The Dark Knight What Will TDK's Rating / Certificate Be?

[CaptainClown]

Well if I were to make Arkham I think I would want to emphasise the gore and violence because mainly it kind of enhances the madness of Arkham. But your right it probably would be pg 13 now a days. Movie wouldn't sell either viewers would be soo confused.

 

[CaptainClown]

yeah i know! im still shocked that those were pg 13, i remember being friggin terrified at those catapulted heads, but then again they were only shown for just a few seconds. and the orc head getting chopped off in FOTR, yeah that was pretty gross cuz not only did it stand up for a few seconds, it had black blood spirting out of it like a leaky faucet, lol. still, it was done so quick in a kind of unreal cartoony way that i guess was ok for pg13 rateing.

personally, i dont want a R rated batman cuz i wouldnt want to see alot of nasty disgusting stuff like blood and guts and all that. sure Batman Returns had some kind of diusturbing images, mainly just cats biting selina's bloody fingers and penguin haveiong black saliva fall from his mouth and biting someones nose, but.....ok im actually quite shocked Returns got a pg 14 rateing, but still it was nothing TOO gross, it was borderline but nothing too bad. but it got close, real close.

Ya dude don't you feel like an old man when its like.. Braveheart and the Rock were rated R

 

[CFE]

Despite there being no need for an R-Rated Batman...

Should Warners EVER decide to adapt say "The Dark Knight Returns" you're telling me you'd WANT DKR to be softened into a PG-13 rating?

Miller sure as hell wouldn't.

And whoever said so I'd have to disagree. There's a considerable aspect of Batman that is violent and scary and dark.

I don't get how fans can be so against the idea of an R-Rated piece, yet not raise eyebrows at "The Batman" which is horribly kiddy.

Maybe if we were against a Batman that's too much for children as well...but we're not for some reason.

The way I see it, it works as a scale for Batman. You can go total dark, find a middle ground, or go total light.

The Burton films, Batman Forever, Batman Begins, and the Timm/Dini/Burnett series are all middle ground, while Batman and Robin, the 60s Batman and "The Batman" are, IMO, total light.

Why can't we have Batman media that goes total dark? The little kids can have "The Batman" but I'd prefer something along the lines of an animated HBO series that does touch on the more violent aspects of Batman.

He fights a one man war on CRIME in the most corrupt city in comic books...and you're telling me there's NOT excessive violence involved to a degree?

The thing about Batman, and what makes him such a great character is that he can be contorted.

We have Batman-media that is excessively bright and for children. Why not Batman-media that's excessively dark?

You could argue that "Well kids'll want to see it out of love for Batman and if it's too dark then they might get scared"

Go ahead and let them watch an episode! If they can't handle it, they can go back to watching "The Batman" and leave those fans who want to see the darker stuff in peace. It'll serve them right for not listening to their parents, who would have to know in advance that the show, Batman or not, would be too harsh for their kids.

Be it Batman Returns or a potential HBO series or an R Rated DKR, it'll the parents own fault.

Parents who walked out of the theatre with their kids on Batman Returns all dismayed was total bulls**t. Why didn't they have the common sense to see the film themselves before bringing their kids? That way the only kids that saw Returns were the cool ones who wouldn't run crying from Penguin-bile...

Yeah, Batman's a cultural icon and kids like Batman. But look at us, the hardcore fans...

Umm...how old are we? I doubt anyone on here is under the age of at least 13 or 12...and if a 13 year old boy can't handle a violent edge to Batman, then there's something wrong with them, since 13's the age where you start to thrive on cinematic violence.

CFE

oh and if you're younger than 12, don't come back here. People here are crazy and they curse and they'll f**k up your mind worse than Rekall...

 

[Infinity9999x]

Despite there being no need for an R-Rated Batman...

Should Warners EVER decide to adapt say "The Dark Knight Returns" you're telling me you'd WANT DKR to be softened into a PG-13 rating?

Miller sure as hell wouldn't.

DKR Being R? Are you serious? I mean Arkham Asylum is darker then DKR and we just had a debate about that being made R.

There is absolutely nothing in DKR that would warrant an R rating. There's no overly sexual elements, and the violence isn't even as graphic as a LOTR movie.

And whoever said so I'd have to disagree. There's a considerable aspect of Batman that is violent and scary and dark.

I don't get how fans can be so against the idea of an R-Rated piece, yet not raise eyebrows at "The Batman" which is horribly kiddy.

Maybe if we were against a Batman that's too much for children as well...but we're not for some reason.

The way I see it, it works as a scale for Batman. You can go total dark, find a middle ground, or go total light.

I have yet to see a single Batman comic that I would say warrants an R rating. I have seen no Batman comic that's above pg-13. Is the character scary and dark? Yes, but nowadays films are very scary while maintaining a pg-13 rating. As I've said, the only films that get R ratings nowadays are those with explicit sex or extreme violence. Batman has neither.

The Burton films, Batman Forever, Batman Begins, and the Timm/Dini/Burnett series are all middle ground, while Batman and Robin, the 60s Batman and "The Batman" are, IMO, total light.

Why can't we have Batman media that goes total dark? The little kids can have "The Batman" but I'd prefer something along the lines of an animated HBO series that does touch on the more violent aspects of Batman.

He fights a one man war on CRIME in the most corrupt city in comic books...and you're telling me there's NOT excessive violence involved to a degree?

Excessive violence? Sure, but not the kind that would warrant an R rating. Last time I checked, I've never seen Batman ripping out the intestines of a burglar.

The thing about Batman, and what makes him such a great character is that he can be contorted.

We have Batman-media that is excessively bright and for children. Why not Batman-media that's excessively dark?

Because he's NOT excessively dark. Batman isn't the punisher, and he's not Spawn. He's a dark character, but he's never been "excessively dark.

 

[CaptainClown]

Ya I didn't see DKR dark at all.

 

[jesse custer]

Despite there being no need for an R-Rated Batman...

Should Warners EVER decide to adapt say "The Dark Knight Returns" you're telling me you'd WANT DKR to be softened into a PG-13 rating?

Miller sure as hell wouldn't.

And whoever said so I'd have to disagree. There's a considerable aspect of Batman that is violent and scary and dark.

I don't get how fans can be so against the idea of an R-Rated piece, yet not raise eyebrows at "The Batman" which is horribly kiddy.

Maybe if we were against a Batman that's too much for children as well...but we're not for some reason.

The way I see it, it works as a scale for Batman. You can go total dark, find a middle ground, or go total light.

The Burton films, Batman Forever, Batman Begins, and the Timm/Dini/Burnett series are all middle ground, while Batman and Robin, the 60s Batman and "The Batman" are, IMO, total light.

Why can't we have Batman media that goes total dark? The little kids can have "The Batman" but I'd prefer something along the lines of an animated HBO series that does touch on the more violent aspects of Batman.

He fights a one man war on CRIME in the most corrupt city in comic books...and you're telling me there's NOT excessive violence involved to a degree?

The thing about Batman, and what makes him such a great character is that he can be contorted.

We have Batman-media that is excessively bright and for children. Why not Batman-media that's excessively dark?

You could argue that "Well kids'll want to see it out of love for Batman and if it's too dark then they might get scared"

Go ahead and let them watch an episode! If they can't handle it, they can go back to watching "The Batman" and leave those fans who want to see the darker stuff in peace. It'll serve them right for not listening to their parents, who would have to know in advance that the show, Batman or not, would be too harsh for their kids.

Be it Batman Returns or a potential HBO series or an R Rated DKR, it'll the parents own fault.

Parents who walked out of the theatre with their kids on Batman Returns all dismayed was total bulls**t. Why didn't they have the common sense to see the film themselves before bringing their kids? That way the only kids that saw Returns were the cool ones who wouldn't run crying from Penguin-bile...

Yeah, Batman's a cultural icon and kids like Batman. But look at us, the hardcore fans...

Umm...how old are we? I doubt anyone on here is under the age of at least 13 or 12...and if a 13 year old boy can't handle a violent edge to Batman, then there's something wrong with them, since 13's the age where you start to thrive on cinematic violence.

CFE

oh and if you're younger than 12, don't come back here. People here are crazy and they curse and they'll f**k up your mind worse than Rekall...

I really like what you had to say here, thanks!

 

[CFE]

DKR Being R? Are you serious? I mean Arkham Asylum is darker then DKR and we just had a debate about that being made R.

There is absolutely nothing in DKR that would warrant an R rating. There's no overly sexual elements, and the violence isn't even as graphic as a LOTR movie.

I have yet to see a single Batman comic that I would say warrants an R rating. I have seen no Batman comic that's above pg-13. Is the character scary and dark? Yes, but nowadays films are very scary while maintaining a pg-13 rating. As I've said, the only films that get R ratings nowadays are those with explicit sex or extreme violence. Batman has neither.

Excessive violence? Sure, but not the kind that would warrant an R rating. Last time I checked, I've never seen Batman ripping out the intestines of a burglar.

Because he's NOT excessively dark. Batman isn't the punisher, and he's not Spawn. He's a dark character, but he's never been "excessively dark."

umm...have you seen Batman Returns? Read Arkham Asylum?

lets see...

Joker shot Barbara in the gut, snapping her spine and paralyzing her before he took naked photos and was speculated to have raped her.

Cornelius Stirk was a Bat Rogue known for cutting out the hearts of his victims and eating them

Bane broke Batman's spine over his knee

Joker clubbed Jason Todd to bloody death with a crow bar

During NML, Joker kidnapped all of Gotham's newborn babies and planned to slaughter them

In "Batman Returns," The Penguin planned kidnapping children and drowning them in chemicals

In every incarnation of his origin, half of Harvey Dent's face is scalded off. His flesh withers and peels and scabs over, thus creating Two-Face

"Dark Victory" had police officers being hanged

"DV" also had the Scarecrow lit on fire

And over 70 years worth of comics have featured everything from blood, murder, bodily dismemberment and necks being snapped to people falling into vats of acid, batarangs through various parts of the human body, hell even mass genocide.

And since when did an R-Rating mean BATMAN had to do anything excessively violent? Or are you forgetting the legion of homicidal and psychopathic lunatics filling the cells of Arkham Asylum?

Given how he acts in the comic books, PG-13 ratings will never allow the tried and true Joker to emerge on screen the way we know him.

And since when did an R-Rating mean seeing guts all over Gotham?

"American Psycho" and "Cabin Fever" are both R Rated films, but they couldn't be more different in their approach to violence.

An R-Rated Batman film could work, as long as the violence is done with taste.

CFE

 

[Infinity9999x]

umm...have you seen Batman Returns? Read Arkham Asylum?

lets see...

Joker shot Barbara in the gut, snapping her spine and paralyzing her before he took naked photos and was speculated to have raped her.

None of that would warrant an R rated movie. Honestly, we see people getting shot every day on TV shows. And we never see the rape, not only that, there's also a T.V. about rape victims, Law and Order, SVSU. That's TV, so none of that is scary enough to warrant an R rating.

Cornelius Stirk was a Bat Rogue known for cutting out the hearts of his victims and eating them

Ever seen Temple of Doom? Scary temple man rips out other temple man's heart, in full graphic detail. That was only pg-13 as well.

Bane broke Batman's spine over his knee

Joker clubbed Jason Todd to bloody death with a crow bar

Again, nothing that would warrant an R rating. Watch any pg-13 action movie, getting clubbed with a crowbar/baseball bat/any random object is commonplace in movies like that. And we see people get their backs/necks broken in Pg-13 movies all the time. Heck, they did it in Disturbia.

During NML, Joker kidnapped all of Gotham's newborn babies and planned to slaughter them

And that again is not going to make an R rated movie. Heck, I've seen Law and Order episodes where people threaten to kill babies, again that was on TV.

In "Batman Returns," The Penguin planned kidnapping children and drowning them in chemicals

Last time I checked Batman Returns was pg-13, not R.

In every incarnation of his origin, half of Harvey Dent's face is scalded off. His flesh withers and peels and scabs over, thus creating Two-Face

Again, not something that would make an R rated movie. In the grudge we see a girl with her entire lower jaw ripped off, and that was only a pg-13 movie.

"Dark Victory" had police officers being hanged

People are hanged in Pg-13 movies all the time, that's not R material by any means. Have you ever watched The Crucible? Heck LOTR had more graphic scenes then people being hanged.

"DV" also had the Scarecrow lit on fire

Happened in BB too, to Batman, remember the rating of that movie?

And over 70 years worth of comics have featured everything from blood, murder, bodily dismemberment and necks being snapped to people falling into vats of acid, batarangs through various parts of the human body, hell even mass genocide.

Yes, and none of these instances have been shown in an overly gory fashion. To get an R rating today, you have to be a Saw with blood and guts everywhere, or show some nudity.

And since when did an R-Rating mean BATMAN had to do anything excessively violent? Or are you forgetting the legion of homicidal and psychopathic lunatics filling the cells of Arkham Asylum?

Ummm...Batman would be only R rated if it is excessively violent, as I've stated. Like I said, look at movies like LOTR, where it has beheading, catapulted heads, bitten off fingers ect. ect. and all those movies were Pg-13. You have to take the violence up a notch to get R ratings today.

Given how he acts in the comic books, PG-13 ratings will never allow the tried and true Joker to emerge on screen the way we know him.

You're joking right? The Joker has never been a super gory character, he's not a Carnage. The Joker does very few things that would make TDK R rated. As I've said look at movies like LOTR, King Kong, The Grudge and see the level of violence in those movies. Pg-13 allows for quite enough violence.

And since when did an R-Rating mean seeing guts all over Gotham?

"American Psycho" and "Cabin Fever" are both R Rated films, but they couldn't be more different in their approach to violence.

An R-Rated Batman film could work, as long as the violence is done with taste.

CFE

Exactly, and if that happens it will likely be Pg-13. Like I've said before, if you look at the level of violence in Pg-13 movies today, you'll see that they admit quite a bit. The level of violence the public is willing to admit in movies has gone up much higher from 15 years ago or even 10 years ago.

If you look at most R rated films today, they're usually R because they are either

1) Super gory like Saw or Hills Have Eyes

2) explicitly sexual

Batman is neither of these, hence why he should not be R.

 

[Mr. Socko]

An R-Rated Batman film could work, as long as the violence is done with taste.

CFE

Yes, it could work but we'll never seen one. WB wouldn't greenlight an R-rated batman scipt in a million years!

 

[CFE]

I think under the right circumstances, they would...

An R Rated Batman would be fine. I fail to see why people feel the need to whine about it.

So what if fans want to see a more violent-oriented Batman? What would be the harm in it?

What's so utterly wrong about the idea of a more violent Batman that makes you feel the need to s**t all over the concept, Infinity9999x?

CFE

 

[gwynplaine]

Nighthawk vs Whiteface could be the R rated film we couldn't get with the real characters. I'd love to see that, a hard R. I like Batman and the Joker so much that I even like their ripoffs.

 

[Infinity9999x]

I think under the right circumstances, they would...

An R Rated Batman would be fine. I fail to see why people feel the need to whine about it.

So what if fans want to see a more violent-oriented Batman? What would be the harm in it?

What's so utterly wrong about the idea of a more violent Batman that makes you feel the need to s**t all over the concept?

CFE

Nothing's utterly wrong with it, I just don't see a specific need for it. I'm not saying that it wouldn't work, because as you said, if done tastefully it could be very good, but like I've said since in todays more desensitized generation, you can fit more violence and adult themes into PG-13 movies then ever before, I don't really see why we would need an R rated Batman.

Now, were this ten or fifteen years ago I could see the need for an R rated Batman, because some of the Pg-13 movies that are out today I would bet would be R rated then.

 

[CFE]

I understand, and I can agree on the non-necessity of an R Rated Batman feature given Nolan's films.

Would any one object to the idea I had proposed of a more violent-oriented animated Batman series featured on HBO though?

CFE

 

[Mr. Socko]

I think under the right circumstances, they would...

An R Rated Batman would be fine. I fail to see why people feel the need to whine about it.

So what if fans want to see a more violent-oriented Batman? What would be the harm in it?

What's so utterly wrong about the idea of a more violent Batman that makes you feel the need to s**t all over the concept, Infinity9999x?

CFE

To make an 'R rated' Batman, all that's required is a pencil and paper, it can be done within a month. With a film it takes 2 years and hundreds of millions. I just don't think they'd risk that, especially when it's never been done before.

 

[Infinity9999x]

I wouldn't mind seeing it, as long as they handle the violence tastefully like you said.

 

[Symbiotic]

Whether it's PG-13 or R, I'm fine with either one. (Although I think we all know that PG-13 is the more likely one.)

 

[wd golf39]

i think if it were R they would be cursing and thats not like a batman movie to have, PG-13 wouldnt be bad either, only becasue its tradition

 

[CaptainClown]

so we alll reached to thesame ol conclusion huh

 

[Figs]

i think if it were R they would be cursing and thats not like a batman movie to have, PG-13 wouldnt be bad either, only becasue its tradition

I'm perfectly happy with a PG-13 rating. If they ever were to go for an R, the swearing would be fine if they had mobsters in the film. I wouldn't care to hear Joker or Batman himself use a bunch of cuss words, but for Mobsters that would fit right in.

 

[CaptainClown]

So anybody supportin a rated R batman yet?

 

[CFE]

I understand there's no need for one...

But I would still support an R Rated Batman film if it were ever to be made sometime in the distant future.

CFE

 

[rory_bat]

So anybody supporting a rated R batman yet?

I would certainly support that, especially with all of the Joker material.

Though from all I have heard and seen, I don't know how this film can get a PG-13 rating with the Joker the way he is going to be portrayed.

 

[Joker773]

Maybe they will do an un-rated DVD?

WB has done THAT before

 

[CaptainClown]

I really hope they don't make note of it. I find it tacky when DVD's put UNRATED on the cover, basically going against the look of the whole thing. If anything I just hope for a directors cut, with everything that was on the cutting room floor.

 

[rory_bat]

Maybe they will do an un-rated DVD?

WB has done THAT before

Nolan would never do that. He always gets final cut for his films. What you see in the theaters is his cut of the film. Hence you will never find any deleted scenes on a Chris Nolan DVD. He doesn't want the studios to be able to release their own extended cuts of his films.

So no, we won't see that...ever.