G Or PG Movies That Would/Should Be Rated Higher

[Punisher Rising]

Beetlejuice definitely deserved a higher rating. Parts of it scared me silly as a kid, and it even got away with an F-bomb in it.

 

[shiv1202]

God... Coraline was a freaky movie. I don't know how that was PG... a hard PG-13 at least... which 9 yr old kid wants to see a man's mouth being sown together? Jeez...

 

[jonathancrane]

Attack of the Clones.

The severing of limbs and decapitation should have secured a PG-13 rating.

 

[james-in-cali]

How hasn't Howard the duck been mentioned yet?

One of Kubrick's bad movies was pg and i believe it had full frontal in the 80's I'm blanking on the name at the moment... ...

 

[Farren]

Temple of Doom, Poltergeist and Jaws really make me wonder what the hell an R-rating was for back in those days. (Maybe Spielberg had dirt on the MPAA).

 

[Quasimod0]

I dont think temple of doom or Jaws deserve an R rating. Not seeing why those two are brought up so often

 

[MrMaooz]

All the Sean Connery Bond movies should have been rated R instead of PG.

 

[Drizzle]

All the Sean Connery Bond movies should have been rated R instead of PG.

Those movies are equivalent to soft PG-13 movies today. I'd hardly call them R-rated.

 

[MrMaooz]

Airplane

 

[NosfeRomas]

Why Airplane ? i doubt a 13 year old will understand most of the jokes.

 

[MrMaooz]

Why Airplane ? i doubt a 13 year old will understand most of the jokes.

Boobies.

 

[NosfeRomas]

Boobies.

I don't remember boobies on Airplane!. I'll have to rewatch it.

 

[Quasimod0]

Ghostbusters would be PG 13

 

[Daywalker89]

Ghostbusters would be PG 13

Yep, scenes like this back that theory
http://deadlymovies.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/ghostbusters-2-titanic.jpg

 

[Drizzle]

Ghostbusters would be PG 13

Easily. If it had been released only a few months later, it probably would have been PG-13. That came out around the same time as Gremlins and Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, and those two were the ones that really brought about the PG-13 rating. But the rating wasn't created until July 1984, a month after Ghostbusters came out.

 

[redhawk23]

Those movies are equivalent to soft PG-13 movies today. I'd hardly call them R-rated.

You know besides the whole raping a woman until she likes it thing.

 

[redhawk23]

The original Planet of the Apes and the 2nd and the 3rd ones as well. Seriously it has always baffled me that they are rated G. All of them quite violent, the first film starts with the nihilistic musing, moves on to man-ass and human hunting, then beatings, touchy religious parallels and then of course the reveal.

The second movie has all of that plus mutants peeling their face off.

The third film strikes kind of an arch tone for much of it that would more or less go above kids heads and ends with the 2 main characters being murdered by the police.

Rate G!

 

[MrMaooz]

Those movies are equivalent to soft PG-13 movies today. I'd hardly call them R-rated.

Yeah, but they're better suited as R than PG.

 

[mahnamahna101]

I'd have to say that everyone saying Cars 2, Toy Story 3, Beauty and the Beast, Lion King, etc should be PG are just being a little too oversensitive as far as content. G means "General Audiences" - it generally is acceptable for most people to watch it.

More importantly, PG means "parental guidance" - you guys think cartoon violence is enough to warrant parental guidance? Never mind that parental guidance should be a no-brainer with any child watching any sort of media or entertainment.

I'd say more PG movies should be G than more G movies need to be PG. Frozen was a G rated movie if Monsters University was. Despicable Me has nothing inappropriate that I can think of. The new Muppet movies had fart shoes... that's it. Tangled had a couple drips of blood - you see more at a kids soccer game than the movie showed. Pretty much any PG movie with "rude humor" or "mild thematic elements" is a G.

Rango, Coraline, ParaNorman and HTTYD 1 and 2 are the only PG kids movies I can think of that actually warranted the PG rating. Secret of Nimh and Black Cauldron too. Watership Down as well. The first two Shreks and Antz were pretty racy for family movies, too - but they shouldn't be PG-13 just because they have intense moments or profanity or sexual innuendos.

When did PG become "kid movie that's okay for anyone to watch"? And don't get me started on people saying the Indiana Jones movies and Ghostbusters should be rated R. PG-13, sure. But R? Next to today's R rated films, no. They're way too light-hearted and squeaky clean (as far as realism/effects go) to be R rated. Goonies, Big, Beetlejuice all probably should have been PG-13 in hindsight. Back to the Future can stay a hard PG since there's no drug references or F bombs. I'd even say both Ghostbusters movies could probably remain PG (some language and a little action, but that's it).

Very few kids movies are intense enough where a PG is legtimately warranted. And for the "what about preschoolers?" argument... well why are they watching many movies to begin with? I'd say you need to be about 5 before you should regularly watch movies that feature sad/tense moments. Even then, it depends on the kid. Coraline shouldn't be shown to anyone under the age of 7. Common sense. Rango might fly over the head of a 9 year old. Common sense. But that doesn't make them PG-13 in the same way Titanic, Men in Black or The Avengers are PG-13.

And if you sincerely think Cars 2 should be PG because "the cars are portrayed as alive just like humans"... I don't know man

Kids don't need to be sheltered because Mom and Dad think some intensity, maybe some cuss words, or even an adult joke makes it a hard PG-13. Or that something resembling conflict makes Toy Story 3 a solid PG (it's borderline G - a cuss word or the characters dying in the incinerator probably would have gotten it a PG. Personally, I think most kids over the age of 4 can handle Toy Story 3 just fine with a G rating)


I'll agree that Raiders of the Lost Ark and Airplane! are automatic PG-13s now. I'll agree that the original Planet of the Apes should have been rated PG from the start. But when something as innocent as The Wizard of Oz gets re-rated PG for "some scary moments" (aka the Wicked Witch and the flying monkeys' 5-10 minutes of screen time) or the Muppets "for mild rude humor" (fart shoes!! so inappropriate! I can't believe Disney put such a thing in a family movie! This could never pass for G!)

Rant done lol

 

[Mandon Knight]

Back in the day, as there was a huge 'gulf' between a PG and a 15 here in the UK, 'family' films had an entire scope from which to work in, all this prior to the 12 certifcate in 1989 with Batman, then the advancement of the 12A as well.

So I grew up as a child in an era where all sorts were passed okay in family fare based releases.

Mentioned a lot here is Ghostbusters, full of thinly hidden 'adult' references and the only blow job scene in a children aimed film I can think of.

I remember my mum not letting me go to see Raiders (I was 6 at time of release) as she'd heard of the on screen visuals at the end would be too much for me.

I also think there's a prencity to 'molly coddle' children these days and not have them embrace 'deeper thinking' films.

Having said that, the 12A is where the problems lie, as it leaves more for the parent's to assess as to their own child's threshold of what they can or cannot stand to watch, after all, children are all different to their sensitivity of being scared or challenged by a visual scene.