unforum

jfiscus · Boot Joined: 03 Aug 2007 Posts: 69

I know TV is quite a ways different in what it allows versus movie ratings, but most of us are all here cause this movie is made by JJ - right? And we like JJ because of LOST & his other projects, right? Which all show on "basic cable" and all get away with a good deal of violence & some swearing - and all are GREAT shows as they are - right???

So, in a nutshell, you don't need the f-bomb 20 times or a LOT of gore to make a movie good.

It wouldn't make much sense anyways cause the movie is shot with a hand-held camera & you can't get all that much "detailed" "wide" overviews that way, so you mostly would see just the deaths of the few people they encounter. If someone else is getting eaten alive or exploding I'm either running in the opposite direction as fast as I can or upchucking so you're not gonna get that shot on camera, lol.

If you like foul language - watch "Superbad" - it has more foul words than regular (plus it's hilarious).

**Posted:** Tue Dec 11, 2007 6:34 pm

zooboomafoo · Veteran Joined: 26 Nov 2007 Posts: 149

well at least now I don't have to convince my parents.

**Posted:** Tue Dec 11, 2007 6:37 pm

OliMango · Entrenched Joined: 07 Oct 2007 Posts: 1189 Location: Vegas

**Posted:** Tue Dec 11, 2007 6:39 pm

pegassissy · Unfettered Joined: 14 Aug 2007 Posts: 552

Granted, JJ is the creator or whatever of LOST, and that show kicks ass(whoops! PG-13 i forgot) but a movie is much different than a tv program. Ill use a VERY good example.

HBO has no restrictions on content correct? And they also had the, if not most popular, second most popular television show on since i have been born in the soparanos. I havent seen all, what? seven seasons? But i caught on late. Take that show and put it on cable. Oh wait, they already did on A&E.

And you know what? the clean version sucks Censored

(pg-13) Take the greatest show and edit it and you get a not as good show. Im not saying cloverfield, or whatever the Censored

this movie gonna be is going to be called bad, im just saying, its not going to be realistic.

I know this may be a sore point, but remember 9/11. I wasnt there and dont pretend to be, but ive seen tapes and heard 911 calls, and there was quite a bit of swearing.

People swear, its life. An R rating would have been 2000x better. What, they can swear in this "game" but not in the movie? Very disappointing.

**Posted:** Tue Dec 11, 2007 7:10 pm

_________________
And then the nurse comes round and everyone will lift their heads
But I'm thinking of what Sarah said, "Love is watching someone die"
So who's going to watch you die?...

tstrel

2 cents

**Posted:** Tue Dec 11, 2007 7:26 pm

Nighthawk

Re: 2 cents

**Posted:** Tue Dec 11, 2007 7:38 pm

bloopbloop · Unfettered Joined: 15 Sep 2007 Posts: 329

**Posted:** Tue Dec 11, 2007 7:46 pm

HerOdyssey · Decorated Joined: 17 Sep 2007 Posts: 276 Location: Oregon

**Posted:** Tue Dec 11, 2007 7:49 pm

OliMango · Entrenched Joined: 07 Oct 2007 Posts: 1189 Location: Vegas

Re: 2 cents

**Posted:** Tue Dec 11, 2007 8:59 pm

Kitsuhime · Boot Joined: 09 Dec 2007 Posts: 56 Location: VA Beach

Listen, I think we're giving too little credit to a PG-13 rating. Think about what an R rating usually means, especially in terms of horror movie. All this means is there's no steamy inappropriate sex scene in the middle of the monster's rampage. The little monsters that may/may not exist aren't going to strap Jamie up with a bunch of hooks through her skin ala Hellraiser.

In other words, this is going to try to be more realistic. Large scale destruction. Brief glimpses of carnage and death. Confusion. Debris. They're getting injured. There's blood in the trailer. There won't be WWII scale damage ala Saving Private Ryan, but that doesn't mean they're all going to go skipping outta New York to Candy Mountain unscathed.

I'm not worried.

**Posted:** Tue Dec 11, 2007 9:04 pm

OliMango · Entrenched Joined: 07 Oct 2007 Posts: 1189 Location: Vegas

Here's a quote from someone on IMDB:

**Posted:** Tue Dec 11, 2007 9:30 pm

mercurix · Veteran Joined: 02 Dec 2007 Posts: 70

**Posted:** Tue Dec 11, 2007 10:03 pm

mercurix · Veteran Joined: 02 Dec 2007 Posts: 70

Hey!

**Posted:** Tue Dec 11, 2007 10:06 pm

AeRoSpaceman · Boot Joined: 08 Oct 2007 Posts: 34 Location: Florida, USA

You also need to remember that the ratings people will let a lot more stuff slide thru on a science fiction movie than on a drama, action, adventure movie. Just my .02 cents. Very Happy

**Posted:** Tue Dec 11, 2007 10:09 pm

brettoniasam · Unfettered Joined: 13 Sep 2007 Posts: 340

Eh, there's no way to whitewash it: PG-13 is a HORRIBLE choice for this movie.

The marketing and previews and everything else were geared towards a very adult audience, replete with lots of story/backstory references involving sex, drugs, booze (in copious quantities), VD, swingin' and lots of other stuff that many 13-year olds would barely understand. Add to that scenes of violence that hint(ed) at a VERY graphic nature, and the movie had "R" written all over it. As well it should have.

The ONLY reason to slap a PG-13 in it is to let kids in. This is NOT the kind of movie I'd like to take my 5-year old son to, and I hope to god all of you realize that you should be thinking along those same lines.

JJ SERIOUSLY needs to throw some more f-bombs and a full-frontal crotch shot or two to scare the MPAA into an "R" rating real quick, or else this is turning into a major disaster.

"PG-13," hell.

**Posted:** Tue Dec 11, 2007 10:27 pm