Is an "R" Rating Really Better?

[MadVillainy]

I've seen alot since 2 years ago with ppl complaining about a certain film needs to be R. But honestly in my opinion, I dont think alot of films needs an R rating

Die Hard 4.0 (called Live Free or Die Hard here in America but the international title sounds cooler) I think that was the one movie that should have been R because the PG13 version was annoying but the Unrated, which basically was an R movie was alot better

Terminator Salvation I know alot of ppl were complaining that the film needed to be R but after seeing the movie it worked fine as a PG13 movie. Was it perfect? No. Could it have been better? Yes. But I dont think making it an R would have made it any better or any worse.

In short: Some things should be R, but an R rating isnt best thing to have in a movie

 

[CFE]

"Terminator: Salvation" I know alot of ppl were complaining that the film needed to be R but after seeing the movie it worked fine as a PG13 movie. Was it perfect? No. Could it have been better? Yes. But I dont think making it an R would have made it any better or any worse.

Agreed..."Terminator: Salvation" needed quite a few things to be better for me...gratuituous, bloody gore and language aren't among those things.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Haven't seen TS yet so maybe I shouldn't say this but I think that Terminator should have stayed an R rated franchise. They only changed it to PG: 13 so they could bring in more kids...that didn't work out too well now did it.

To answer the question, no the R rating isn't better than PG: 13.

 

[craigdbfan]

Terminator Salvation I know alot of ppl were complaining that the film needed to be R but after seeing the movie it worked fine as a PG13 movie. Was it perfect? No. Could it have been better? Yes. But I dont think making it an R would have made it any better or any worse.

The R rating would of made it better in this case because we actually would have seen the Terminators terminating humans instead of throwing them around and giving them a beating or two.

The story/character development would of still been "bleh" but at least we would have seen the Terminators doing what they are supposed to do.

I agree the R rating isn't necessary all the time but with certain material you have to either go R or just don't make the movie at all.

 

[Dr. Evil]

To me, whether or not an "R" Rating is necessary depends on the type of movie it is.

 

[Wiseman]

I don't watch any film that isn't rated R. Kinda sucks being a part of a superhero website though seeing as though most of these films are PG-13

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

Does na R-rating matter? Depends on what type of film/ if it's necessary.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I know one thing I felt that PG: 13 rating in Die Hard 4...that and the crappy direction and screenplay.

 

[dark_b]

it has a lot to do with the movie and the characters.

for example this guy here is R. there is nothing PG13 about him.

making a movie that is PG13 with john mclane is idiotic. i dont care if there is good action. its about him acting and talking R

 

[dark_b]

a hardcore war movie should be R. obviously. imagine people using big guns and there is no blood. if you want a cartoon then watch a cartoon. if you want a war movie then you want to show it how it happens. if its to expensive and you wont make a profit then dont make a war movie.

if you make a movie about a guy who has claws then it can not be PG13. he has f.... claws on hes hands. he kills people with hes claws. a movie where he is with the x-men team i dont care. but if you devote a movie to him , if you spend 2 hours him killing people with hes claws then it needs to be R.

 

[Dr. Evil]

Does na R-rating matter? Depends on what type of film/ if it's necessary.

Yep. I'll use a comedy as an example: Tropic Thunder. The fact that movie was rated "R" was part of the film's greatness. If the film was PG-13, it would have been nothing more then a decent comedy, not great.

 

[MadVillainy]

I agree about the DIe HArd point dark b, I talked about it in the OP

but like with Daredevil getting rebooted alot of ppl say that it needs to be R, I say you can make it a very intense PG13

 

[MadVillainy]

Comedies now adays the way they do it most of them need to be R, but still not every movie

 

[dark_b]

i like also that comedys are again R. some movies that were PG13 worked.

look for exampel the Farrelly brothers. There's Something About Mary was R. Me, Myself & Irene was R. both movies IMO great. then they make Stuck on You. PG13 of course. some funny moments but i always got a feeling that they were holding back. and then they both go back to R with The Heartbreak Kid.

 

[Wiseman]

haha, I always hate the people who vote undecided in polls. Now I'm one of them. Yes!!!

 

[CFE]

if you want a war movie then you want to show it how it happens.

That's not necessarily true...the act of war is horrible enough without having to show excessive absurd violence.

Not showing what actually happens and instead doing it in a more suggestive manner shows creativity and taste...and that allows for the imaginations of the audience to run wild.

Why do I need the violence spoon-fed to me when the suggestion of violence and my own imagination can make it so much worse?

For example, the deaths of Dallas and Lambert in "Alien" have so much more significance than characters having their guts ripped out by gunfire or whatnot...

It's about what I don't see that freaks me out...

 

[dark_b]

That's not necessarily true...the act of war is horrible enough without having to show excessive absurd violence.

Not showing what actually happens and instead doing it in a more suggestive manner shows creativity and taste...and that allows for the imaginations of the audience to run wild.

Why do I need the violence spoon-fed to me when the suggestion of violence and my own imagination can make it so much worse?

For example, the deaths of Dallas and Lambert in "Alien" have so much more significance than characters having their guts ripped out by gunfire or whatnot...

It's about what I don't see that freaks me out...

i obviously didnt mean showing everything.

but having a war movie without any drop of blood?

 

[CFE]

Well no, I wouldn't go that far obviously...lol

I think the violence, as with most things, should be done in moderation...unless the story absolutely positively NEEDs the violence to be excessive. The 'Terminator' films don't need that however, not when the concept and suggestion of machines exterminating us through a nuclear holocaust is already horrible enough.

 

[Project862006]

yes john mccaine cussing alot when you take that away you neuter his character

TS would not of mattered if it was rated r it would of been a ultra violent mediocre film lol if the script and character development sucks r rating doesn't matter

 

[Project862006]

double post

 

[DieSmiling]

If it's a raunchy comedy or an action movie that isn't effects driven (Die Hard, Taken, etc. as opposed to Transformers, Star Trek) being rated R almost always improves the film, at least for me personlly. Most things I find funny involve mature humor (at least, most things I find funny that Hollywood seems able to produce) and I'll be honest -- I'm a sucker for violence. I love seeing people get blown away or just plain ****ed up in action movies.

 

[Wiseman]

yes john mccaine cussing alot when you take that away you neuter his character

The guy who was running for president is in a movie

 

[The Squirrel]

No.

 

[CFE]

and I'll be honest -- I'm a sucker for violence. I love seeing people get blown away or just plain ****ed up in action movies.

Truth be told I can dig it to once in awhile...all the better if it's meant to serve the story.

On the subject of whether or not it can dictate a film being good or bad, I just never thought so.

But sometimes you gotta let it rip and let the blood flow...and I'm down with that

 

[mr. peasant]

Personally, I think the very act of aiming for a particular rating (whether up or down) is detrimental to the movie's quality. The presence and/or absence of more 'mature' content should be determined based on the movie in and of itself rather than the rating system.

When deciding on the amount of violence and gore, things that should be considered are how much is necessary and how much suspension of belief the audience is already being subjected to. Does the absence of profuse bleeding following a stab wound from a set of claws seem too unrealistic in comparison to people turning into diamond? Do we need to show severed limbs following a bus exploding or is that just sledgehammering something blatantly obvious? If you look at sex scenes, just showing suggestive movements under bedsheets is more than enough and audience understand what's going on without the need of on-screen penetration.