Marvel Studios' Movies Won't Be R-rated

[BlackLantern]

the current Captain America (in the comics) does pack a gun....

 

[terry78]

the current Captain America (in the comics) does pack a gun....

Which still bugs me.

 

[Hmarrs]

the current Captain America (in the comics) does pack a gun....

But it's not the same guy!!!
The movie won't be about him.
It will be about Steve Rogers.
This proves my point in order to have Cap carry a gun it had to be a different person.

 

[cosmicherosa]

I can see a lot of Marvel movies with darker tones coming out under a HARD PG-13 rating. As long as they don't show blood and sex I think we are ok.

 

[Evil Twin]

In re: Captain America and WWII

I'd like to point out that there are plenty of war pictures that depict the brutality of war without having to resort to SAVING PRIVATE RYAN style gore. ALL QUIET ON THE WESTERN FRONT, BATTLEGROUND, THE BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI, LAWRENCE OF ARABIA, PATHS OF GLORY, APOCALYPSE NOW, THE BIG RED ONE, GALLIPOLI, GLORY, and GETTYSBURG spring to mind. All of them regarded, then and now, as realistic portrayals of war. Gore is a tool for a filmmaker, but it's not the only tool.

 

[COAL TIGER]

Some of you are saying blood and guts don't help a film, or isn't needed in a film. Saving Private Ryan has been mentioned a number of times. Blood and guts was very necessary in that movie and it helped the story like and other none war fictional films like Scarface. You all can try and argue againts it all you want but it is what it is.

Just stick to Toy Story people.

 

[GhostPoet]

Some of you are saying blood and guts don't help a film, or isn't needed in a film. Saving Private Ryan has been mentioned a number of times. Blood and guts was very necessary in that movie and it helped the story like and other none war fictional films like Scarface. You all can try and argue againts it all you want but it is what it is.

Just stick to Toy Story people.

Actually...I would have been fine if Saving Private Ryan didn't have any blood and guts.

That's not to say I wasn't glad they were in there! Cause you know...I love my blood and guts!!

Anyway...point is...Marvel won't do R-rated because PG-13 brings more people in.

 

[COAL TIGER]

Ok than explain to me how we were able to get an UItimate Avengers movie with his origin that was only PG-13. Admitedly it was a cartoon, but still it shows that it can be accomplished.

You're using a cartoon for your argument? That's pathetic.

Exactly, I'm not sure if many of you watch Supernatural, but that's a television show that they show tons of killing and even gore. No joke go look on youtube......Yea did you see it? They can get away with that on TV with a TV-14 rating. I think You people are thinking closer to PG than what can be possible in PG-13.

I'm Batman

That's TV. If they were to go further with that in a film it will get an R.

 

[COAL TIGER]

Thirdly, yes Punisher killed people, but if one of you would go back and read any of the THREE Punisher series prior to the 90s which were all under the CCA, you can see that they never really show any ridiculous or unnecessary murders. So a PG-13 movie could be believable and practical, but too many of use are raised on the MAX bs (sorry to offend any of you, but I personally don't like it) that shows people sprawled out on the ground with their liver hanging out of their gouged out eye socket.

Finally, Some of you people are only thinking in immediate theatre terms and not in DVD terms. When a movie comes out they can edit everything out and than reintroduce it in the uncut DVD. I know its kinda cheap but its effective.

You think it would be ok to do that in a Punisher film? We'll end up with another AVP. He's not Batman. Forget all that kiddy stuff. We need to see the blood and brains.

 

[BlackLantern]

Some of you are saying blood and guts don't help a film, or isn't needed in a film. Saving Private Ryan has been mentioned a number of times. Blood and guts was very necessary in that movie and it helped the story like and other none war fictional films like Scarface. You all can try and argue againts it all you want but it is what it is.

Just stick to Toy Story people.

Yes, because Saving Private Ryan is echoing actual events in history.....My point is just because you have blood and guts doesn't automatically raise the quality of the film or make it more credible....if you are going to have the blood and guts...have a point to it....and those previous films mentioned...Big Red One, The Green Berets, The Longest Day, Sands of Iwo Jima...are all fantastic war films with minimal "gore"....I suggest you take a look at some cinematic heritage before you start trying to insult people...

 

[GhostPoet]

Three words.

THE DIRTY DOZEN

 

[COAL TIGER]

Actually...I would have been fine if Saving Private Ryan didn't have any blood and guts.

Then that Toy Story comment was for you too.

Anyway...point is...Marvel won't do R-rated because PG-13 brings more people in.

Like I said a number of times before. I'm not talking about how much money Marvel can make. I'm talking about the tone of characters and doing them right.

 

[BlackLantern]

Like I said a number of times before. I'm not talking about how much money Marvel can make. I'm talking about the tone of characters and doing them right.

but Marvel is mostly concerned with reaching the widest audience possible....odds are Marvel Studios won't bother adapting any characters that might push that 'R' boundary.....

 

[COAL TIGER]

Yes, because Saving Private Ryan is echoing actual events in history.....My point is just because you have blood and guts doesn't automatically raise the quality of the film or make it more credible....

I never even said it did. But it's very necessary in some films. Can't argue againts that. Yeah, I know SPR was based on actual events. That's why I said "fictional films" when I mentioned Scarface. And blood and guts does raise the quality of some films and makes it more credible. Would Scarface have been as great with out the ultraviolence? HECK NO!!! Get over it.

if you are going to have the blood and guts...have a point to it....and those previous films mentioned...Big Red One, The Green Berets, The Longest Day, Sands of Iwo Jima...are all fantastic war films with minimal "gore"....I suggest you take a look at some cinematic heritage before you start trying to insult people...

First of all, those movies came out in the 50's, 60's, and early 80's and were soften.

Secondly. We're are talking about action films. Not emotional dramas.

Stick to Finding Nemo.

 

[Hypestyle]

well... I guess that Cuneo & company aren't willing to really push risky boundaries with R movies self-financed.. still, that kind of cuts them out of profit participation when it comes to other characters who may be set up elsewhere, for R-style films..

the "best" scenario I'd say to look for is to produce films with an R-in mind, cut it down to PG-13, then eventually release an unrated/extended version that has the original footage intact...

 

[BlackLantern]

First of all, those movies came out in the 50's, 60's, and early 80's and were soften.

Secondly. We're are talking about action films. Not emotional dramas.

Stick to Finding Nemo.

All of those movies I mentioned were World War 2 films....Big Red One and Sands of Iwo Jima are very action heavy.

I'm not saying I don't like gore or that it's bad....I'm all for it when the opportunity calls for it. Smokin' Aces, Rambo (the new one) and 300 are more recent examples of having a good amount of violence and still being a good film. Stuff like Hostel and Saw are proof you can have an 'R' rating and suck the high hard one....

 

[Hmarrs]

You think it would be ok to do that in a Punisher film? We'll end up with another AVP. He's not Batman. Forget all that kiddy stuff. We need to see the blood and brains.

I'm glad you mentioned AVP because AVP reqium was all blood and guts and it SUCKED BIG TIME compared to the first AVP.I shut it off and walked away it was STUPID.What we are talking about is the difference between quantity and quality anything can be done if it's done right.
those of you who like it fine but it's not nessary.Me now I said me before everyone gets crszy and jumps on me.I feel it insults my intellegence I don't need all the blood and guts to know someone is dead.I prefer a good story over shameless bells and whistles.Remember I said me.
It's just eye candy for people who like that stuff I don't think it's essential to the story.Basically it's put out there for people who like it.

 

[Hellstormer]

You're using a cartoon for your argument? That's pathetic.

Says the one who's desperately trying to argue with almost the entire thread.

That's TV. If they were to go further with that in a film it will get an R.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Edmt9VrtZhw
Check 4:36, yea that's what they can get away with on television with a TV-14 rating, imagine what they could do in movies, not that they would need to.

ArcBlade, I'm not really sure what's going through your mind to make you believe all the things that you're trying to force onto us, but it's a little disturbing how much you love ultra violence. And I don't think all the insults you're using are really helping your creditability. You must love mindless action films and hate movies that have any emotional or psychological depth behind them. Go sit down and watch something like Casablanca, learn to appreciate remarkable films that didn't use gore or cheap tricks.

 

[Armored Avenger]

I would like Marvel to be true to the character and the story and not worry about the rating, rather than have all of there films have to made to fit into a particular rating.
I dont want Marvel to make Moon Knight anymore.

 

[Hmarrs]

I never even said it did. But it's very necessary in some films. Can't argue againts that. Yeah, I know SPR was based on actual events. That's why I said "fictional films" when I mentioned Scarface. And blood and guts does raise the quality of some films and makes it more credible. Would Scarface have been as great with out the ultraviolence? HECK NO!!! Get over it.



First of all, those movies came out in the 50's, 60's, and early 80's and were soften.

Secondly. We're are talking about action films. Not emotional dramas.

Stick to Finding Nemo.

50's 60's and early 80's
But it worked.Emotional drama?As a matter of fact the more emotional connection you have with the character actually hightens the action picture.
If I don't care about the character no matter how much action it has it's boring.
Again AVP 2.

 

[BlackLantern]

I would like Marvel to be true to the character and the story and not worry about the rating, rather than have all of there films have to made to fit into a particular rating.
I dont want Marvel to make Moon Knight anymore.

I see it in the shop I go to but no one buys it......does anyone read that...?

 

[COAL TIGER]

All of those movies I mentioned were World War 2 films....Big Red One and Sands of Iwo Jima are very action heavy.

I'm not saying I don't like gore or that it's bad....I'm all for it when the opportunity calls for it. Smokin' Aces, Rambo (the new one) and 300 are more recent examples of having a good amount of violence and still being a good film. Stuff like Hostel and Saw are proof you can have an 'R' rating and suck the high hard one....

The saw movies were coo.

 

[COAL TIGER]

I'm glad you mentioned AVP because AVP reqium was all blood and guts and it SUCKED BIG TIME compared to the first AVP.I shut it off and walked away it was STUPID.What we are talking about is the difference between quantity and quality anything can be done if it's done right.
those of you who like it fine but it's not nessary.Me now I said me before everyone gets crszy and jumps on me.I feel it insults my intellegence I don't need all the blood and guts to know someone is dead.I prefer a good story over shameless bells and whistles.Remember I said me.
It's just eye candy for people who like that stuff I don't think it's essential to the story.Basically it's put out there for people who like it.

I've already explained things and I'm tired of doing it over and over again.

 

[Hellstormer]

The saw movies were coo.

Wow those 5 words just explained your stance and you're manor of thinking. Thank you, truly.

I see it in the shop I go to but no one buys it......does anyone read that...?

I used to, it was really good, but I had to cut it by budgetary constraints. I just got my license and gas costs too much .

 

[Majik1387]

I liked the Saw movies as well, but no Marvel comic compares to Saw in terms of storytelling...