Also, this means that the film-print version of ROTS really is finished.
Benovite wrote:You could even spin this stuff into a marketing approach.
AnaKanned_Food wrote:Lord of the Rings got a PG-13 because of its violent content. If things are mutilated but are not human, they tend to get the pass from the MPAA. I'm pretty sure the Uruk Kai were very minnimal in their impact. I mean, hell, Fellowship had beheadings, blood baths, and then some. It deserved a PG-13 rating.
As will Revenge of the Sith.
AnaKanned_Food wrote:Doesn't say "Uruk Kai images."
ManaByte wrote:ROTJ: SE almost got a "frightening images" PG-13 for the Rancor when it came out in 1997.
Ayatollah Krispies wrote: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.
Ayatollah Krispies wrote:ManaByte wrote:ROTJ: SE almost got a "frightening images" PG-13 for the Rancor when it came out in 1997.
Where'd you hear that? I'm not doubting you, I'd just like to find out more about it.
ManaByte wrote: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.
ManaByte wrote:The MPAA has become much more strict in the last 10 years or so.
Ayatollah Krispies wrote:ManaByte wrote: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.
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.
ManaByte wrote:With the six movies, Episode III is really the middle act and things get the darkest there only to get better in the end.
Traiken wrote:But in terms of emotional intensity, things like the Throne Room Duel in RotJ take on so much more meaning after we see what Anakin's been through.
JRA81984 wrote: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.
FusionAddict wrote: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.
ManaByte wrote: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.
ManaByte wrote: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.
SkyWard wrote:ManaByte wrote: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.
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.
Ayatollah Krispies wrote: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?
JRA81984 wrote: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.
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?
BobTheGoon wrote:Yeah, old Jack is about 3 months ahead of you...
VT-16 wrote:This is one of the things I like about this series, how inconsistent and absurd it really is.
Disco1999 wrote: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
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest