one cool thing in recent years was discovering that all the horror movies that i was utterly terrified of ever seeing as a kid are in fact awesome

most of them aren't even that scary. except the texas chainsaw massacre (the original one) which is maybe the scariest movie i've ever seen

they tried to avoid an x rating by showing very little explicit gore (they were apparently gunning for a PG -- if this sounds nuts just remember Jaws was rated PG) and they got an x from the MPAA anyway. this was back when the ratings were g - pg - r - x. imagine if the texas chainsaw massacre had been rated PG

as an aside it is wild to me that the movie rating system has changed so that movies are never rated G unless they are for preschoolers specifically and PG means a family/kids' movie with fart jokes and maybe someone gets comically hit in the crotch. PG used to mean a shark would bite a guy in half and fake blood would spray everywhere

tangent on US film ratings 

i have a lot of opinions on how useless the current US movie rating system is. compressing G and PG into kids' movies, PG-13 as the big category for movies most adults are fine taking kids to, R either means too many swears, nudity, or horrific violence??? and we don't use NC-17 anymore because most theaters won't play films with that rating. some films are instead released unrated which means exactly the same thing


tangent on US film ratings, violence 

this got me thinking about how one of the times when i went to see pan's labyrinth (rated R) when it first came out, there were multiple adults with their preteen children in the audience. i suspect most people have only a fuzzy idea what the ratings system means and R is the most meaningless of all. maybe someone says fuck three times or maybe someone gets their face graphically smashed with a bottle in the first ten minutes of the film

tangent on US film ratings, violence 

@wolfteeth The MPAA: Seeing a titty is exactly as bad for kids as seeing a graphic murder

tangent on US film ratings, violence 

@misoks and someone cussing too much? well, that's at least as bad

tangent on US film ratings, violence 

@wolfteeth The Icelandic ratings system is just:
General Audience
Not Suitable for very young kids (usually for scary stuff aimed at older kids or teens)
Restricted to 12 years or older
Restricted to 16 years or older

A lot of action movies that didn't have gruesome violence ended up in the 12+ range. Like James Bond.
Sexual stuff had to be pretty explicit to end up in the 16+ category, violence and scariness was most important.
Language didn't matter a lot.

tangent on US film ratings, violence 

@Ormur that system makes sense and i think it mirrors a lot of what the mpaa system is supposed to be. theoretically it's G (general), PG (parental guidance suggested), PG-13 (parental guidance recommended for kids under 13), R (no one under 17 admitted without a parent), NC-17 (adults only). but in practice it becomes a marketing thing in a lot of ways. wheeling and dealing for the desired rating

tangent on US film ratings, violence 

@wolfteeth The MPAA rating require you to list why it's rated what it is unless it's G, but the print on that is so small that it's utterly useless.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Honey Mummy Central

A cozy little tomb full of friendly ghouls.