G Or PG Movies That Would/Should Be Rated Higher

[Max J Power]

I thought Temple of Doom was one of or the main reason for the PG-13 rating to exist. I don't think PG-13 was around when that movie came out.

Yes, by most accounts, Temple of Doom was the movie that really made the MPAA decide to add another rating.

 

[CelticPredator]

Raiders could easily be R today, no way would Jaws be PG-13. It would be a HARD R...

 

[Asteroid-Man]

This thread is a really a good example of how over the last few decades, the world has been continually losing it's balls.

QFTW

 

[Gunga Diner]

The original Superman movie shows a kid's dick. And, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Jaws have nudity?

Also Sixteen Candles

 

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

And, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Jaws have nudity?

No.

 

[CelticPredator]

Wrong. It had huge ****.









Man ****.

 

[MOVIELORD101]

Wrong. It had huge ****.









Man ****.

 

[mclay18]

Teen Wolf
There was some heavy teen drinking for a PG film and I think the language was a bit much for PG

Not to mention a background extra flashing the camera in one of the gym scenes.

 

[baerrtt]

Pretty much any PG rated movie that had the f word (BEETLEJUICE, BIG).

I was quite surprised to know that TERMS OF ENDEARMENT got a PG rating in the States considering, amongst other things, it contains a scene where (for anyone here familiar with it) Jeff Daniels character starts to ******e his new wife played by Debra Winger.

 

[Max J Power]

The original Superman movie shows a kid's dick. And, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Jaws have nudity?

A woman runs topless near the beginning, but all you see is sideboob. Still, it wouldn't fly in a PG movie today (among many other things in Jaws).

 

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

Damn, how did I forget Beetlejuice? PG-13 was even around at that point and the movie was still PG.

 

[Drizzle]

Damn, how did I forget Beetlejuice? PG-13 was even around at that point and the movie was still PG.

I guess they were more lenient in the 80s. PG-13 was still relatively new at that point.

For the record, I just watched "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince" again and noticed that there's more blood in it than "The Dark Knight".

 

[mongoose-mania]

I'm a bit surprised that the Wallace and Gromit feature didn't get PG. There were a few things in that movie that went way over kids' heads.

 

[B.Layton Fan]

In the 80's there were a number of films that fell between MPAA's PG and R ratings. Which begat the PG-13 and less successfully so later the NC-17- which was truly as backward as it gets.

GREMLINS...I saw this when I was a kid and while it didn't bother me too much-it had enough juvinille humor to keep it from being to frightning, the first Raiders and TOD gave me a few nightime..uhhh trepidations that sent me running into bed w/ my folks. Something about a dude's face melting by the sight of demons can send you .

Anybody remember 'The Gate' I think it was PG-13, probably should have been R.

Hell I'm cool w/ the PG-13 rating, so the F what. Nobody ever wants to admit that in many instances in society you have to protect people from themselves, and their kids. Some in small ways some in greater, but it still needs to be done sad to say.

 

[CelticPredator]

I think all movies should require a boobie shot, followed by a head being blown off by a guy doing coke on a hooker's naked back.

Just sayin.

 

[Jumpin' Jack]

TOD. I had so many nightmares when I was a kid about being possessed, get my heart ripped out, and screaming monkey's with no brains.

 

[CelticPredator]

Dispite all things, I think Raiders is way more violent. The heart ripping was intense, but it wasnt as gory as the head shots, and melting faces in Raiders.

 

[terry78]

PG-13 is the broadest rating in existence. You get a very mixed bag when it comes to that, because movies can either be very tame or very hardcore.

 

[B.Layton Fan]

A PG-13 motion picture may go beyond the PG rating in theme, violence, nudity, sensuality, language, adult activities or other elements, but does not reach the restricted R category. The theme of the motion picture by itself will not result in a rating greater than PG-13, although depictions of activities related to a mature theme may result in a restricted rating for the motion picture. Any drug use will initially require at least a PG-13 rating. More than brief nudity will require at least a PG-13 rating, but such nudity in a PG-13 rated motion picture generally will not be sexually oriented. There may be depictions of violence in a PG-13 movie, but generally not both realistic and extreme or persistent violence. A motion picture’s single use of one of the harsher sexually-derived words, though only as an expletive, initially requires at least a PG-13 rating. More than one such expletive requires an R rating, as must even one of those words used in a sexual context. The Rating Board nevertheless may rate such a motion picture PG-13 if, based on a special vote by a two-thirds majority, the Raters feel that most American parents would believe that a PG-13 rating is appropriate because of the context or manner in which the words are used or because the use of those words in the motion picture is inconspicuous.

source

Not as open as some may think. I've heard you can say the F word twice in a PG-13 film.

 

[Infinity9999x]

Raiders could easily be R today, no way would Jaws be PG-13. It would be a HARD R...

I disagree. I think both would definitely be Pg-13. Fifteen years ago, maybe they would have been R, but recently they've been letting a lot of things slide in Pg-13. The Dark Knight, Lord of the Rings, or take any of the pg-13 horror movies out there. The grudge shows a girl with her lower jaw ripped off, the Unborn is filled with tons of extremely disturbing images (too bad the movie sucked balls though).

 

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

Not as open as some may think. I've heard you can say the F word twice in a PG-13 film.

Pretty sure it's just once, because I've never heard it twice. Unfortunately, every PG-13 comedy likes to use it for some big joke at the end, like it's the grand finale or something.

 

[Punisher Rising]

Dispite all things, I think Raiders is way more violent. The heart ripping was intense, but it wasnt as gory as the head shots, and melting faces in Raiders.

I feel Raiders was more violent too, more scenes of gore and more gruesome scenes in Raiders, overall. Although Temple definitely has some strong moments of violence, and is a much more violent film than The Last Crusade and Crystal Skull put together.

On the subject of PG-13 films, Congo was one that violence-wise was really pushing the boundaries of it's rating. Quite a bit of gore in that one.

 

[blueblazer2]

How come in a pg-13 movie . Their Allowed to show Male Nudity . But not Female Nudity

 

[CelticPredator]

I disagree. I think both would definitely be Pg-13. Fifteen years ago, maybe they would have been R, but recently they've been letting a lot of things slide in Pg-13. The Dark Knight, Lord of the Rings, or take any of the pg-13 horror movies out there. The grudge shows a girl with her lower jaw ripped off, the Unborn is filled with tons of extremely disturbing images (too bad the movie sucked balls though).

Um.....no. Not at all.

TDK was not hardcore. They didnt get away with anything because it was never near an R-Rated level. It was just shot in a way that made everything feel dark. When it wasnt.

LOTR was all black monster blood. Doesnt qualify.

All the PG-13 horror movies suck. (Save for a good 3...lol), and none of them are even close to R. They might have some creepy crap, but nothing close to what it could've had with an R rating.

 

[CelticPredator]

How come in a pg-13 movie . Their Allowed to show Male Nudity . But not Female Nudity

Because boobies can corrupt a small child. Which can lead to spontanious combustion.