The Amazing Spider-Man G Rating or R Rating?

[SuperFerret]

If it's good and enjoyable, I'll see it. I still pop in G rated movies from time to time.

 

[Sawyer]

The first person here who says this needs to be R-rated is going to be the first person on the hype that I kill.

 

[SuperFerret]

The first person here who says this needs to be R-rated is going to be the first person on the hype that I kill.

[YT]fKG5US_NVoY[/YT]

 

[TheSlag]

Who the hell wants to see a Spider-Man movie that's not kid-friendly?

Me. Hell, I would love to see a R-Rated Spider-Man movie, but I know there is very little chance of that.

That said, just because a movie is not R-Rated, and is rated PG-13, that does NOT mean the damn storylines need to be watered down, and they DO NOT need cheesy kids (especially at climatic moments), squeaking.. GO SPIDEY!! or Wanna buy a camera.. Flim's EXXXXTRA. Sheesh

As far as R rated vs. PG13, it's just like the Slasher movie vs. the Suspensful movie.. I do not care to see the Slasher/Blood everywhere junk.

They can make a serious, adult storylines and characters PG-13 Spider-Man, that kids can still see, and Adults can watch and enjoy.. without any "Cringe or Roll your eyes" Moments. (Looking at you Sam(bo) Raimi)

 

[SuperFerret]

And when does "kid-friendly" equal "cringe-worthy"? And when did cheese become unpopular?

 

[TheSlag]

The first person here who says this needs to be R-rated is going to be the first person on the hype that I kill.

If or when they include Venom, I could see the possibity of an R-Rated movie, it's just according to how hard PG13 movies they take with the reboot, leading up to that moment.

 

[TheSlag]

And when does "kid-friendly" equal "cringe-worthy"? And when did cheese become unpopular?

Since Sam kept including his Kin at critical times of the movies.

Or the approach of Spidey has GOT TO Land in front of waving flag at some point of the movie.

Or Tobey has to turn into Saturday Nite Fever Travolta to show the dark influence of the symbiote on him.

Tobey Struttin his Smexy stuff Emo Style.

Kirsten singing, walking down grand stairs like something out of a 1920 MGM movie.

Breaking up the "dramatic climatic" final battle (not for me, but I am sure for you it was), with the girl selling JJ a camera... Films's EXXXXTRA

Struttin Peter in SM2 (sense some redundancy here yet) and we have to hit you over the head with the obvious that Peter Parker.. in college by now mind you.. IS A KLUTZ (insert canned laughter here with Stogoes "Yuck.. Yuck... Yuck)

Announcer.. "This COULD Be the end of Spider-Man.. *gasp* ... cause AGAIN... Sam has to HIT you OVER the Head with the frickin obvious.. cause we're just tooo dumb to know that this is supposed to be a *Gasp* dramatic moment in the movie...

"Etc... Etc... Etc."

 

[SuperFerret]

Yes, that answers both of my questions completely.

 

[Pythagoras]

I too love to see a Rated R Spiderman movie but it will never happen. Cursing, blood, and sex will not work in a Spiderman movie. He is not the Punisher or Blade at all. So he has to be PG-13 in every live action film.

 

[Spidey_62]

Spidey will never get a G rating, or an R rating. Just because people want quips won't automatically make it a true blue G film. Nor will the darker tone they want get an R.. Even asking something is just stupid.

 

[TheSlag]

The Dark Knight Rated PG-13 for intense sequences of violence and some menace.

There you go. And I think Venom could be done in the same mode with a PG-13 rating.

 

[JeanVitchier]

Superman (1978) was PG and it was a huge hit back then. All the kids love it. A PG Spidey reboot would definitely recapture the kids into the comic book fold!

 

[Spidey_62]

Superman (1978) was PG and it was a huge hit back then. All the kids love it. A PG Spidey reboot would definitely recapture the kids into the comic book fold!

Isn't that because the MPAA's only ratings were PG and R back then?

 

[Artistsean]

G rating, or PG rating. Spidey and R rating just don't go together.
Plus R rating would cut out some of the audience they already have. I don't think they would do that.

 

[MrSpyder]

Neither it'll always be PG-13 or of course if Carnage is in it

 

[Immortalfire]

Isn't that because the MPAA's only ratings were PG and R back then?

Those and G, yes. PG-13 came along in the 80's, thanks to Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom.

 

[spider-neil]

you can get away with murder (no pun intended) if you show no blood or sex. you can really push that rating. an R isn't needed even for characters like lizard or carnage.

 

[©KAW]

And what age were you when you started to enjoy super hero comics?

Maybe saying I hate kids was a bit harsh, what I meant was, I hate when studios think that they can make more money by catering to kids, and the film resulting in being nothing but a skeleton of its fat source material. And Spider-Man's stories, characters and source material is stuffed with greatness.

Seriously though, what does it matter, these movies are PG-13 like "The Dark Knight" and "Lord of the Rings"--yet, they're simplistic, goofy, watered-down, cartoonish and juvenile?

Why even give the damn movie a PG-13 if you're going to fill it with nothing but fluff during the key moments within the films?

Me. Hell, I would love to see a R-Rated Spider-Man movie, but I know there is very little chance of that.

That said, just because a movie is not R-Rated, and is rated PG-13, that does NOT mean the damn storylines need to be watered down, and they DO NOT need cheesy kids (especially at climatic moments), squeaking.. GO SPIDEY!! or Wanna buy a camera.. Flim's EXXXXTRA. Sheesh

As far as R rated vs. PG13, it's just like the Slasher movie vs. the Suspensful movie.. I do not care to see the Slasher/Blood everywhere junk.

They can make a serious, adult storylines and characters PG-13 Spider-Man, that kids can still see, and Adults can watch and enjoy.. without any "Cringe or Roll your eyes" Moments. (Looking at you Sam(bo) Raimi)

Cringe and rolling eyes, yep, I do a lot of that with Sam Raimi's style of Spider-Man film making. Catering to children is a comic book movie killer. But these directors don't seem to learn from past comic book films who have done it.

Superman (1978) was PG and it was a huge hit back then. All the kids love it. A PG Spidey reboot would definitely recapture the kids into the comic book fold!

Spider-Man already has the kids regardless of it being a "G," "PG-13," or an "R" rated film. Let kids get into the comic books because they like the comics, not depending on the films to do that. Kids loved The Matrix, Terminator 2 or 300, of course not. All it takes is an older person to get them in, if anything, it would make them want to see it more, because it won't be a film that talks down to them like they're idiots.

G rating, or PG rating. Spidey and R rating just don't go together.
Plus R rating would cut out some of the audience they already have. I don't think they would do that.

If they can make "The Matrix" with an R-rating, why can't they make a Spider-Man film with it. That movie wasn't filled with sex, blood and gore...and kids loved it to death, same can be said for Terminator 2.

An R rating isn't needed, but if Sony/The Director feel the need not to utilize the PG-13 rating, let's at least give the writers the go ahead to write something without a bunch of juvenile fluff.

 

[Golgo-13]

Fantastic Four 2 wasn't what i consider kid friendly. They showed SS being tortured, and had some pretty crude dialogue, yet it garnished a PG. I think the only reason SM1 got a PG-13 was because they actually showed blood. Other than that it could have very well gotten a PG...i'm serious when i say that i wouldn't be at all surprised if the new Spider-Man flick was rated as such.

Those and G, yes. PG-13 came along in the 80's, thanks to Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom.

Ah, is that the movie that changed things?

The Beast Master is a PG, yet they show Tanya Roberts bare breasted. Clash of The Titans has a few shots of TnA in it also...the good ol' days.

 

[©KAW]

Both Fantastic Four movies were geared towards kids, period.

Let's hope that the next Spidey film keeps its "PG-13" and doesn't fall to a "PG" film, it would be the wrong direction, especially for Spider-Man's villains--who are already watered down to their very last compound. This time, I hope they actually utilize the damn PG-13 like "Lord of the Rings" did.

 

[LegendaryCaleb]

this is a ******ed thread....
obviously pg-13
how the heck would there ever be a chance of r?
not even TDK was r

 

[spider-neil]

for the sake of speculation if spidey had lizard and the movie was approached like the american warewolf in london i.e. gore, terrifying change, blood. the movie would lose some of its audience, but how much would it lose? a quarter? half?

 

[Troy_Parker]

PG-13.. The Dark Knight was dark enough to stay PG-13.. so surely they can do the same if not, a better job for Spider-Man.

 

[©KAW]

for the sake of speculation if spidey had lizard and the movie was approached like the american warewolf in london i.e. gore, terrifying change, blood. the movie would lose some of its audience, but how much would it lose? a quarter? half?

Actually, it would gain a bigger audience. It would send a clear message that the singing, dancing, goofy, cheesy, corny, fluffy, juvenile and the simplistic story telling could finally be gone.

 

[spider-neil]

Actually, it would gain a bigger audience. It would send a clear message that the singing, dancing, goofy, cheesy, corny, fluffy, juvenile and the simplistic story telling could finally be gone.

seriously, you think if the new spidey made a movie that was a hard R (no swearing but blood and violence) MORE people would watch it rather than less? so the slack left by children (because no way will their parents allow them to watch this) would be picked up by everyone else? hmmm...can't see it