LogFAQs > #892031019

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, Database 2 ( 09.16.2017-02.21.2018 ), DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	What is the tamest R-rated movie? The Matrix comes to mind for me
Zeus 12/11/17 6:41:51 PM #21:	Steamedhams...? Wait... are you an Oguri alt?! SteamedHams posted... IIRC there is no language or sexuality that would be above a PG-13. Pretty sure the rating is just for violence, but even then, it's not like there are a lot of extreme scenes or any gore. I used to watch it on TV way too many times and the only violence I can remember being edited was some reduced blood splatters in the lobby scene. Tamest by MPAA standards, at least. I'm sure there are movies where it's just a few f-bombs or some nipples shown for too long, but Americans have weird standards. We're apparently very prude about swearing and sex, but violence isn't a big deal I'm sure there's tamer. If nothing else, Billy Elliot -- a movie about a miner's son who wants to be a dancer -- had an R. At any rate. does it really matter much? Some films will market themselves as R rather than PG13 to attract a different crowd, since angsty young people are often prejudiced against PG13 films. Lokarin posted... I see the opposite problem, movies using their "one fuck limit" and "20 kill limit" to keep their movie PG-13 Pretty sure neither of those are things Lokarin posted... most publishers try to avoid that R. Companies sometimes want an R rather than a PG13. For instance, there's a stigma around PG13 horror, partly thanks to stuff like Twilight. Lokarin posted... So basically, anything R from before the 90s is pretty tame on average due to simpler sensibilities... they wouldn't have Human Centipede'd back then. Like, take The Terminator for example... that's one swear from being a kids movie Lokarin posted... SteamedHams posted... Oh, there's a kill limit? It might not actually be "20", that's just an estimate. Take that movie "Mechanic: Resurrection" which doesn't make any sense or have any internal logic... It's technically rated R, but only because it went over the kill limit by 1. Because the rest of the movie is PG-13 EASILY It might not actually be 20 because there's almost certainly no limit. How many died in Titanic? That was PG13. The Wolverine? Also PG13. Happy Death Day had the main character repeatedly get murdered and, guess what? PG13. Plus you have hundreds of monster movies with widespread casualties rated PG or PG13. Hell, even Cloverfield was PG13 and that had a LOT more than just 20 deaths. --- (\/)(\/)\|-\| In Zeus We Trust: All Others Pay Cash <cite>Zeus posted [p:892031019] in What is th... [t:76086859]...</cite> <quote>Steamedhams...? Wait... are you an Oguri alt?! <cite>SteamedHams posted...</cite> <quote>IIRC there is no language or sexuality that would be above a PG-13. Pretty sure the rating is just for violence, but even then, it's not like there are a lot of extreme scenes or any gore. I used to watch it on TV way too many times and the only violence I can remember being edited was some reduced blood splatters in the lobby scene. Tamest by MPAA standards, at least. I'm sure there are movies where it's just a few f-bombs or some nipples shown for too long, but Americans have weird standards. We're apparently very prude about swearing and sex, but violence isn't a big deal</quote> I'm sure there's tamer. If nothing else, Billy Elliot -- a movie about a miner's son who wants to be a dancer -- had an R. At any rate. does it really matter much? Some films will market themselves as R rather than PG13 to attract a different crowd, since angsty young people are often prejudiced against PG13 films. <cite>Lokarin posted...</cite> <quote>I see the opposite problem, movies using their "one fuck limit" and "20 kill limit" to keep their movie PG-13</quote> Pretty sure neither of those are things <cite>Lokarin posted...</cite> <quote>most publishers try to avoid that R.</quote> Companies sometimes want an R rather than a PG13. For instance, there's a stigma around PG13 horror, partly thanks to stuff like Twilight. <cite>Lokarin posted...</cite> <quote>So basically, anything R from before the 90s is pretty tame on average due to simpler sensibilities... they wouldn't have Human Centipede'd back then. Like, take The Terminator for example... that's one swear from being a kids movie</quote> <cite>Lokarin posted...</cite> <quote><cite>SteamedHams posted...</cite> <quote>Oh, there's a kill limit? </quote> It might not actually be "20", that's just an estimate. Take that movie "Mechanic: Resurrection" which doesn't make any sense or have any internal logic... It's technically rated R, but only because it went over the kill limit by 1. Because the rest of the movie is PG-13 EASILY</quote> It might not actually be 20 because there's almost certainly no limit. How many died in Titanic? That was PG13. The Wolverine? Also PG13. Happy Death Day had the main character repeatedly get murdered and, guess what? PG13. Plus you have hundreds of monster movies with widespread casualties rated PG or PG13. Hell, even Cloverfield was PG13 and that had a LOT more than just 20 deaths. --- (\/)(\/)\|-\| In Zeus We Trust: All Others Pay Cash</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1