Should the MPAA make a "PG-15" rating?

[Mrs. Sawyer]

They should make PG-15 and combine R and NC-17.

 

[terry78]

Frankly I think too many ratings is actually more anal than anything. Yeah, PG-13 is a massive margin for error rating, but they just need to hire people that understand content better. Video game ratings have four over here....the E, E10, Teen and Mature. The Adults Only rating is rarely used.

 

[Soapy]

Only two ratings are necessary:

Rating A

• This movie doesn't have excessive violence, nudity, and/or swearing. As always we recommend that you should be a good parent and be mindful of what your children are watching. If you want to let them watch it, hey that's your business.

Rating B

• This movie has excessive violence, nudity, and/or swearing. As always we recommend that you should be a good parent and be mindful of what your children are watching. If you want to let them watch it, hey that's your business.

Or an alternative one rating system:

Rating

• We're not your damn babysitter.

 

[Picard Sisko]

Its too close to PG-13 and totally unnecessary.

 

[Bruce Malone]

Yeah it's silly seeing as R is technically PG-17. Do we really need a whole separate ratings category just to cater to that relatively narrow in-between age set?

 

[antsman41]

How about no ratings and let's be honest in films?

Will make directors have more control, keep the politics ******** away, and won't have so many films cheating or getting screwed.

 

[Thundarr]

Only two ratings are necessary:

Rating A

• This movie doesn't have excessive violence, nudity, and/or swearing. As always we recommend that you should be a good parent and be mindful of what your children are watching. If you want to let them watch it, hey that's your business.

Rating B

• This movie has excessive violence, nudity, and/or swearing. As always we recommend that you should be a good parent and be mindful of what your children are watching. If you want to let them watch it, hey that's your business.

Or an alternative one rating system:

Rating

• We're not your damn babysitter.

Technically, the rating system is there to help parents make such informed decisions. It's just that the system for rating these movies is inconsistent and lopsided, and in some cases extremely prejudiced and biased.

 

[AndrewGilkison]

Only two ratings are necessary:

Rating A

• This movie doesn't have excessive violence, nudity, and/or swearing. As always we recommend that you should be a good parent and be mindful of what your children are watching. If you want to let them watch it, hey that's your business.

Rating B

• This movie has excessive violence, nudity, and/or swearing. As always we recommend that you should be a good parent and be mindful of what your children are watching. If you want to let them watch it, hey that's your business.

Or an alternative one rating system:

Rating

• We're not your damn babysitter.

I could get behind this rating system.

 

[jmc]

Its too close to PG-13 and totally unnecessary.

Yeah it's silly seeing as R is technically PG-17. Do we really need a whole separate ratings category just to cater to that relatively narrow in-between age set?

I reeeeeeeeeally don't think some of you are quite understanding the actual advantages of a '15' rating. It's not about catering, it's about a more balanced system that's fair for the film and the studios, if a film is too mature for a 13 rating it simply gets bumped up to a 15, all is means is 2 years worth of audience don't have the luxury of being able to see it without mum or dad as opposed to 4 years with the current system.

 

[Maximus One]

Ratings are just dumb period. I get needing to know if you're taking your kid to see something like Antichrist or Hostel or something but aside from extreme sexual and violent content I see no other use. Language shouldn't even factor in but that's a whole other discussion. Personally, on a philosophical level, I find the very idea of vulgarity or profanity absurd anyways. But yea, gratuitous sexual imagery and violence parents and the audience in general should be informed of but aside from that, aren't the audiences smart enough to know of they're taking their kid to see Wreck-It Ralph or Saw? I mean come on now, no excuse in this day and age for not knowing something going in.

 

[Thundarr]

I reeeeeeeeeally don't think some of you are quite understanding the actual advantages of a '15' rating. It's not about catering, it's about a more balanced system that's fair for the film and the studios, if a film is too mature for a 13 rating it simply gets bumped up to a 15, all is means is 2 years worth of audience don't have the luxury of being able to see it without mum or dad as opposed to 4 years with the current system.

But is still doesn't matter so long as the system by which the MPAA rates movies continues to be broken. You can have PG13, PG14, PG15, and PG16 added to the ratings system, and the MPAA are still gonna be unjustly giving X ratings to movies that should be rated R, R ratings to movies that should be rated PG(add number here), and so on. Fix the ratings system first. Then you can add all the new PG ratings that you want.

 

[jmc]

But is still doesn't matter so long as the system by which the MPAA rates movies continues to be broken. You can have PG13, PG14, PG15, and PG16 added to the ratings system, and the MPAA are still gonna be unjustly giving X ratings to movies that should be rated R, R ratings to movies that should be rated PG(add number here), and so on. Fix the ratings system first. Then you can add all the new PG ratings that you want.

What's the harm in trying though? Honestly, all I'm hearing from some people is 'fix the system', but no one seems to be offering anything other than 'fix the system'. Yeah, maybe the system might need fixing, and perhaps he first step is to bring in a new rating. Maybe it forces change.

 

[terry78]

If we already have a mindset, changing the technical aspect doesn't always work with some people.

 

[warhorse78]

I reeeeeeeeeally don't think some of you are quite understanding the actual advantages of a '15' rating. It's not about catering, it's about a more balanced system that's fair for the film and the studios, if a film is too mature for a 13 rating it simply gets bumped up to a 15, all is means is 2 years worth of audience don't have the luxury of being able to see it without mum or dad as opposed to 4 years with the current system.

You know, in my area, it is extremely easy for kids to buy tickets to a PG movie, and then just sneak into an R rated flick, no questions asked. They have it set up where you just show your ticket at the main entrance, and then once you are through, you have access to all of the screens, except for one, which is up at the top floor, and is especially made for adults and even serve liquor and have their own bathrooms up there. That's where most of the NC-17 flicks are shown, and it's also where people who hate kids go to get away from them.

 

[Lencho01]

interesting
http://badassdigest.com/2013/07/25/2013-the-year-pg-13-broke/

in a way its good that WOlverine got pg13 because it can make money. but than i have a feeling that mpaa was payed to give it pg13.

I like those descriptions of the different ratings.

 

[MadVillainy]

I think they should. I dont really see a downside to the idea

 

[Thundercrack85]

I say we abolish the entire system. Who's with me?

 

[Thundarr]

What's the harm in trying though? Honestly, all I'm hearing from some people is 'fix the system', but no one seems to be offering anything other than 'fix the system'. Yeah, maybe the system might need fixing, and perhaps the first step is to bring in a new rating. Maybe it forces change.

Unfortunately it won't force change. It'll just make it that much messier.

 

[jmc]

Unfortunately it won't force change. It'll just make it that much messier.

How do you know? It's just as likely a '15' rating will level the inconsistencies giving films and studios are fairer and acceptable outcome and causing less hassles for the MPAA. No-ones really built a strong case against a '15' rating and if anything feels like people are trying to prevent the option for reasons that don't really make much sense other than to preserve the status quo.

 

[jmc]

Alternatively you could just bump the R rating down to '15' and leave the NC-17 as is.

 

[dark_b]

what i do know is that hollywould would like to make action movies for very young kids. pg13 is a compromise that they have to make to get adults in the theater. beause you can not show any contact with a pg action scene. thats why they use so much shaky cam and quick cuts. because MPAA agrees that you can not see what is happening.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Alternatively you could just bump the R rating down to '15' and leave the NC-17 as is.

That's even better than my idea.

 

[Thundarr]

How do you know? It's just as likely a '15' rating will level the inconsistencies giving films and studios are fairer and acceptable outcome and causing less hassles for the MPAA. No-ones really built a strong case against a '15' rating and if anything feels like people are trying to prevent the option for reasons that don't really make much sense other than to preserve the status quo.

How do I know? History. The MPAA have made stupid, inconsistent, and convoluted decisions in rating movies since their conception. The ratings used to go from G to PG, then R, then X. They added PG13 and NC17 to the list. Did this change how screwed up the system is? No. So what makes you think that adding another PG rating will do what adding PG13 and NC17 didn't?

On paper, a PG15 rating looks like it could be a good idea. But in the end we're still gonna be left with a severely broken system by which the movies get rated in the first place. THAT is what needs to be fixed. Once it is fixed, then you can add as many new PG ratings as you like.

 

[jmc]

How do I know? History. The MPAA have made stupid, inconsistent, and convoluted decisions in rating movies since their conception. The ratings used to go from G to PG, then R, then X. They added PG13 and NC17 to the list. Did this change how screwed up the system is? No. So what makes you think that adding another PG rating will do what adding PG13 and NC17 didn't?

On paper, a PG15 rating looks like it could be a good idea. But in the end we're still gonna be left with a severely broken system by which the movies get rated in the first place. THAT is what needs to be fixed. Once it is fixed, then you can add as many new PG ratings as you like.

Then what's the solution? Don't just say 'fix it', give some examples otherwise your arguments in favour of the status quo are hollow.

 

[terry78]

Bump PG up to include up to 13-14, turn PG-13 into PG-15, leave G for the really sugarcoated family stuff and R for the hardcore profane/sexual/violent ****. There, you're done. Rocket science.