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

[Mrs. Sawyer]

The different between G and PG I never fully understood.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

All adding PG-13 did was bump up the ratings for films. G movies became PG, and PG became PG-13. The G rating which used to serve a purpose became only for children's animation.

The problem isn't with the rating system. It is with the clowns doing the rating. The MPAA is hopelessly corrupt.

 

[warhorse78]

All adding PG-13 did was bump up the ratings for films. G movies became PG, and PG became PG-13. The G rating which used to serve a purpose became only for children's animation.

The problem isn't with the rating system. It is with the clowns doing the rating. The MPAA is hopelessly corrupt.

True. I have seen a couple of NC-17 movies that got me scratching my head why they were given such ratings to begin with. One of the movies I know was actually petitioned and the NC-17 was removed and an R rating placed instead. It was that Blue Valentine.

 

[MadVillainy]

Im surprised the response to the new idea is so negative. As I said earlier I dont really see a downside or problem with doing it.

 

[jmc]

Im surprised the response to the new idea is so negative. As I said earlier I dont really see a downside or problem with doing it.

And no-one seems to be offering viable alternatives which makes the negative responses even more perplexing.

 

[batfreakforever]

America does have a stupid ratings system.
Look at Australia G,PG,M,MA 15+ and R 18+.
Very simple.

 

[MadVillainy]

overseas have a Pg-15 type rating right? EDIT: nvm someone just posted about it

Idk I kinda see it like this: there are some movies that are R like Looper, Memento, or the first Matrix which are beyond PG13;but do not deserve to be "R" and put in the same class with much gorier/sexier/more vulgar movies like DJango Unchained, Rambo or some of the slasher films that are released. I can see a PG15 rating bbeing beneficial in that regard.

But either way Im 21 years old. I can see any movie without an an adult present so it's not a big deal to me. But I personally dont see a downside to a Pg15 rating or even really an NC15 rating

 

[jmc]

In Australia we had this ridiculous thing going on for years where films were being given harsh ratings until the MA15 rating was introduced. I think from memory one of the first films released down here with the MA15 rating was Ransom with Mel Gibson, which was the perfect movie for the new rating, too violent and mature for the M Rating (our PG13) but not so violent to be given an R18 rating (our NC17).

 

[warhorse78]

Im surprised the response to the new idea is so negative. As I said earlier I dont really see a downside or problem with doing it.

We already told you why. One, the MPAA is corrupt, and if a studio pays them something on the side, they will stick a lesser rating on the movie. 2nd, the theaters chains are not there to babysit, they are there to make money. They will not go into a theater and see how many 12 year olds are sneaking into an R rated flick. I'm negative about the whole thing because to me, what's the point? Personally, I think we have worse things to worry about in this world than a movie's rating.

 

[MadVillainy]

We already told you why. One, the MPAA is corrupt, and if a studio pays them something on the side, they will stick a lesser rating on the movie. 2nd, the theaters chains are not there to babysit, they are there to make money. They will not go into a theater and see how many 12 year olds are sneaking into an R rated flick. I'm negative about the whole thing because to me, what's the point? Personally, I think we have worse things to worry about in this world than a movie's rating.

1) I dont see the MPAA corruption of putting lesser ratings on movies as a problem in regards to the PG15. Could anyone name examples of that happening because I cant remember any PG13 movie where I said wow that shouldve been R. In fact I think PG15 could help because it creates a middle ground for some movies

2) Actually there are some theater chains that will check to see how many 15 year olds snuck in. I dont know if it's a lot but from my own experience Ive been to a few theater when I was younger where an usher would check R rated showings. As I said I dont know how many chains do that. They probably do that mostly in richer/more affluent neighborhoods where parents are more likely to complain and cry negligence if they found out their kid went to snuck into an R rated movie. Sidebar: Has anyone else noticed the increase in being carded at theaters. I feel that 2 years ago I never got carded but now I do everytime I see an R rated movie and I look about the same age if not older.

3) The "I think we have worse things to worry about in this world than a movie's rating" statement is a pointless one to make I think.

 

[Snow Queen]

Sidebar: Has anyone else noticed the increase in being carded at theaters. I feel that 2 years ago I never got carded but now I do everytime I see an R rated movie and I look about the same age if not older.

I'm 15. I got carded to see The Wolverine. It's not even an R. I don't understand this logic. Anyone above 13 should be able to see it alone, hence the rating PG-13. You don't have an ID when you are 13, so how can you card people for a PG-13 movie?

 

[jmc]

We already told you why. One, the MPAA is corrupt, and if a studio pays them something on the side, they will stick a lesser rating on the movie. 2nd, the theaters chains are not there to babysit, they are there to make money. They will not go into a theater and see how many 12 year olds are sneaking into an R rated flick. I'm negative about the whole thing because to me, what's the point? Personally, I think we have worse things to worry about in this world than a movie's rating.

Um, wouldn't a 15 rating eliminate the need for any underhanded deals? If there's a middle ground it means the studios don't have to bribe anyone, or worse, cut scenes out of movies just to please a bunch of old people. Isn't the corruption and the MPAA inconsistencies down to the rating system at hand in that there's too big a gap between the PG13 an R ratings? You've got studios who's only way of getting a clearly more mature film a lesser rating is to bride the MPAA or cut stuff out of the film, don't you think a '15' rating will solve that problem? What's going to be the excuse? Either create a '15 rating or reduce the R rating to 15 will solve everything. The studios won't have to do shady deals to ensure a lesser rating, the films won't be compromised to fit a PG13 rating, and the MPAA avoids future criticism over bribery and relevance because the middle ground gives them a buffer to play with. Where's the down side here exactly?

 

[Thundarr]

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.

1) The members of the MPAA are supposed to fit a certain criteria (parents whose children are in a certain age group) yet they never are. Make sure the members of the MPAA fit the listed requirements.

2) The MPAA have no listed set of standards as to what constitutes a G, PG, PG13, R, NC17, or an X rating. It's all left up to their own individual tastes. Personal taste should have nothing to do with the rating system. If full frontal nudity equals an R rating in one movie, then it should equal an R rating in all movies.

3) When the list of standards is created, STICK TO THEM.

4) There should be an odd number of MPAA members to eliminate the possibilities of the votes being tied.

5) The MPAA's vote should be final, not overturned by the whim of the head of the MPAA.

6) The MPAA should be an open procedure. As of now, they're supposed to be anonymous.

7) The MPAA's appeal procedure needs to be opened up. The members of MPAA Appeals Commitee have to be made public. The film maker needs to be allowed to ask questions and compare his film to other, similar films that had been given lower ratings.

If you're wondering, the exact opposite of all of these things is currently true.

 

[MadVillainy]

I'm 15. I got carded to see The Wolverine. It's not even an R. I don't understand this logic. Anyone above 13 should be able to see it alone, hence the rating PG-13. You don't have an ID when you are 13, so how can you card people for a PG-13 movie?

wtf? Yeah I didnt know you get carded for PG13. Isnt PG13 Parental Guidance Suggested? It's not no kids under 13 without an adult right? That's really strange

 

[Warhammer]

Yeah, that's weird. PG-13 isn't a restriction. A 7-year old can straight up pay for a PG-13 movie and can't be denied.

 

[dark_b]

i thought that you need to be 13 for Pg13. everything under 13 needs a parent.

 

[Destructus86]

I say remove PG-13 and just go PG and then R and then NC-17.

PG-13 is a waste of time. It's like buying watered down soda. Sure, you are drinking a soda...but it's completely flavorless. So either drink water or go for a sugar, sickening sweet soda. NO inbetween.

 

[MadVillainy]

i thought that you need to be 13 for Pg13. everything under 13 needs a parent.

I dont think so. Maybe different theaters are different about it

I say remove PG-13 and just go PG and then R and then NC-17.

PG-13 is a waste of time. It's like buying watered down soda. Sure, you are drinking a soda...but it's completely flavorless. So either drink water or go for a sugar, sickening sweet soda. NO inbetween.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

I say remove PG-13 and just go PG and then R and then NC-17.

That's what the ratings originally were. The problem was that many movies that were advertised for kids really weren't. Movies like the first two Indiana Jones movies were the two biggest examples. Temple of Doom is the reason why PG-13 was created.

I don't thin they should go back to that purely because you really have nothing in between PG and R. Something needs to be in between.

I say either bump it up to PG-13, or PG-15.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

I would definitely say that films like Indiana Jones are suitable for kids. Those films along with Jaws, Star Wars, Back to the Future, Terminator, and Alien, were by far the most popular films in my elementary school when I was growing up in the 80s.

 

[Bruce Malone]

I would definitely say that films like Indiana Jones are suitable for kids. Those films along with Jaws, Star Wars, Back to the Future, Terminator, and Alien, were by far the most popular films in my elementary school when I was growing up in the 80s.

Yeah but that's you and many people have different standards as to what is or isn't appropriate.

As stated enough parents didn't think movies like Indiana Jones were appropriate that it created a big backlash.

I don't know if PG-15 is the way to go? but there needs to be a distinction made to differentiate hard R's from soft one's. There's now way The King's Speech and Hostel 2 should have received the same rating.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

King's Speech should have been PG. There is no violence or sex or nothing in that film. Just a few curse words.

Yeah but that's you and many people have different standards as to what is or isn't appropriate.

As stated enough parents didn't think movies like Indiana Jones were appropriate that it created a big backlash.

Not really. It was more like people like Steven Spielberg and George Lucas thought it was inappropriate. Those in the industry itself were the driving force behind the PG-13, not parents.

 

[Bruce Malone]

King's Speech should have been PG. There is no violence or sex or nothing in that film. Just a few curse words.

That to me is the real crux of the issue with MPAA and it has nothing to do with needing to create a new rating standard.

They simply need to rate the films better as to the existing ratings. Yes there was no reason The King's Speech should have been rated R. It could have been at most pg-13.

The MPAA are so rigid in their standards though that things like that film get mis-rated.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Beyond the suggestions to fix the MPAA, which is the real issue here. I would keep the ratings mostly as is (with one exception), but not rate the individual films so harshly. Violence, sex, and only the most extreme language (ie. racial slurs) would be the only things that would be judged.

The ratings:

G - Your standard film for all ages. Not no violence, but not graphic. Would consist of most current G and PG movies. Suitable for all ages.

PG - Not recommended for young children. More violence and sexual situations are allowed. The equivalent of most modern PG-13 films. Ex. The Avengers

PG-13 - Not recommended for anyone under the age of 13. All but the most extreme films are allowed. Consists of most R rated films. Ex. Die Hard

R - Restricted to anyone below the age of 18. Consists of only the most extreme R rated films and NC-17 films. Everything allowed. Ex. Django Unchained

NC-17 - Abolished

 

[SWAT]

We have: A, 7, 11, 15, 18.

Very few are rated 18. Most of those are not previewed by the movie- rating authority.
But it's a bit easier here, since language and sex isn't considered the root of all evil.