millenniumfalcon.com

Yep it's most likely true.

TV ads have been airing and they generally like to get the rating slapped on the ads within a week or two.

Also, this means that the film-print version of ROTS really is finished.

It's still shocking even though we knew it was inevitable. Like when we first heard they found water on Mars.

It's true. Soon, members of the math club will be attaching themselves to your underbelly for transportation.

The good news keeps rolling in.



Probably. I think McCallum said April 15th or 16th was the cutoff date for when the film print had to be locked down.

No surprise. PG-13 or not it still going to be a great film. I'm looking forward to the gore. :mfyd:

Hell, Lucas probably insisted that ROTS get a PG-13 rating.

At this point how would it look for it to get a mere PG? There's gotta be a PG-13 pay-off to all this, anything else would be anti-climactic.

You could even spin this stuff into a marketing approach. The new Star Wars movie. It's dark. It's PG-13. Oooh!

Meanwhile 30% of the audience will probably be under 13 because parents want their kids to experience the last Star Wars movie in theaters.

i can see a ton of people saying he was just trying to look cool with a PG-13 rating (even though it's not true)....I just hope this doesn't backfire. But I'm just glad that he didn't hold back.

The look of Anakin's injuries alone will get a harsh PG-13. The Orcs and Uruk Hai in LOTR got that a PG-13 and they aren't nearly as extreme as crispy Anakin.

The Balrog was

It wasn't an extra crispy charred torso.

Given that Lucas kept bringing up the possibility of the PG-13 rating in practically every bit of publicity he's done, I'd say he's way ahead of you.

It's funny, I was watching The Legend of Hell House (1973) on DVD the other day, and in the original trailer, the movie's PG rating is accompanied by the phrase "Parental guidance suggested - some material may not be suitable for pre-teenagers." Now unless I'm totally off base with my interpretation of the term "teenager, " I have to figure that anyone younger than 13 is a "pre-teenager," given that no one ever uses words like tenteen, eleventeen or twelveteen. So, really, the MPAA already had a PG-13 rating before they came up with one that was named that. Only four years after Hell House, Star Wars was released and got a PG, which, at the time, apparently meant that it also contained mateiral that "may not be suitable for pre-teenagers." Bear in mind that Planet of the Apes was released in 1968, showed Charlton Heston's bare ass, not to mention all sorts of violence, and got a G.

But here in the 21st century, a superhero cartoon like The Incredibles gets a PG, and a Star Wars film gets a PG-13. Do these ratings actually mean anything anymore? Isn't it time Jack Valenti got his wrinkled old ass kicked out of the MPAA?

The Incredibles was a U in the UK, I'm guessing ROTS will be PG

All three LOTR had this for their rating description:
Rated PG-13 for epic battle sequences and some scary images.

With today's MPAA you put in an ugly Orc/Uruk Hai or a giant flaming CG monster and you get a PG-13.

ROTJ: SE almost got a "frightening images" PG-13 for the Rancor when it came out in 1997. Whenever you change anything in a movie you have to resubmit it for a rating, and in 1997 the MPAA was very close to slapping ROTJ with a PG-13 for the Rancor. (The PG-13 rating didn't exist in 1983 AND the MPAA was very different back then).

What do you mean, put back?

Eh...there have been plenty of PG-13 and R-rated movies that have sucked ass regardless of how much they deserved those ratings. Quality of storytelling matters more than "tone" or "mature content," and I'm more than a little tired of the suggestion that this movie will be good because it's gotten this rating. It's one thing when this suggestion comes from fans, but it starts really stinking of hype when it comes from the director before the movie even gets its rating. My expectations for this chapter have absolutely nothing to do with how many beheadings there are, or whether or not I get to see Anakin deep-fried in living Technicolor.

Where'd you hear that? I'm not doubting you, I'd just like to find out more about it.

Well it was coming from the director because it kind of is a big deal with Star Wars.

Previously all Star Wars movies were PG and Lucas has always said he wanted the series to be suitable for everyone. Part of the reason why the 1997 SE of Star Wars has censored blaster hits when people get shot is that Lucas was secretly trying for a G rating.

Back in 1998 and 1999 when Lucas really started to talk about the prequel trilogy he always said the third one would be the darkest and that he thought people won't be ready for it and won't be able to handle it. He's been saying since before Episode I came out that Episode III would be the darkest and most "un-Star Wars-like" of the other five movies.

I can't reveal my source. From what I heard, the MPAA people who viewed ROTJ SE back in 1996 (the release was in 1997) had an issue with the Rancor picking up the guard and biting down on it in terms of the PG rating. But since the same scene was in the PG-rated version, cooler heads prevailed and they didn't change the rating. The MPAA has become much more strict in the last 10 years or so.

This is very common.

If you edit minute second of footage out of your movie and intend to re-release it, you need to resubmit it to the MPAA for a new rating. This INCLUDES home video releases such as the LOTR Extended Editions and the Star Wars DVDs.

The reason why you see so many Unrated DVDs of recent comedies is because they go and add in the stuff that would've got it a R rating (or stuff you couldn't have in a R) and the re-editing would cost the studio time and money to resubmit it to the MPAA. Instead, they just release it as unrated.

Sure, I know. But really, you can get a serious headache trying to figure out just what the fuck is on Lucas's mind. In the current issue of Premiere, he's quoted as saying, "Ultimately, I'm really making this trilogy under the assumption that people will see it I to VI." So how does that work if one of the middle chapters is so violent that it gets a more mature rating than the rest, while the end chapter stars teddy bears? Who's his audience?

I find that these movies make a lot more sense if I ignore everything that Lucas has ever said about his intentions.

I'd substitute "schizophrenic" for strict. There's stuff getting R ratings that wouldn't have been allowed on the screen 10 (or, especially, 20) years ago.

Well with the Original Trilogy, they looked at the three movies like a three-act play where the second act is where everything goes to hell and is dark.

With the six movies, Episode III is really the middle act and things get the darkest there only to get better in the end.

It is finished.

It's not the "darkness" that I question. I just think that you reach a level of intensity with part III that the remaining chapters fail to match. But then that's always been ROTJ's problem anyway.

In the 'Making of' book Lucas is talking about not including a sequence of Yoda dicing up a stormtrooper to avoid an 'R rating'.

No argument! However, things like Chewie's Tarzan yell, and Han and Leia cuddling with Ewoks, not to mention the muppetfest in the opening sequence, do NOT take on anymore emotional intensity at all. In fact, I think that if I really were in the position of watching these I-VI, with the promise of a full-on return to ROTS-style intensity that ESB suggests, I'd be pretty friggin' let down by ROTJ.

I guess I'm not really talking about the rating anymore, am I? Oh well.

Mind fuck time.



"In a surprise move by the MPAA,
George Lucas' final Star Wars movie
was given a rare NC-17 rating!"

I am really happy that the movie is PG-13. I think that it is a genious marketing idea because now people wont see it as a kid movie and think of it as more of a serious sci fi movie.

Plus things like seeing anakin burn to death I think are crucial in showing hte tragedy of darth vader. It just wouldnt be the same if stuff like that was just implied.

Exactly. Especially since the two prequals were looked at as too childish (particularly Phantom Menace).

This is the movie most of the fans have been waiting for, and the PG-13, while really not important, is just one more way for the LucasFilm marketing team to help hype this film to shit, while at the same time saying to the prequal haters, "wait, this film is going to be different."

I think everyone should note that, had EMPIRE been released after the implementation, it would likely have garnered a PG-13, between the heavy thematics, the jump-scares, Luke getting thrashed by the Wampa, and his cauterized wrist-stump.

Empire, ROTJ, Gremlins, and Temple of Doom all would've been PG-13. The latter two are what caused the rating in the first place.

There's one or two things you're forgetting.

1) In the U.S., NO movie needs to be submitted for a rating. However, the way it works here "unofficially", if you don't, no theater will show it, and if they do 99% of the time they will treat it as NC-17, and no-one will see it (Day of the Dead anyone?).

2) In the U.S., it costs $2,000 to rate a film (trust me on that, I've tried). So a lot of the time, these "unrated" cuts are unrated because they don't want to spend the 2 grand getting it rated.

3) A lot of films are also marketed as "unrated" for just that reason - marketing. You hear "Unrated!", you think "cool, more gore/breasts/sex!" and usually it's 2 seconds of added footage just so you'd go out and buy it.

And Mana, you're forgetting Raiders - that also originally got an R rating for the exploding head at the end, but they superimposed fire over it and it barely passed with a PG. Nowadays that would *definitely* get a PG-13 at least. (Little bit of useless trivia that pissed me off while playing SceneIt at a party - the first film to be released with PG-13 was RED DAWN, but the first to be GIVEN the rating was THE FLAMINGO KID. The question was the first film given the rating, and not knowing about Flamingo Kid at all, I said RED DAWN, and got it wrong.)

What are the ratings in the US, it's totally different here in Australia.

G - General Admission
PG - Parental Guidence required for those under 15
M - Recommended that Under 15 not be allowed to see the film
MA - Mature Audiences only, no-one under 15 allowed
R - Restricted only to audences over 18

In Aus, Episodes I, IV, V, VI all got PG and Episdoe II got M

That might mean that Episode III in aus gets a MA, that would wipe out som much of the younger audiences who are buying a lot of the toys here. I can't go anywhere at the moment without seeing at least two kids playing with lightsabers.

Most nation-wide theater chains in the US will not show NC-17 movies.

Temple of Doom is PG now. I noticed this a few days ago. Wasn't it PG-13 before? Because I had heard the Gremlins/Temple of Doom rumor before assuming Temple was PG-13. Or did they create PG-13 after that or because of that debacle? I confooz.

ROTS will change the intensity of ROTJ's ending since we now understand how dangerous the Emperor really is and how unprepared Luke is to kill such a powerful force user. It's his determination to redeem his father that makes his character all the more courageous since he could not physically take on Palpatine, it was only his compassion that defeated him.

No, Temple of Doom was always PG. The PG-13 rating came around due to parental complaints about Gremlins and Temple of Doom.

Heh. The Red Dawn post was posted as I typed. Thanks guys.

Yeah, old Jack is about 3 months ahead of you...

I don't see how THAT wouldn't give ROTS an R rating. That's a very disturbing image. I know when the photo of him like that popped up, I kind of jumped from my seat and it still kind of makes me "squirm" if you know what I mean.

"I think that it is a genious marketing idea..."

Or the rating is the natural result of the artist making the movie the way he wanted to.

"It's a little naive to think there isn't at least SOME combination of the two going on.."

Possibly, but Lucas was talking about how "dark" this movie was a long time ago, before TPM came out. I can't read his mind, but I think he just did what he wanted to.

This is one of the things I like about this series, how inconsistent and absurd it really is.

Ep. I: Evil capitalists are thwarted by a little kid and floppy-eared aliens. The kid also race a guy with arms for legs and legs for arms.

Ep. II: The kid has grown up as a Jedi and lusts for the Queen-turned-Senator, his semi-stalker behaviour actually pays off, as she is just as horny as him. Then they fight bug-people and get married.

Ep. III: The evil capitalists started a war that is now on-going, and their leader is a cyborg. The Jedi who´s secretly married, has visions of his wife dying and will do anything to prevent it. Ends up being fooled by his friend, the Chancellor, and kills everyone in his order. Then he kills all the evil capitalists, accidentally kills his wife and is turned into a cyborg. PLOT-TWIST!

Ep. IV: The geewhiz son of the Jedi-turned-Sith helps defeat a giant artificial moon that can blow up planets (and does).

Ep. V: The kid is trying to become a Jedi, but keeps messing up. Has visions of his friends in danger, but ends up getting in danger himself. Gets his hand cut off by his father and tries to kill himself (also known as a self-sacrifice).

Ep. VI: The evil Chancellor-turned-Emperor has visions of getting killed by the kid, builds another giant artificial moon that can blow up planets. Meanwhile, the heros visit a giant slug-gangster to rescue their friend and the princess becomes a jerk-off fantasy. The evil badguy´s plans are thwarted by an army of teddy-bears and the Jedi-turned-Sith ends up killing him. PLOT-TWIST!

The End

I assume you're referring to the fact that he's no longer MPAA president, and yeah, I do know that. But I read something fairly recently that detailed the amount of power that he still had there -- I just can't remember where. If I find it, I'll post some of the relevant quotes in this thread.

You forgot the geewhiz son being inspired to rescue his twin sister because he wants to bang her.

That's a funny way of summing it up 16. Star Wars is to pulp what shakespeare is to literature. haha. I suppose if I live to be 120 Ill never outgrow the simple charm and escapism and just pure fun that star wars provides.

I am not surprised that it got the PG-13 Rating. Part of the reason is a lot of the deaths & body parts flying throughout the movie. Not to mention what happens to Anakin.

For Brits - the first 12 was Batman.

12A came along in 2002 (I hate that rating - basically means kiddies get to watch fairly adult films, filling cinemas with extra gobshites). Can't remember the first film though.

I'm pretty sure that Star Wars will be a 12A

Ah, I remember now - the first 12A was..... Spiderman.

No surprise really - meant Sony (or whoever) could make a few more millions at the expense of the enjoyment of anyone wishing to watch the film before 10 pm at night.

For those elsewhere - adding the A to a 12 rating basically meant it was up to the parents to decide. Given that most parents in the UK are almost entirely selfish and irresponsible, it basically meant that the rating is irrelevant.