Your Thoughts On The Hollywood Rating System

Tools    





I've never really thought about our rating system that much.

Ours is U; PG; 12; 12A; 15; 18; R18

The difference with a 12 & 12A is that anyone under 12 who wishes to see a 12A must attend the screening with an adult. Quite smart & sensible too. America should adopt something like that.



The M rating in Australia is pretty much useless most M rated movies are pretty much PG except with a couple f bombs added or a little bit of blood.



Welcome to the human race...
The M is Australia's PG-13 but every so often it gets applied to any sufficiently lightweight R-rated movie such as The Breakfast Club or Love, Actually. It's more interesting how an American R can be reclassified as an M, an MA15+, or an R18+, which speaks more to its broadness.
__________________
I really just want you all angry and confused the whole time.
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0



My problem was with The King's Speech, which was rated R for a two minute Cluster F-Bomb. No violence, sex or nudity. Just that one scene.
I posted my theory on the reason why that happens:

I think the system is do for an overhaul. Its misused and here's how:

Producers/Directors want to reach the largest audience and make the most money...And these days a PG movie made for adults will take in less money than the same movie with a R rating. So what happens? The director throws in a few F bombs so they earn a R rating and people then think the film is worth seeing.

I've watched numerous newer films that are rated R, but really are a PG or PG13 film that has been 'pumped upped' to an R with just a few F bombs or other R ranted words.

My solution: let the producers/directors choose their own rating as long as it's the same or 1 step up more restrictive than the Motion Picture Association of America film rating system. Example if a film is given a PG, the producer/director can opt for the film to be a PG-13. If it's given a PG-13 then can opt for a R...




My thought is after "Deadpool" all dummies are raving about more R rated movies being released in the future. It's like their standard for a good movie is excessive swearing and gratuitous violence. I'm all for more mature movies in relation to content, not superficial style which if I were to be more indignant defies all customs of moral decency in aspirations to be more "edgy".



It's a very inconsistent system. "The Right Stuff" 1983 rated PG, at least 4 F words. "The Woman in Red" 1984 PG-13 Bush. Some super hero Movie 2015 rated PG-13 someone smoking a cigarette. And now the MPAA globe logo, and inside the box we see rated R for pervasive language and violence. Whatever happened to risk and adventure? Don't tell us what the ingredients are, stop being a sissy about your kids being corrupted. Live a little. Take a chance. Like the olden days. Rated R. Period. You're gonna hafta see the movie to find out why. Rated R. There's a pretty big hint there. "As Good as it Gets" 1997 PG-13 lots of F words, more than the usual 2 allowed.

The there's TV...so, you can show people getting tortured, gutted and drop the sh*t and as* bombs like gangbusters but god forbid you show some boobie or an occasional salami in the mix, oh no, not that! Killing is OK, but no procreation or words that insinuate any sexual act.!

The system is filled with holes. Holes in the head.



It's a very inconsistent system. "The Right Stuff" 1983 rated PG, at least 4 F words. "The Woman in Red" 1984 PG-13 Bush. Some super hero Movie 2015 rated PG-13 someone smoking a cigarette. And now the MPAA globe logo, and inside the box we see rated R for pervasive language and violence. Whatever happened to risk and adventure? Don't tell us what the ingredients are, stop being a sissy about your kids being corrupted. Live a little. Take a chance. Like the olden days. Rated R. Period. You're gonna hafta see the movie to find out why. Rated R. There's a pretty big hint there. "As Good as it Gets" 1997 PG-13 lots of F words, more than the usual 2 allowed.

The there's TV...so, you can show people getting tortured, gutted and drop the sh*t and as* bombs like gangbusters but god forbid you show some boobie or an occasional salami in the mix, oh no, not that! Killing is OK, but no procreation or words that insinuate any sexual act.!

The system is filled with holes. Holes in the head.

Couldn't disagree more. There are holes but as a parent of 9 and 8 year old boys that loves to go to the movies I am very appreciative of the system we have now. I can take them to most PG-13 stuff, every once in a while there is something I shudder at in the types of films I take them to but I can feel relatively safe. Imagine if Avengers was rated the same as Logan? I would have had a heart attack if I had taken them to that this weekend.
__________________
Letterboxd



Couldn't disagree more. There are holes but as a parent of 9 and 8 year old boys that loves to go to the movies I am very appreciative of the system we have now. I can take them to most PG-13 stuff, every once in a while there is something I shudder at in the types of films I take them to but I can feel relatively safe. Imagine if Avengers was rated the same as Logan? I would have had a heart attack if I had taken them to that this weekend.
I respect your stand on the rating system. I feel differently, but definitely see your point.

But, with that said, I want to reinforce the "head full of holes" sentiment. The rating system is junk, even with the insurance policy in place. And PG-13 isn't the same as PG-8 or 9. Not trying to be a dick, but inconsitsent rating system..what passes as violence, foul language and adult themes? We still won;t know until we see the film for ourselves, beforehand.



I feel like a film shouldn't be given an R rating for profanity. Also NC-17 is pretty pointless. It's the parents responsibility to see whether they can bring their 12 year old kid to a certain movie. It's not like if we remove the NC-17 rating a parent's gonna see the cover for 'Love' and say 'Oh yeah a movie that's basically just sex scenes is perfect for my kid!'