Do Movie Ratings Make Any Sense to You?

TD

My wife and I have a "Movie night" once a week where we watch two movies. She picks one and I pick one. Here's the two movies we watched tonight and their ratings.

1. The Andromeda Strain - 1971 (My pick)

Direct adaptation of a Michael Crichton novel. Pretty dated, but still fun. Movie opens with all but two in the fictional town of Piedmont Arizona laying dead in their tracks. Scenes include: People laying dead in the streets being picked at by birds. A woman laying dead in her living room, naked to her waist. A pre-teen girl laying dead on the floor still clutching a stuffed animal An elderly woman has hung herself in a stairwell and is gently swinging in the breeze.

Doctors Stone and Hall are curious why livor mortis has not set in. Stone takes a scalpel and deeply slits a man's wrist to reveal the fact that all his blood has turned to powder. ---Nothing too intense, especially by today's standards, but definitely not Disney stuff.

The movie is rated 'G'

2. Secretariat - 2010 (Her pick)

Mostly true story about Penny Tweedy and the racehorse that won the triple crown in 1973. There's a little bit of language, but no sex, no nudity and no violence. The movie is mostly about the horse and the people who worked with it.

The movie is rated 'PG'

Do these ratings make any sense at all?

darthfader

I'm a bit surprised by the "G" rating of Andromeda Strain... The farther back you go, the more strict most if the MPAA ratings are. I cant count the number of movies that has an "R" rating back in the 70's or 80's that have similar movies out now that are "PG" or "PG-13".

cheers

Mad Sweeney

I'm with darthfader. Looks like a typo snuck in somewhere and nobody caught it.

But that said, no, the ratings in the USA don't make sense. Violence is A-OK but a boob or an f-bomb will get you an "R" rating. It's ludicrous how this country views what is appropriate or inappropriate for minors.

littlerockguy

Part's of the made-for-TV movie Born Innocent (1974) with Linda Blair had to be edited out (the all-girl rape scene which Linda Blair's character was raped with a broom handle) in future airings on TV after public outcry. Probably wouldn't be a big deal now if it was aired on TV originally intact.

LRG

simon17

All the Presidents Men I think was PG and it had F-bombs all over the place. I never understood that one, especially since its like 30 years old.

donuthole

Ratings actually were less strict -- Here are a few examples:

Planet of the Apes Rated G - Male backside nudity, violence, and mild profanity

Barbarella, Airplane, Sixteen Candles - Rated PG - Naked breasts

sd-7

Not really. There are some films that are PG-13 nowadays and you wonder how they got away with so much language or with some of the more violent scenes. It's like as long as the 'f-word' isn't used, they can have at it with the language, no problem. Why is that one word worse than all the others?

I was watching an old movie, 'They Call Me Mister Tibbs!' awhile back and didn't even know it was R; except for maybe one scene, it seemed like a PG-13 movie to me; the themes were a bit R-rated, though, so I can understand the rating. Nowadays I have a feeling that might actually get away with a PG-13 rating with only a minor edit.

--sd-7

leavingwt

TD:

If you haven't seen this documentary, you may enjoy it. Please be advised that the film is not intended for children and it contains mature content.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0493459/

This Film is Not Yet Rated is a 2006 independent documentary film about the Motion Picture Association of America's rating system and its effect on American culture, directed by Kirby Dick and produced by Eddie Schmidt. It premiered at the 2006 Sundance Film Festival and was released limited on September 1, 2006. The Independent Film Channel, the film's producer, aired the film later that year. It was rated TV-MA in the United States.

The MPAA gave the original cut of the film an NC-17 rating for "some graphic sexual content" – scenes that illustrated the content a film could include to garner an NC-17 rating. Kirby Dick appealed, and descriptions of the ratings deliberations and appeal were included in the documentary. The new version of the film is not rated.

The film discusses disparities the filmmaker sees in ratings and feedback: between Hollywood and independent films, between homosexual and heterosexual sexual situations, between male and female sexual depictions, and between violence and sexual content.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_Film_Is_Not_Yet_Rated

TD

Interesting comments. Thanks!

One thing I didn't bother to think about last night (Wife and I usually split a bottle of wine while we watch) is that the rating system has been overhauled several times

Prior to 1970, the ratings were G, M, R & X; From 70 to 72 they were G, GP, R & X; From 72 to 84 they were G, PG, R & X; From 84 to 90 they were G, PG, PG-13, R & X. The current system of G, PG, PG-13, R & NC-17 dates from about 1990 on.

Band on the Run

I recall Last Tango in Paris had an X rating. A group of us had to see it opening day. I don't think the film was that good but the X rating brought in a crowd.

Rather than a rating, why don't they summarize what some people might find objectionable. Sometimes the violence is so over the top I can't believe they are showing it.

Do Movie Ratings Make Any Sense to You?

Share this