Films that shouldnt have been awarded a PG cert, a 15 one, an 18s certificate etc

IvaBigWun

I remember seeing this scene when I was a kid and having nightmares for a week after. Ghostbusters arguably shouldn't have been a PG film based on this ghost alone.

The bit Im talking about is at 3.30

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kj2bF8dDNs

Likewise, wasnt Jaws Certificate 12 when it came out? Too light for this film too.

At the other end of things Gone Girl was rated R in the States, Rated R means all under 17s are required to be accompanied by a parent or adult guardian. A rating that was too strong in this case in my opinion.

Even with that blade scene.

What other films shouldnt have been awarded a PG cert, a 15 one, an 18s etc and what cert would you have given them instead?

e_e

My DVD of The Good, The Bad and The Ugly is rated 18 for "Moderate Violence".

Badlands and Manhattan are similarly baffling 18 ratings, the latter at most having just one or two uses of the f word.

Nervous Wreck

Ratings used to be a bit looser when people weren't such PC, tree-hugging, little wusses. Gone be the days...

e_e

What? If anything ratings are looser now. It's a lot harder to get an 18 and the 3 movies I linked above are all from the 60s/70s.

IvaBigWun

Wasnt it Steven Spielberg and his mass influence that gave America PG13?

Mickeroo

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

Ratings used to be a bit looser when people weren't such PC, tree-hugging, little wusses. Gone be the days...

Most films that were 18s or 15s back in the day wouldn't get that rating now, the first Batman was 15s for example. Lethal Weapon was 18s and is pretty light by today's standards. I think things have gone the opposite to what you're saying.

e_e

I don't think Die Hard, Aliens or The Terminator would be an 18 if released today either.

Compare those to a modern 18 rated action film like Dredd or The Raid 2 and there's a good difference in how graphic the violence is.

Birneybau

IvaBigWun wrote: »

Wasnt it Steven Spielberg and his mass influence that gave America PG13?

I imagine it was profit led.

happysunnydays

IvaBigWun wrote: »

I remember seeing this scene when I was a kid and having nightmares for a week after. Ghostbusters arguably shouldn't have been a PG film based on this ghost alone.

Did you cry like little girl?
In 80's, me and buddy hired Aliens as kids from rural vid library, that's the hardcore sh*t right there! ....both like 'Woaaaah'.

e_e wrote: »

I don't think Die Hard, Aliens or The Terminator would be an 18 if released today either.

Compare those to a modern 18 rated action film like Dredd or The Raid 2 and there's a good difference in how graphic the violence is.

Well there's the sex, language too .....and psychological implications of adult themes too but I'm ok, some aren't!

AnonoBoy

IvaBigWun wrote: »

At the other end of things Gone Girl was rated R in the States, Rated R means all under 17s are required to be accompanied by a parent or adult guardian. A rating that was too strong in this case in my opinion.

Even with that blade scene.

Use of the word c*nt would guarantee an R rating in the States. Definitely.

ceegee

There are some stupid rules which govern ratings. Afair pg13 can only use tbe word f**k once. If you use it twice you get bumped up a rating.
Xmen 1st class used up there one f**k on wolverines bar cameo

Liam McPoyle

e_e wrote: »

I don't think Die Hard, Aliens or The Terminator would be an 18 if released today either.

Compare those to a modern 18 rated action film like Dredd or The Raid 2 and there's a good difference in how graphic the violence is.

New releases of Die Hard and Terminator are both 15 cert.

Loughc

Business Cat wrote: »

New releases of Die Hard and Terminator are both 15 cert.

And they are both awful.

e_e

I think he means re-releases.

http://bbfc.co.uk/releases/die-hard-1988
http://bbfc.co.uk/releases/terminator-1984

Nervous Wreck

e_e wrote: »

What? If anything ratings are looser now. It's a lot harder to get an 18 and the 3 movies I linked above are all from the 60s/70s.

Sorry, what I meant was studios used to be looser about making movies that would have higher ratings cos people weren't such pussies. Think I missed the actual point of the op though. :-/

AnonoBoy

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

Sorry, what I meant was studios used to be looser about making movies that would have higher ratings cos people weren't such pussies. Think I missed the actual point of the op though. :-/

It's not that people are pussies. Although one could argue that point too.

It's more about money. PG-13 movies make more money these days so studios will aim for that and perhaps release a grittier version later. But to quote William Shakespeare - "it's all about the Benjamins yo."

Tony EH

'Jaws'

PG
































Bollocks.

ps3lover

Most people seem To think the original Halloween would get a 12a/ PG13 today.

e_e

I think it'd be a light 15. There is swearing, drugs and a sex scene as well as the (not too graphic) killings.

darkdubh

Mickeroo wrote: »

Most films that were 18s or 15s back in the day wouldn't get that rating now, the first Batman was 15s for example. Lethal Weapon was 18s and is pretty light by today's standards. I think things have gone the opposite to what you're saying.

The fight at the end of Lethal Weapon is probably the reason for the 18 cert.

ps3lover

e_e wrote: »

I think it'd be a light 15. There is swearing, drugs and a sex scene as well as the (not too graphic) killings.

Well it was re rated by the BBFC last year and got an 18 cert for strong horror and threat.

Drag00n79

ps3lover wrote: »

Well it was re rated by the BBFC last year and got an 18 cert for strong horror and threat.

The opening scene of a child stabbing his sister to death with a kitchen knife would've played its part.
In Lethal Weapon the explicit cocaine use would've bumped it up too.

JaseBelleVie

I always found it a bit strange that The Matrix got an 18 rating here. For sure there's violence galore in it, but nothing too bloody, and mostly martial arts-style violence or something. Certainly nothing that would come close to, say, Saving Private Ryan which has a 15 rating here (I think).

There is not an insane amount of bad language in it either, I even struggle to think of an instance where "f*ck" is used, and "c*nt" definitely isn't used. There is no real sex or nudity in it either, from what I can remember, apart from maybe a couple of seconds after the awakening scenes, but even at that.

Maybe it's the themes of enslavement and whatnot that are in it, but even that's a push. Maybe I'm desensitised to the violence or something, but I always thought that 18 was a bit much for The Matrix. There are far more violent 15 films out there.

Also, you've got to love the Irish Censors giving Michael Collins like a 12 rating, when it is one of the most violent films ever to come out of Ireland! I know they justified it by saying it was a historical film and so on, but it is as bloody and as violent as they come!

In relation to films like Halloween, a lower rating might damage its sales and as such the distributor may submit the film but request that the rating remain the same.

TerrorFirmer

Remember The Cider House Rules? It was PG or 12's in the UK, and 18's here...and that's fairly recently.

eviltwin

American Beauty was an 18 which seems a bit OTT. Its harmless.

OU812

IvaBigWun wrote: »

Wasnt it Steven Spielberg and his mass influence that gave America PG13?

He suggested PG14 following criticism of Temple of Doom & Gremlins

JaseBelleVie wrote: »

I always found it a bit strange that The Matrix got an 18 rating here. For sure there's violence galore in it, but nothing too bloody, and mostly martial arts-style violence or something. Certainly nothing that would come close to, say, Saving Private Ryan which has a 15 rating here (I think).

There is not an insane amount of bad language in it either, I even struggle to think of an instance where "f*ck" is used, and "c*nt" definitely isn't used. There is no real sex or nudity in it either, from what I can remember, apart from maybe a couple of seconds after the awakening scenes, but even at that.

Maybe it's the themes of enslavement and whatnot that are in it, but even that's a push. Maybe I'm desensitised to the violence or something, but I always thought that 18 was a bit much for The Matrix. There are far more violent 15 films out there.

Also, you've got to love the Irish Censors giving Michael Collins like a 12 rating, when it is one of the most violent films ever to come out of Ireland! I know they justified it by saying it was a historical film and so on, but it is as bloody and as violent as they come!

It's all about context. Our Censor is actually very lenient. Matrix was gratuitous violence while Michael Collins is historical (despite liberties being taken with the story & timeline) & Saving Private Ryan has historical grounding.

kunst nugget

happysunnydays wrote: »

Did you cry like little girl?
In 80's, me and buddy hired Aliens as kids from rural vid library, that's the hardcore sh*t right there! ....both like 'Woaaaah'.

My da brought me to see Aliens in the local cinema when I was about 9. The manager told him it probably wouldn't be suitable but my da just fobbed him, telling him I'd be fine. I was more than fine. I was absolutely fúcking amazed! Not a film that stands the test of time as much as the original when I look at it now.

Pet Semetary though. The flashbacks of the sister done me untold damage when I say that on video. Still a horrible little film when you look at it now. Especially the little tyke in it.

AnonoBoy

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

Remember The Cider House Rules? It was PG or 12's in the UK, and 18's here...and that's fairly recently.

Abortion theme probably did that.

Also - wasn't there something for a while that if a film showed people headbutting in fights that it would bump up the rating? Or am I imagining that one.

JaseBelleVie

AnonoBoy wrote: »

Also - wasn't there something for a while that if a film showed people headbutting in fights that it would bump up the rating? Or am I imagining that one.

I know a load of films that have had headbutts edited out by British censors (two right off the top of my head are GoldenEye and The Matrix). Arguably, this is an easily imitated behaviour by kids and has no place in mainstream films.

Tony EH

JaseBelleVie wrote: »

I always found it a bit strange that The Matrix got an 18 rating here...

'The Matrix' was made in 1998 or so. That was at the end of a fairly strict time in film classification/censorship. I was an avid film collector then (still am) and a lot of films simply never saw the light of day without either cuts, enforced by the likes of the MPAA or the BBFC, or they simply were not allowed in the cinema or on video.

It took decades for me to actually be able to buy 'Zombie Flesh Eaters' on DVD since 1984's "video nasties" nonsense and now I can buy it almost anywhere.

But, while 'Zombie Flesh Eaters' deserves its 18 cert, a very large number of films/videos that were released in the 90's were given an 18 cert by virtue of the genre that they belonged to. So, nearly any horror film had an 18 cert slapped onto it regardless of its content, which more often than not was far, far tamer than most pictures being produced today.

Likewise, strong language (i.e. "fuck") was a real no-no as well, and certain scenes of sex would see an automatic 18 cert.

Today, pictures are classified with more sense, IMHO and I think that that's a good thing. Unfortunately, we also have seen a rise in the PG-13 films that have made producers deliberately tone down films that shoule be harder, given their subject, in order to get more bums on seats. 'World War Z' was a perfect example of that and while that film was utter dross anyway, making it a PG-13 film was the icing on the cake.

AnonoBoy

JaseBelleVie wrote: »

I know a load of films that have had headbutts edited out by British censors (two right off the top of my head are GoldenEye and The Matrix). Arguably, this is an easily imitated behaviour by kids and has no place in mainstream films.

And of course there was a period where Ireland did not rate home video releases. We just used the British certs. Up until the early 90's perhaps?

Tony EH

As far as I know we always had our own film censor. We used the BBFC "U", "PG", "15" and "18" certificate indications, but the Irish Film Censor carried out their own reviews and in some cases awarded a film with a different classification than their British counterparts.

e_e

The Passion of the Christ getting a 15A (or 15PG as it was then) rating.

"Watch a guy get whipped for 20 minutes until there's no skin left on his back. Bring the kids!"

jpm4

It's been mentioned already but I think Temple of Doom could have been 15s - after only seeing the censored version for years the uncut is insanely violent in places - the flogging of a kid, the heart rip, the very graphic lowering into the fire pit.

Tony EH

'Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom' was released uncut in Irish cinemas in 1984. I remember my mum taking me to see it in the Classic Cinema.

The video version and the version shown on BBC is, however, cut. I think the only major cut is the heart rip from the chest.

jpm4

Tony EH wrote: »

'Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom' was released uncut in Irish cinemas in 1984. I remember my mum taking me to see it in the Classic Cinema.

The video version and the version shown on BBC is, however, cut. I think the only major cut is the heart rip from the chest.

Most versions I have seen on TV at Christmas cut out the stuff I mentioned above too.

AnonoBoy

Tony EH wrote: »

As far as I know we always had our own film censor. We used the BBFC "U", "PG", "15" and "18" certificate indications, but the Irish Film Censor carried out their own reviews and in some cases awarded a film with a different classification than their British counterparts.

Until 1989 they only classified films for cinema release hence why they had the British certs on home video. After that the blue Irish ones were used.