|
|
Post by Captain Midnight on Mar 9, 2010 22:00:08 GMT -5
Are movies with a PG or PG-13 are watered down in some way?
Whaddaya say? Please, give your opinion. I'm actually curious.
|
|
|
|
Post by roostergore on Mar 9, 2010 22:41:14 GMT -5
When I see horror flicks rated PG-13 I think they are catered for little kids that want to see MTV actors/actresses in a "scary" situation. Shit flix......Prom Night remake, The Haunting of Molly Hartley,etc........not that all PG-13 movies suck, just the majority. Imo.
|
|
bigmac
Revolting Revenant
You mean the movie lied!?!?!?
Posts: 1,508
|
Post by bigmac on Mar 10, 2010 1:01:49 GMT -5
I agree with roostergore on that one. It really depends on the movie. The Ring (American version) is a very effective PG-13 horror film. If the movie isn't relying on murder and mayhem (unlike most slasher remakes), but more on atmosphere and suspense, I think a PG-13 horror film is just fine.
And don't forget, movies like Paranormal Activity earned the R-rating for language, not violence. Sometimes, all it takes is the right word or a single severed head to push a film out of PG-13 territory.
But here's an interesting thought. How many of the horror films of the 70's and 80's might be candidates for a PG-13 rating, given the current standards? The original Prom Night might have been given a PG-13 with a few seconds of the head rolling scene trimmed out. And I think the original Halloween could have earned it as well, depending on how much nudity is allowed in a PG-13 film.
The only reason I bring this up is to illustrate that the rating doesn't matter when it comes to a horror film (unless you want to make a slasher flick, then bring on the gore!). Some of the scariest movies achieve their effect without buckets of blood. It just depends on the filmmaker.
Wow, just noticed I'm the only one who voted no. Bit of a surprise.
|
|
|
|
Post by Peekysdad on Mar 10, 2010 1:29:35 GMT -5
I agree with roostergore on that one. It really depends on the movie. The Ring (American version) is a very effective PG-13 horror film. If the movie isn't relying on murder and mayhem (unlike most slasher remakes), but more on atmosphere and suspense, I think a PG-13 horror film is just fine. I agree. Actually, though some films may be "watered down" to get the PG or PG-13, there are probably almost as many that throw in an f-bomb or two to achieve the R rating. Assures folks it's not kid stuff. |
|
|
|
Post by maycanady on Mar 11, 2010 9:31:47 GMT -5
I don't really think the rating makes a difference if it's a good film anyway. Like other people have said, The Ring (remake) was a well-done PG-13 film, as was the remake of The Grudge. Ratings are arbitrary a lot of the time anyway. The MPAA can give a film an R rating just because somebody pissed in their cornflakes that morning, regardless of the content.
|
|
|
|
Post by Professor Damian on Mar 27, 2010 21:42:40 GMT -5
I voted "no" on this mostly because I have to admit that usually I have no idea what a film is rated before I go to see it... just don't pay that much attention to them... I'm more interested, as others have said, in what the filmmaker is actually putting on the screen than how many swear words or boobies there are... (which seems generally to be the difference in the ratings)... That being said, except for torture-hostel-type flicks, which I really have no use for, (though I did think the original Saw was masterful in its tension) I think filmmakers today have really gotten much less daring than those from say the 70's when it wasn't all about getting the teens in the multiplex... Compare some of the films that were rated PG (or even G) back then to what they would be rated today, and...
|
|
misterd
Frightful Fiend
Posts: 1,220
|
Post by misterd on Mar 27, 2010 22:59:04 GMT -5
I laugh to think back in the day, Jaws and Gremlins were rated PG.
Honestly I hate the PG-13 rating in many ways, largely because it does essentially cated straight to the teen market, but the rating itself isn't to blame for that. In the Grand Old Days (the 80s), horror films still catered to the teen market, but were able to... uhm... cover up their shortcomings with guts, blood, boobs and drugs. That made for a different sort of lazy filmmaking (albiet of a sort that strongly appeals to folks like us).
In the end, I look at what was done with Dark Knight, the Others, Sixth Sense, Signs, and many other films, and I find no NEED for an R rating. You can do a film right without it. Hell, even most R-rated films (Saw excepted) don't seem to be as hard as they used to be. Look at Trick 'R Treat - that's an R film. Why? I think because one of the kid says "butt fucking" once. Otherwise, the gore, sex and language are tame, or at least tame enough for PG-13.
|
|
bigmac
Revolting Revenant
You mean the movie lied!?!?!?
Posts: 1,508
|
Post by bigmac on Mar 28, 2010 22:51:21 GMT -5
I agree with you on Trick 'R Treat, but I'm sure the MPAA shouted "BARE BOOBIES" during the werewolf scene and that was enough to place it in the R-rated range.
Seriously, my country is too hung up on nudity for it's own good.
|
|
|
|
Post by Demon Sprocket on May 6, 2010 11:05:49 GMT -5
How can you have a good slasher flick rated PG or PG-13? I look on the back of any DVD case and look at the ratings. It has to have 1.blood 2.gore 3.nudity.
On the other hand I will not let my 12 year old daughter watch any of those 3. Helps find scary movies for her to watch too.
|
|
|
|
Post by Captain Midnight on May 6, 2010 15:33:37 GMT -5
How can you have a good slasher flick rated PG or PG-13? . Psycho? |
|
|
|
Post by Peekysdad on May 7, 2010 11:49:26 GMT -5
How can you have a good slasher flick rated PG or PG-13? I look on the back of any DVD case and look at the ratings. It has to have 1.blood 2.gore 3.nudity. On the other hand I will not let my 12 year old daughter watch any of those 3. Helps find scary movies for her to watch too. Well, I don't think you can have a good PG or PG-13 slasher flick based on today's ratings system. You can, however, have awesome horror films like Drag Me to Hell, The Ring, or even to a lesser extent, The Others. |
|
|
|
Post by Peekysdad on May 7, 2010 11:52:09 GMT -5
How can you have a good slasher flick rated PG or PG-13? . Psycho? Actually, Psycho was given an R rating on it's DVD release. |
|
|
|
Post by Demon Sprocket on May 7, 2010 12:04:57 GMT -5
Psycho?[/quote]
There for a minute I thought you were calling me Pyscho.. I use the rating system as a tool /guide to determine if a movie has potential. I wish Netflix would break down their rating systems to view the movies content.
|
|
|
|
Post by Captain Midnight on May 7, 2010 14:24:30 GMT -5
Actually, Psycho was given an R rating on it's DVD release. Holy Christ-on-a-cracker! You're right, Peekys! That's stupid. There is no reason it should be R. It's intense, but not terribly bloody. Everything is implied rather than shown. What a crock! Then again, I let my daughter watch the original Night of the Living Dead when she was seven. Which they also gave an R. And Rosemary's Baby, which also has an R. They can should all three unedited in prime time TV with no warning. Hell, they show worse stuff on CSI. Muthapusbucketrsonovabiscuit. *stalks off to get more coffee* |
|
bigmac
Revolting Revenant
You mean the movie lied!?!?!?
Posts: 1,508
|
Post by bigmac on May 8, 2010 10:56:00 GMT -5
If you're trying to make sense of some MPAA decisions, you might need something stronger than coffee. Or at least an extra large bottle of aspirins.  |
|
