'Watchmen' film cert reduced to 16

maquiladora

IRISH CINEMAGOERS aged 16 and over may see the violent new US action film Watchmen following a decision by the Film Appeals Board. John Kelleher, director of the Irish Film Classification Office (Ifco), had given the film an 18 certificate – in tandem with a similar classification in the UK.

However, a more lenient rating has since been granted following an appeal by the film’s distributor, Paramount Pictures. The film goes on release in Ireland, Britain and the US on March 6th.

Mr Kelleher’s office advises viewers on its website – www.ifco.ie – that Watchmen “contains strong, visceral hyper-realistic violence, including one brutal sexual assault”.

In Britain and Northern Ireland, the film has been restricted to audiences aged 18 and over by the British Board of Film Classification.

Citing the film’s “strong bloody violence”, the board’s report states that Watchmen contains “a number of scenes that focus on strong detailed violence and its gory result”. It adds: “In one such example, a man is stabbed through the arm, with it forcefully twisted and broken, as the knife is shown penetrating his arm and emerging from the other side.

“In another, a man is shown being struck in the head with a meat cleaver followed by repeated bloody sight of the cleaver striking the head. Both of these scenes, in addition to one or two others, were considered inappropriate at 15 and better placed at the adult 18, where detail of strong violence is permitted.”

The British board’s report concludes: “ Watchmen also contains an attempted rape scene, strong language and sexual activity without strong detail.”

Watchmen is based on a popular graphic novel by Alan Moore. It is set in 1985 in an alternate America where the Vietnam War was won, Richard Nixon was elected for a third term as US president, and costumed superheroes are part of the fabric of society.

Directed by Zack Snyder, who made the historical epic 300 , the film features Jeffrey Dean Morgan, Patrick Wilson, Carla Gugino, Matthew Goode, Jackie Earle Haley and Billy Crudup.

Under the Censorship of Films Act, a film distributor may submit a production to the appeals board after the film classification office has decided on a rating for the film. Mr Kelleher viewed Watchmen on February 13th and gave it an 18 certificate.

A quorum of the board’s members viewed the film on Monday night after Paramount’s appeal and agreed to give it a 16 certificate. “We are delighted that Watchmen has been classified as 16,” said Niamh McCaul, general manager of Paramount’s Irish office. “It increases our potential audience and more importantly will give access to fans that are 16 and over.”

Mr Kelleher declined to comment on the rerating yesterday.

The last time the appeals board sat was May 19th last year, when Disney appealed against the 12A rating given to The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian . The board reduced that rating to PG.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0225/1224241775635.html

ryoishin

I hope this does nt mean they cut bits out.

aidan_walsh

ryoishin wrote: »

I hope this does nt mean they cut bits out.

Its not incredibly unusual to see differences between the two boards on the rating of the same product.

TheDemiurge

It's amazing to think that 30 years ago people used to travel to the North to see movies that were either banned or cut down here. It's the other way around now and the UK is far more stringent on certs than JK.

robgordon

I think Keller is doing a great job. Fair play to him for changing it. It's probably no more or less violent than that crap Saw.

Five star review here

http://entertainment.ie/movie_reviews/Watchmen/5737.htm

syklops

It sounds deadly!

I wonder were the film board under "recession pressure" to generate a bit more money out of this movie? While people are going to newry to stock up on bickies, maybe movies goers from the north will come down her to watch it?

me-skywalker

syklops wrote: »

It sounds deadly!

I wonder were the film board under "recession pressure" to generate a bit more money out of this movie? While people are going to newry to stock up on bickies, maybe movies goers from the north will come down her to watch it?

i can see what you mean but its not true because its actually well known that in recession more ppl go to the cinema than before so with this already in mind and opening up to another band of young kids this will increase exposure right before the release to get the receipts up!!

chin_grin

Christ, you know the last film to have this much marketing and hype was I Am Legend. And what a film that turned out to be!

I'm a huuuuuuuuuuge Watchmen fan. When I heard there was (finally) a movie coming out I went back and reread the comic again and again.

But in my experience a film that has this much blurb about it before it's release is a sure thing that it's going to be a pile of crap. Sorry, but it's like Murphys Law for films.

(Won't stop me from going either! )

Fysh

me-skywalker wrote: »

i can see what you mean but its not true because its actually well known that in recession more ppl go to the cinema than before so with this already in mind and opening up to another band of young kids this will increase exposure right before the release to get the receipts up!!

Without seeing some stats to back it up, I don't buy it. The same argument is made for comics, but the only proof people ever come up with is "well superman started in back in 1938 and people loved it so much it's still going today" - but comics today are slickly-packaged items with high production values and price tags of $2.99 and upwards, whereas comics back then were relatively rough-and-ready items costing $0.10 or thereabouts.

Similarly, with cinema tickets costing €8-12 per head these days, I'm not convinced about the whole "cinema thrives in economic depression" argument. I mean, throw in a drink and popcorn and you're talking about €20 per head, for 2 hours or so of entertainment and half an hour's worth of advertising before any of it gets started.

(This is a bit off topic though so maybe should spin out into another thread...)

Richard Dower

Looking forward to this!, in fact i assumed it was *just* another Superhero movie?...12A rating and what not, you don't see many 18 rated superhero flicks, can i expect a Spiderman type deal,or is it Batman meets 300/Sin City?

pljudge321

Fysh wrote: »

Without seeing some stats to back it up, I don't buy it. The same argument is made for comics, but the only proof people ever come up with is "well superman started in back in 1938 and people loved it so much it's still going today" - but comics today are slickly-packaged items with high production values and price tags of $2.99 and upwards, whereas comics back then were relatively rough-and-ready items costing $0.10 or thereabouts.

Similarly, with cinema tickets costing €8-12 per head these days, I'm not convinced about the whole "cinema thrives in economic depression" argument. I mean, throw in a drink and popcorn and you're talking about €20 per head, for 2 hours or so of entertainment and half an hour's worth of advertising before any of it gets started.

(This is a bit off topic though so maybe should spin out into another thread...)

God Bless student tuesdays in Dun Laoghaire and being too cheap to buy any food there.:o

Kess73

Richard Dower wrote: »

Looking forward to this!, in fact i assumed it was *just* another Superhero movie?...12A rating and what not, you don't see many 18 rated superhero flicks, can i expect a Spiderman type deal,or is it Batman meets 300/Sin City?

You should get yourself the graphic novel and read it. It would be a very very good purchase and is an amazing read and no matter how many times you read it, it always seems fresh.


I am loathe to compare it to anything else as it stands alone as a work and it is more a case of other hero comics/films being like Watchmen than it being like them.

Fysh

pljudge321 wrote: »

God Bless student tuesdays in Dun Laoghaire and being too cheap to buy any food there.:o

Heh, I know the feeling - the cinema in Blackpool in Cork used to do Monday showings for a fiver, and there's a great cinema in Leicester Square in London that shows films for between £1.50 and £5 (depending on what time it's on and whether you're a member) by getting films in a couple of months after they've been released.

The thing about buying food and stuff there is a double-edged sword, as for a lot of cinemas they make more money on the stuff they sell than on ticket prices (especially in the first week of screenings); of course, it's hard to feel too sorry for them when the price of a normal adult ticket is in the double digits.

Edited to add:

Richard Dower wrote: »

Looking forward to this!, in fact i assumed it was *just* another Superhero movie?...12A rating and what not, you don't see many 18 rated superhero flicks, can i expect a Spiderman type deal,or is it Batman meets 300/Sin City?

*twitch*

It is none of the above. I reckon your best bet is to watch the film, then buy/borrow a copy of the comic and read that (preferably at least twice, since there's a lot in it that only becomes more apparent the second time around). It's hard to pin it down to a simple description; something like "a deconstruction of superhero comics as they existed in the 80s via the mechanism of a murder-mystery story set in an alternate-history world where superheroes and costumed adventurers had existed for years".

johnny_ultimate

Fysh wrote: »

The thing about buying food and stuff there is a double-edged sword, as for a lot of cinemas they make more money on the stuff they sell than on ticket prices (especially in the first week of screenings); of course, it's hard to feel too sorry for them when the price of a normal adult ticket is in the double digits.

Whatever about tickets (I'm just glad I'm still a student!), its the price of food / drink which seems more excessive to me. While they don't make too much from tickets (which partially explains the higher price and need for profit) charging 6-9 euro for a medium drink / popcorn combo is absurd, considering what you're getting probably cost the cinema less than a euro. Cineworld is the worst for this - their prices are borderline obscene.

Which is why, as mentioned, Dun Laoghaire Tuesdays are welcome. It costs me 7.50 for a ticket, popcorn and drink. My non-student friend gets charged around 15+ euro for the same thing! Considering the amount of people who actually show up on Tuesdays (I'm actually sometimes put off by the insane crowds, which seem to get bigger every week) they must be raking it in, and is a good illustrating of how low costs can equal good business. And tbh, at less than a fiver for a ticket, it doesn't matter what crap you end up seeing :pac: It still seems like decent value.

On topic: not really too surprised at the downgrading of the rating. Was taken aback when I heard it was 18s, as Kelleher and all seem pretty liberal these days, reserving the highest rating for the most shocking and violent material. Glad its gritty though.

It is pretty awesome being a student alright. The Eye in Galway have Ruby Tuesdays (every Tuesday.. obviously) and it's €4 for *almost* every movie before 8:30.

but I work there, so not like I pay really ..

Back on topic, I'm highly looking forward to watching this movie.

Wacker

I can't wait for this movie. I've read the graphic novel four times (and anyone who's read it will know that it takes about a week to read the damn thing!), and I can honestly say that it blows all the competition out of the water. Even The Dark Knight Returns (widely regarded as the second best graphic novel ever) seems light compared to it.

For those of you who have read the thing, can you believe that it looks like they're going to go with the ending from the book? Holy sh*t-balls!!!

Guys, if you have not read The Watchmen, just do it. You don't know what you're missing. Be warned though; two mates of mine who are quite in to comics tried and failed to read it. It has more in common with War and Peace than Planet Hulk and the like.

faceman

Fysh wrote: »

Without seeing some stats to back it up, I don't buy it. The same argument is made for comics, but the only proof people ever come up with is "well superman started in back in 1938 and people loved it so much it's still going today" - but comics today are slickly-packaged items with high production values and price tags of $2.99 and upwards, whereas comics back then were relatively rough-and-ready items costing $0.10 or thereabouts.

Similarly, with cinema tickets costing €8-12 per head these days, I'm not convinced about the whole "cinema thrives in economic depression" argument. I mean, throw in a drink and popcorn and you're talking about €20 per head, for 2 hours or so of entertainment and half an hour's worth of advertising before any of it gets started.

(This is a bit off topic though so maybe should spin out into another thread...)

*cough*

http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/film/article4341278.ece

http://www.filmjournal.com/filmjournal/content_display/news-and-features/features/cinemas/e3i47e1eccf1ecc9bae537cc1e448a8df56?imw=Y

johnny_ultimate

Wacker wrote: »

Guys, if you have not read The Watchmen, just do it. You don't know what you're missing. Be warned though; two mates of mine who are quite in to comics tried and failed to read it. It has more in common with War and Peace than Planet Hulk and the like.

QFT. Watchmen is one of the highpoints of contemporary pop literature, expertly capturing the social and cultural zeitgeist of the 80s, while completely deconstructing and examining comic books as an artform, and a perfect look at what makes a superhero. So many people pass it of as just another comic, but few novels have intelligent commentary. As you said, The Dark Knight Returns is great and all (

especially the whole Batman v Superman business

) but is nowhere near the epic, sprawling, revolutionary accomplishment Watchmen is. Rest of Moore's stuff that I've read is impressive (From Hell is a remarkable accomplishment, Swamp Thing equally adept at deconstructing the superhero myths), but Watchmen is close to perfect. If the movie gets more people to read the book, then that is a success in its own right.

fugazied

I think with the stuff kids see on the Internet, the ratings standards are getting a bit outdated 16 year olds wouldn't find anything in this film too much for them I bet. Cartoonish and games violence isn't as bad as graphic news items which are on TV every night showing real world people getting blown up in Iraq or wherever.

Fysh

faceman wrote: »

*cough*

http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/film/article4341278.ece

http://www.filmjournal.com/filmjournal/content_display/news-and-features/features/cinemas/e3i47e1eccf1ecc9bae537cc1e448a8df56?imw=Y

That timesonline one has no numbers and may as well have been the tale of some bloke down the pub, but at least the filmjournal piece gives some data. Mind you, I'm not sure that "ticket sales remaining consistent/rising by a low-single-figure percentage" counts as "thriving in a recession"...

(Thanks for the reply, it's nice to see some actual figures attached to these kind of comments)

constitutionus

Fysh wrote: »

That timesonline one has no numbers and may as well have been the tale of some bloke down the pub, but at least the filmjournal piece gives some data. Mind you, I'm not sure that "ticket sales remaining consistent/rising by a low-single-figure percentage" counts as "thriving in a recession"...

(Thanks for the reply, it's nice to see some actual figures attached to these kind of comments)

dont forget to factor in piracy now as well. its actually alot easier for people to STEAL a film now than go to one. (which wasnt the case back in the 80s, even with the video pirates)

so if the figures are going up this year then its quite an achievement.

personally i reckon its on the level. its all about escaping reality. libraries for instance have apparently gone through the roof in terms of new members . it makes sense when you think about it, why BUY a book when you can read it for free?

you cant really compare comics and films as comics have never been as popularly accepted by the public as cinema and you get alot more bang for your buck from the cinema. you'd be lucky to get a comic to last 20 min now thanks to the changes in story telling whereas your average film has doubled in length since the 80's. in fact cost wise comics now arent a good deal. if you go to the cinema your getting a film for half the price of it on DVD if you dont get food- practically the SAME price as a DVD if you do.

comics per story arc cost DOUBLE what the trade paper back will set you back. even MORE if you dont go for the premier or hardback stuff (but i love them )

T'is apples and oranges in the end.

faceman

Fysh wrote: »

That timesonline one has no numbers and may as well have been the tale of some bloke down the pub, but at least the filmjournal piece gives some data. Mind you, I'm not sure that "ticket sales remaining consistent/rising by a low-single-figure percentage" counts as "thriving in a recession"...

(Thanks for the reply, it's nice to see some actual figures attached to these kind of comments)

No probs.
There are figures and plenty of articles about cinema during hard times for the US but I posted something more relevent to us instead.

Sleepy

Heard Kelleher being interviewed by Dave Fanning last week. Very interesting. He admitted that he used to travel to London to see banned movies himself ('Last Tango in Paris' being one). He seems like a generally likeable bloke, a huge movie fan and anti-censorship (he's only ever banned one movie, the ban in question being one to argue a point. He expected it to be over-turned and it was).

He did admit that the only kind of movies he doesn't enjoy are stoner flicks (he didn't refer to them as that - teen comedy or something but referenced Harold & Kumar stuff rather than Superbad and it's ilk) and gore-porn drivel like Saw / Hostel etc.

robgordon

The Saw films are a picked scab on the arse of cinema

Necronomicon

This wouldn't bother me a whole lot. Given that ratings seem less strict nowadays I don't think it's unrealistic to see the full Watchmen content at a 16 rating. I remember a few years ago going to see Land of the Dead - when I saw it was 15s I was worried it would be cut to shreds, but it was just as gory as its predecessors.

robby^5

16 - 17 year olds are usually the age of those spas always down the back of the cinema, feet up on the chairs, talking and shouting loudly not giving a sh!t about anyone else in the cinema, fecking kids.

FreeOSCAR

There is nothing worse than when in the cinema getting ready to enjoy the movie when a bunch of "members of the travelling community" come in and start acting the jack.

Dexterm99

I've seen Watchmen a few days ago in NY and thought that it deserved the R rating it received. Although there is no specific mention of any changes to the cinema release in Ireland, I'd be interested to know if they made any cuts here. It's advertised here at 162 mins (apart from movies at Dundrum at 163 - maybe they didn't bother to change the advertised movie length?) This is the same length at the AMC theatres in the US.

For those of you that have seen it in Ireland, is the angle grinder scene in it?

Sleepy

Dexterm99, the film is unedited, the cert was appealed and the Irish Film Classifcation Office granted it a "16'a (on appeal from 18's)" certification after a re-watching of the movie by a number of their classifiers.

Dexterm99

I think they got it wrong this time. I'm certainly not prudish but this to me deserves to be rated 18. Interested to hear opinions from others who have seen it.

bnt

What's 18-rated about this? Looks more like a PG to me:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDDHHrt6l4w

:pac:

orangecake

Dexterm99 wrote: »

I think they got it wrong this time. I'm certainly not prudish but this to me deserves to be rated 18. Interested to hear opinions from others who have seen it.

I agree, there are a lot of really violents scenes in this film, some very serious material such as sexual assault, and that whole scenario where

Rorschach finds the guy who kidnapped the little girl and kills him

I know its not as bad as Hostel, Saw or the like but it was still probably deserving of the 18 rating.

MooseJam

I doubt the film was even watched, they just saw what the UK had given it and copied

Our man in Havana

Untrue. They do watch all films submitted for classification.

MooseJam

how do you know though, have you sat with them while they watched or are you going by what they say, how many is there in the department, how many movies and DVD's and TV shows are released every day

ztoical

MooseJam wrote: »

how do you know though, have you sat with them while they watched

they do watch all the films and yes I have sat with them.

Our man in Havana

There are 12 classifiers in the IFCO.

In 2007 they classified 631 films and 8033 videos.

MooseJam

ztoical wrote: »

they do watch all the films and yes I have sat with them.

Well I'm sure when they have to demo their work they will actually watch a flic but when the guests have gone it's off down the pub. Now I'm not saying I know this for a fact but the work ethos of your average civil cervant isn't the best - especially so when there is no product, if they say they watched it hows anyone going to know otherwise, just read a review and see what the bbfc have classed it.

Fysh

MooseJam wrote: »

Well I'm sure when they have to demo their work they will actually watch a flic but when the guests have gone it's off down the pub. Now I'm not saying I know this for a fact but the work ethos of your average civil cervant isn't the best - especially so when there is no product, if they say they watched it hows anyone going to know otherwise, just read a review and see what the bbfc have classed it.

Awesome, so what you're saying is that based on your assumption of the average civil servant's work ethos (which already puts us deep in the realm of bovine excreta) they clearly don't watch all of them and just slack off.

I think a more accurate statement would be that if you were for some reason employed in the IFCO, you'd attempt to skive off as much as possible in precisely the manner you've described.

Valmont

MooseJam wrote: »

Well I'm sure when they have to demo their work they will actually watch a flic but when the guests have gone it's off down the pub. Now I'm not saying I know this for a fact but the work ethos of your average civil cervant isn't the best - especially so when there is no product, if they say they watched it hows anyone going to know otherwise, just read a review and see what the bbfc have classed it.

Well two posters have reported that they have indeed sat and watched some of these films and all you have is a hunch so the burden of proof is upon you here. Yet it seems all you are basing your opinion on is a ridiculous stereotype about all civil servants.

Our man in Havana

The staff of the IFCO are extremely dedicated to their work. I had the pleasure of meeting Mr. Kelleher and he is not the typical civil servant that you describe. He is an absolute gentleman and he is extremely knowledgeable about films.

To suggest they simply copy the BBFC ratings is frankly insulting.

MooseJam

Fysh wrote: »

I think a more accurate statement would be that if you were for some reason employed in the IFCO, you'd attempt to skive off as much as possible in precisely the manner you've described.

Of course I would I'm only human, it's not like it's important work

MooseJam

Bond-007 wrote: »

To suggest they simply copy the BBFC ratings is frankly insulting.

Actually now that you mention it, given the current climate the IFCO should be scrapped, or at least cut down to one man who copies the BBFC's ratings,
it's pointless duplication of work, and money that could be better spent elsewhere

johnny_ultimate

MooseJam wrote: »

Actually now that you mention it, given the current climate the IFCO should be scrapped, or at least cut down to one man who copies the BBFC's ratings,
it's pointless duplication of work, and money that could be better spent elsewhere

I would have argued the same, but Kelleher - from any interviews and examples of his decisions I've seen - is an extremely intelligent and progressive individual, and he has made IFCO a fine and trustworthy institution. He has rightly perceived that his job is to classify rather than censor (barring that Manhunt 2 fiasco) and in fact IFCO tends to come across as a more liberal office than the BBFC these days. Perhaps cutting out the IFCO would save some cash, but I'm happy that money is being spent supporting an important, progressive and local institution. Classification is an important issue - less so as you get older, but moreso again once people become parents - so would never consider it a waste of money.

Sleepy

Why would anyone want to skive off the job?!

Surely being paid to watch and classify movies has to be one of the best jobs in the country. Sure, you're gonna have to sit through some drivel but it definitely beats conference calls, pointless meetings and all the usual crap that goes with an office job.

monkeyfudge

MooseJam wrote: »

Actually now that you mention it, given the current climate the IFCO should be scrapped, or at least cut down to one man who copies the BBFC's ratings,
it's pointless duplication of work, and money that could be better spent elsewhere

IFCO do charge the film companies each time they submit a film for classification.

It's why the IFI requires membership for certain films. It's because some of the films they show don't go on general release and simply wouldn't make enough money to justify the cost of classification.

ztoical

MooseJam wrote: »

Well I'm sure when they have to demo their work they will actually watch a flic but when the guests have gone it's off down the pub. Now I'm not saying I know this for a fact but the work ethos of your average civil cervant isn't the best - especially so when there is no product, if they say they watched it hows anyone going to know otherwise, just read a review and see what the bbfc have classed it.

The people whose film it is are allowed [and expected] to sit in on the screening - the whole screening. While your not going to get the director of big american blockbusters over, you will get someone from the irish side of the distrabution company sitting in trying to talk them into a lower cert. And there are films out there that haven't been rated by the bbfc before the IFC gets to them.

MooseJam

Well if the IFCO charge for them and actually make money out of it then thats cool, but I would still imagine that they are duplicating most of the work of the bbfc, of course you could say the same about the bbfc duplicating the work of the ifco, bit of a chicken and egg situation there, basically we share the same sensibilities as our neighbours and I'd imagine 90% or more of films would get the same rating here as there, it doesn't matter though if money is being made as monkeyfudge says, if it wasn't though it would be something to look at perhaps

ztoical

MooseJam wrote: »

basically we share the same sensibilities as our neighbours and I'd imagine 90% or more of films would get the same rating here as there

In more recent years yes they've been pretty similar but not too long ago we were giving much higher ratings then the UK and banning a number of films that got general releases there [From Dusk till Dawn for example]

Dexterm99

I've a lot of time for the IFCO and would agree that they provide a valuable service but I believe they got it wrong this time. I'd like to hear their reasoning behind the 16 decision and why they felt the violent and sex scenes didn't warrant an 18 cert.

Out of the 79 movies currently on release in Ireland (http://www.ifco.ie/website/ifco/ifcoweb.nsf/web/currentfilms?opendocument&current=yes&type=graphic), only 3 movies have received an 18 rating.
At the BBFC, they have classified more 18 cert movies than the IFCO. OK, some are not showing here such as Last House on the Left which is rated 18. This opens up another question of why they have not reviewed it? It's not even listed as an upcoming release. Apart from the Watchmen, Surveillance is BBFC rated 18 (rated 16 by IFCO but listed as 18 in Movies@ and correctly as 16 in Vue). Why bother to classify a movie if the cinemas have the discretion to change it?

It's clear that we do not always follow suit to the UK. Are we more tolerant of violence in movies than the British?
Is it possible that the IFCO are under pressure to certify as many movies under 18 as they can?

ztoical

Dexterm99 wrote: »

Why bother to classify a movie if the cinemas have the discretion to change it?

It's clear that we do not always follow suit to the UK. Are we more tolerant of violence in movies than the British?
Is it possible that the IFCO are under pressure to certify as many movies under 18 as they can?

Cinemas most certainly don't have the authority to change ratings for films so I'd say its a mistake. It's funny that we now seem to be more tolerant then the UK cus as I mentioned in my last post we use to be alot worse and rather then give films an 18 cert we'd ban them - From Dusk till Dawn, Kids, Natural Born Killers. There was that big kick up when Sky were going to show films that had been banned in Ireland on their movie channel which of course most people in Ireland have. Now we seem to have swung the other way. It's not usually the likes of the IFCO that are under pressure to give lower certs to films, usually the big film companies want the lower cert to allow more people to see the film and they pressure the director to make cuts to get that lower cert, esp in the states where an NC-17 cert is considered the kiss of death for a film. At the other end of the scale a U cert is very hard to get as to cover their ass most film classifiers would go for the PG rating just in case some parent throws up a stink.

Back on topic I have to say I was very surprised Watchmen got a 16 esp as normally a film would have to have some cuts/editing done for the film classifiers to consider even thinking about changing the cert and from what I understand that didn't happen in this case. I've seen films with alot less gore, violence and sex get 18 certs and given very limited release. Given that everyone knew Watchmen was going to go into pretty much every cinema in the country I'm really surprised with the 16 rating.