light in the way, his head still explodes. And the melty face: bloody hell.

By the way, this is yet another AvP thread.

AAARRRRGGGHHHH!

You know, in a world where knowledge is power, maybe communications devices are more powerful than hand-guns?

No, fair enough, those walkie talkies are embarrassing.

I'll put this forwards for the PG 13 rating - you can still have an adult-oriented film where violence happens and people die and things hurt - you just can't show the splat. The Bourne Supremacy would be an example.
If there were no PG-13, films would be toned down to PG's and then the content would REALLY have to be toned down to the point where the film and plot and characterisation would change.
I can live without the squib effect as long as the guns are not just toys, but dangerous and lethal things.
That argument works for thrillers and dramas - we get the bigger budgets with a PG 13, but we can still have adult content.
It doesn't work for Horror or action films like AvP however, where the splat is kind of the whole point.

Another point in favour of PG-13: Lord of the Rings. those films are an example of spicing up a PG, rather than toning down an 'R'.

At least they announced an R rated "Uncut" DVD so we know not to waste time and money checking out the pg-13 dvd.

AVP thread #3,144,578



They didn't officially announce anything, and given the fact that we haven't seen that "uncut" version of Resident Evil, or that directors cut of Event Horizon, don't hold your breath until it comes officially from Fox.

Anderson is known for talking out of his ass.

I thought that was only while he was directing.

I keed! I keed!

I'm quite surprised American Wereolf is still rated 18 over here in Enlgand, as most of the violence is 'fantasy' violence and rotting corpses. Maybe its the hot agutter sex machine that keeps the rating. England and America are still very touchy when it comes to sex.
But even without the sex, it would never become a PG-13 in America.
I think until the stigma attached to the R-17 (is that the right spelling) goes away you Americans are going to have a problem with making genuinely adult cinema.
Films that are made by adults, for adults. seems only fair, but you have to have that 'accopmanied by and adult' thing that seems really wierd to us foreigners.
For a land that has such a hard on about free speech (we dont actually have any constitutional rights in england, you know), you still have a problem with the word 'shit' on network tv.
But hey, i'm not railing on you Yanks, just some of your MPAA decisions. Lord knows our own BBFC has made some 'eccentric' decisions in it's time. Did you know we still can't get an uncut version of 'Blood Feast' over here?

In ther news, i went to school with the hospital kid in American Werewolf who kept saying 'no!' to Jenny Agutter. Who'd say no to her? We took the piss out of him relentlessly, thus proving that children are all arseholes.

Even being fantasy violence, take a look at the moors kill now. It's still way fucking harsh. My favourite scare in the whole of moviedom.

It's set up brilliantly, innit? i mean its all the standard stuff - lots of darkness, strange sounds, characters saying they're scared, false starts, and then the jump on the off beat when you are not expecting it - but damn it still gets to me now and it's been...how many viewings? It just works, and i enjoy being scared by it. i'm not trying to second guess the director, i'm just going with it. joy.

But the actual mauling is just a wolf head tearing at clothes and then lots of red. not actually that gory?

But, then again, maybe it gets extra 'ratings' points because it is such an intense scene and because the mauling goes on for so long.
Hmmm, I don't know, i'll go along with you because i like the film so much.

Favourite scare EVER, though? That it still gives me a jump after so many viewings, i can definitely see your point.

Was American werewolf in Paris very gory? Was it even an 'R'? it was a 15 over here. i think i've blocked it out of my memory, Delpy titty or no. Maybe that film is a good example of pointless 'toning down'?

I don't think it was gory. I've kinda blocked it out of my mind.

I think you have to look at the intent and mood as well as the violence. Like AWIL, it's gory but not that gory, but the way it's set up, it's vicious as hell. Much like THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE - notorious for hardly having any blood at all, but it's an incredibly nasty and harrowing movie. I mean, Tobe Hooper initially submitted it for a PG-13. The MPAA said no way, slapped an R on it, and the BBFC banned it outright.

I'm going to be picky here: did they have PG-13's in the 70's.

That aside, it's a bloody good point: will the move to make every fucking movie in the world PG-13 (12a for us Brits!) mean that they will be filmed, or at least edited, to make them less 'intense', irrespective of any particular instance of violence?
Head shots i can do without, but studio or ratings board inteference to make the films less intense? that, i think, would be a Bad Thing.
Is it happening?
The Bourne Supremacy seemed pretty intense to me.

DOH.

PG, even. PG-13 wasn't introduced until '84 with RED DAWN. You got me.

He submitted it for a PG. Which is even crazier.

I hope it isn't happening. We still are getting intense movies, it's just the bigger budget ones (your ALIENS VS PREDATOR etc) look to be doing it to get to a wider demographic.

Holy fuck! Red Dawn was PG-13? The highest body count of the 80's? Wow, i didn't know that. Americans and their appetite for killing communists, huh?

I hope Tobe Hooper was joking or on very powerful drugs when he submitted Texas Chainsaw for a PG. that film is a high water mark for nasty and intense.

You know, if i had seen the ameican remake of 'The Ring', those might be good films for comparison.
'Ringu' got a 15 over here, seemingly just because it was just so intense and scary (i know i didn't sleep well for months after). there certainly wasn't any gore, nor any obvious violence that i remember.
the american re-make was a 12 (or PG-13). was it just because it wasn't as scary?

purely as a piece of trivia, i saw 'Ringu' at the Prince Charles theatre in London, which is a) a really cool cinema and b) right next to London's Chinatown, and a little chinese girl with long dark hair sat down right next to me from out of nowhere about two thrids of the way into the film. scared the shit out of me.

I forgot RINGU was a 15. That's crazy. I'd have loved to have seen it in the theater.

Incredibly, the new DVD of the 1939 ADVENTURES OF ROBIN HOOD is a 12. Whether someone on the special features swears or something, I don't know, but that being a 12, that's insane.

That is wierd. maybe it's the dead deer?
the DVD for Lawrence of Arabia is a 12 because someone says 'fuck' once on one of the documentaries, which is prety silly itself.
Maybe the producers didn't think anyone under the age of 12 would want to watch such old and boring films anyway, bloody kids.

So glad this thread isn't about AvP. When's it coming out in England? I'll have to remember to be washing my hair that week, or possibly having my teeth removed without anaesthetic.

wait, dont you guys think the whole AvP fiasco, like Exorcist: The Beginning was just a last minute scramble by the studios to cash in on what would otherwise have turned out to be a costly trainwreck?

the rating doesnt matter to me as much as the sheer under-handedness of it all.

they cut out the gore to get the kiddies, and then they cut out the critics so that there would be no warnings.

simple. effective. utterly dastardly.

AvP is just the latest example of what might be a trend to bring all 'adult' movies towards the PG-13 rating.
Riddick is another example, apparantly.
Studios aren't dastardly, they are capitalists. business has no morality.
The question is whether the PG-13 rating might kill off adult orientated movies.
You never know, it might serve to 'spice up' kiddie movies.
it is a question as to whether 20 years ago Van Helsing would have been an R or a PG.

same difference, apparently.

At least in the US, there's always the POTENTIAL for an unrated version of a flick. In the UK, nothing can be released on video or DVD without a BBFC certificate. If they don't like the exploding heads in Dawn of the Dead '04, then we won't be getting it (which I think is true, but it may be due to the laziness of the distributor to release it).

And also the stupid rule that two versions of a film can't be released with a different certificate, which is why American Werewolf remains an 18 but Terminator gets a 15, because the widescreen version is classed as a different work and thus can get a different rating. Notice that when Terminator was released on widescreen DVD with a 15, a full screen VHS was re-released at the same time which retained an 18.

And don't get me started on headbutts. We got cut versions of Spider-Man 2 and Shrek 2, because headbutts would upgrade them from U's and PG's to 12a's! Spider-Man 1 was a 12a and that fucking raked in the dough... the 12a is an advisory rating now, so why not release it as such!

I fucking HATE censorship. Pretty much all my essays and projects in sixth form were about censorship in some way.

People seem to act like the PG-13 rating was the biggest problem with AvP. I look at it as being either in the middle or the bottom of a long list. Even a solid NC-17 could not have saved this mess.

Canadas rating system is great

G, then Pg, then 14A, then 18A.

most R rated films get split up between 14A and 18A, so the Matrix films, LotR, and Terminator are all 14A films.