• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

How the F is "Taken" PG-13???? (SPOILERS!)

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: LikeLinus
Originally posted by: EvilYoda
I read a while back that they might be editing it down for the US release - does anybody know if this is true? I didn't think it was going to get a wide release so I downloaded and watched it already, but if it's the same edit I'll go pay for it again.
Click to expand...

You haven't actually read this tread, have you?
Click to expand...

I guess I missed something. oh noes.
 
A lot of those old PG movies from the 70s and 80s were rated as such because there was no PG-13 at the time (didn't exist until 1984). Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom was one of the movies to inspire the creation of the PG-13 rating.

I agree that the rating system is crazy. They changed "X" to "NC-17" to attempt to remove the stigma surrounding it and to prevent the use of the term "X-rated" for non-porn movies, but the only movies to get NC-17 ratings are pseudo-porn movies anyway, so it did nothing. Plus, movie theaters are so high and mighty that a lot of them refuse to screen NC-17 movies.

IMO, the ratings have gotten more conservative lately. I bet Airplane! would have been rated R if it had come out today. Not just for the nudity, but for the other "questionable" content like the pedophile pilot and so on. NC-17 should be eliminated and R should cover about half of recent R-rated movies and all recent NC-17 movies. PG-13 covers the other half of the R-rated movies, and the rest stay the same. G could probably be broadened as well (things like "comic mischief" are apparently enough to raise a movie from G to PG, which is silly), but maybe not since G has its own stigma attached to it.
 
Wish more movies coming out would just get R-rated to make it better. Removing violence/nudity/swearing so they can get a PG-13 rating usually makes the movie suck more.
 
Originally posted by: anxi80
from imdb...

-The UK cinema version has an alternate electrocution torture sequence. In the original version, Neeson stabs two metal spikes into the legs of his hostage and connects the jump leads to them. In the UK version, he simply attaches the leads to the metal chair. This is completely different footage redone to secure a lower rating.

-Some of the shoot outs, the torture scene and some fisticuffs have been shortened in length for the film's US release to secure a PG-13 rating.
Click to expand...

so it seems like the scene where he tortures marco is going to be changed, as well as some of the fights (probably the scene where he stabs one of the albanian's in the heart and another one in the chest in the kitchen scene).
Click to expand...

Shit yea, an excuse to track down an unrated version so I can watch it again because the version I saw was already pretty awesome.

Originally posted by: Homerboy
Watch this: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0493459/
It will show what a stupid system is in place.
Click to expand...

Good movie, very informative. They're so secretive about something so mundane that it's kind of scary... well, mostly funny that they go to such lengths, but still.. wtf.

Originally posted by: darkxshade
If you want ridiculous, Frost Nixon is rated R because they used the F bomb like twice in the entire movie. No nudity, no violence and barely any language.
Click to expand...

that makes "sense" because as you'll see in This Film is Not Rated(or Get Shorty), one single F-bomb is acceptable in a PG-13 movie as long as it is just an expletive and not a reference to sexual intercourse. What a stupid fucking rule.
 
Originally posted by: alchemize
The craziest NC-17 was Orgazmo. No nudity, hardly any swearing, no violence.
Click to expand...

Well, they did purposely block breast shots with man ass 😛.

"You ever see that film Revenge of the Titans?" "I don't want to sound queer or nothin', but unicorns are pretty kick ass!"

EDIT: Oh and Taken was pretty awesome.
 
Originally posted by: mxyzptlk
Originally posted by: anxi80
from imdb...

-The UK cinema version has an alternate electrocution torture sequence. In the original version, Neeson stabs two metal spikes into the legs of his hostage and connects the jump leads to them. In the UK version, he simply attaches the leads to the metal chair. This is completely different footage redone to secure a lower rating.

-Some of the shoot outs, the torture scene and some fisticuffs have been shortened in length for the film's US release to secure a PG-13 rating.
Click to expand...

so it seems like the scene where he tortures marco is going to be changed, as well as some of the fights (probably the scene where he stabs one of the albanian's in the heart and another one in the chest in the kitchen scene).
Click to expand...

Shit yea, an excuse to track down an unrated version so I can watch it again because the version I saw was already pretty awesome.
Click to expand...

i can gaurentee there will be a "unrated" DVD release
 
Originally posted by: Imported
Wish more movies coming out would just get R-rated to make it better. Removing violence/nudity/swearing so they can get a PG-13 rating usually makes the movie suck more.
Click to expand...

This
 
Originally posted by: Imported
Wish more movies coming out would just get R-rated to make it better. Removing violence/nudity/swearing so they can get a PG-13 rating usually makes the movie suck more.
Click to expand...

Exactly - whenever I see a movie that looks like a kick-ass action flick and then at the end it says "PG-13," I always wonder why they went for the PG-13 rating. Is it supposed to be kid-friendly? Are they trying to attract junior high kids? If so, why? I certainly don't want to share a theater with J-highers. Is it because it's a crappy low-budget film that needs as broad an audience as possible to meet its financial goals?

The same thing happened when I saw the previews for Max Payne. PG-13 for Max Payne? The games were rated higher than that!

It's not that a movie has to be rated R for me to go see it, but something about PG-13 action movies (ones that probably should be rated R) rubs me the wrong way.
 
Originally posted by: AstroManLuca

It's not that a movie has to be rated R for me to go see it, but something about PG-13 action movies (ones that probably should be rated R) rubs me the wrong way.
Click to expand...

The latest Die Hard is the perfect example of this!

They bleeped out John McClain's catchphrase, Yippie Kiyay motherfucker, for crissakes!
 
Nuns on the Run had a scene with a LOT of full frontal female nudity, and it was PG or PG-13, can't remember which 🙂
 
Originally posted by: mxyzptlk
Originally posted by: AstroManLuca

It's not that a movie has to be rated R for me to go see it, but something about PG-13 action movies (ones that probably should be rated R) rubs me the wrong way.
Click to expand...

The latest Die Hard is the perfect example of this!

They bleeped out John McClain's catchphrase, Yippie Kiyay motherfucker, for crissakes!
Click to expand...

Whoa, really? I only ever saw it on DVD so maybe I saw the "motherfucker" edition.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top