Rated R DVD questions

Ok, I can't believe I'm asking this...
I've got a 14 year old daughter who likes the Friday the 13th/Freddie
Kruger/Halloween movies. She's a very mature, bright kid but likes
scary movies. They're fun to her. When they originally came out,
the R rating was much more like a pg13 rating of today. Back then
it was a bit more tame.

I just rented Freddie vs. Jason. I was going to watch it with her. I
usually screen them first. I screened it. There are some things that
I'm just not comfortable having my kid watch here. It's much worse
(sex/gore) than it used to be.

My question (sorry it took so long)- Is there a place to rent DVDs
that are R rated but have PG/PG13 edit versions on them? Seriously, if
these horror movie makers were smart, they'd put a lower rated version
on the disc as well. There's plenty of room to do this.

Yeah, I know it's kind of a prudish question, and I know that the
movie was
rated R, but these movies are totally aimed at a TEEN audience. I
don't understand why they make the movies that are aimed at teens not
suitable for them. You can still have the same kind of flick without
it being closer to an NC17.

Just askin'

barry womb

barry womb wrote

>
> I just rented Freddie vs. Jason. I was going to watch it with her. I
> usually screen them first. I screened it. There are some things that
> I'm just not comfortable having my kid watch here. It's much worse
> (sex/gore) than it used to be.

It's cyclical. Sometimes harder R's are allowed by the MPAA, sometimes
they are not. It seems that we are in a period where the envelope is
being pushed further ( The new Texas Chainsaw Masacre is another
example)
>
> My question (sorry it took so long)- Is there a place to rent DVDs
> that are R rated but have PG/PG13 edit versions on them? Seriously, if
> these horror movie makers were smart, they'd put a lower rated version
> on the disc as well. There's plenty of room to do this.

With a fullscreen and widescreen version on the disc already, putting
yet another version on there would compromise quality further. They
could employ "Seamless branching" but not all player can play it
correctly.

Your only alternative is to use these guys:

http://www.cleanflicks.com/

who do 1:1 edited versions of movies. It's something the movie industry
and the movie buff frowns upon but that is where you will get what you
want. You can send them your DVD of Freddy VS. Jason and they will
return you an edited version for a fee.


> rated R, but these movies are totally aimed at a TEEN audience. I
> don't understand why they make the movies that are aimed at teens not
> suitable for them. You can still have the same kind of flick without
> it being closer to an NC17.

In the case of Freddy and Jason, they are actually catering to at least
a couple types of audience. There stated goal is to bring the people
that started out watching Freddy and Friday the 13'th movies way back in
the 80's back in theaters. That's an adult audience. But make no
mistake, they aim to get a teen audience as well (with rock video tie
ins and an up and coming music star in the cast).

They know that teens find a way to sneak into R films and in some ways
they are counting on that, make no mistake.

Even though I provided you with info to get an edited copy, I suggest
that you instead watch it unedited with her. Telling her what scenes you
personally find uncomfortable and why.

That way, you don't create a "premium" around this movie with stuff "the
folks don't want you to see".

I can tell you from personal experience, when the folks said they didn't
want me to see a particular movie, the value of seeing that movie
instantly increased in my mind.

Watching it with her and stating your disaproval with how they handled
some scenes will stick with her better than just holding it back from
her.

BTW, this is coming from someone who has Jason Vs. Freddy on DVD and
enjoyed it. But it's definataly not for kids, it might be okay for some
older teens, early teens... I don't know...

Mike

Michael Rogers

On 19 Jan 2004 13:31:23 -0800, (barry womb) wrote:

>Ok, I can't believe I'm asking this...
>I've got a 14 year old daughter who likes the Friday the 13th/Freddie
>Kruger/Halloween movies. She's a very mature, bright kid but likes
>scary movies. They're fun to her. When they originally came out,
>the R rating was much more like a pg13 rating of today. Back then
>it was a bit more tame.

**I know what you mean. Why don't you try checking out older slash
movies like Prom Night? (cheesy but Jamie Lee and MaryBeth Ruebens are
cute) After teen slashers got popular, the market got flooded.
Sadly, the more recent stuff is pretty gross instead of scary. I bet
the guys in this NG have a lot of suggestions. Has she seen The Ring?

kaboomie

kaboom

>Yeah, I know it's kind of a prudish question, and I know that the
>movie was
>rated R, but these movies are totally aimed at a TEEN audience. I
>don't understand why they make the movies that are aimed at teens not
>suitable for them. You can still have the same kind of flick without
>it being closer to an NC17.
>
>Just askin'

A few thoughts as to why R ratings are harder:

1. Many parents nowdays don't have time to take their kids to movies
anymore, so nowdays a R cuts out a large portion of the audience. The
result is that the PG-13 rating gets pushed to the limit. In the LOTR
commentary, Jackson makes a few comments of things he had to do to just
squeak by with a PG-13.

2. Back in the old days a very few successful movies came out with an X
rating, but nowdays the NC-17 rating is the certain kiss of death. The
result of this is the R rating gets pushed to the limit. The most common
scenario is a film that rightfully should get a NC-17 has a few small
cuts made, resulting in a very hard "R". I heard that The Crow and
American Pie were two examples of this.

3. Freddy and Jason were shocking in their time, but with all the
sequels and clones, audiences have become acclimated, so the producers
probably felt they had to do things to push the envelope again.

Thoughts on edited versions:

1. Most directors take a dim view of their films being altered, which is
one of the reasons it's not to common. Probably another is you have to
pay someone to do it, and then release a different version.
Considering how many parents don't care what their kids watch, I
don't see much of a market for this. Although some DVDs do come in toned
down versions (Requiem for a Dream), more common is to put material back
in that they couldn't get away with in the theater.

2. As a last resort you can always wait until the movie is shown on
television.

--

Monte Castleman, <<Spamfilter in Use>>
Bloomington, MN to email, remove the "q" from my address

Monte Castleman

I think the old Jason/Freddy flicks were just as filled with violence/sex as
the new one is. If she has seen all the old original R rated versions of
those films, I don't think there is anything she has not seen before.

HDTV games lists and discussions
http://www.hdtvarcade.com
Online shop now open with apparel & misc items.

"barry womb" <> wrote in message
news: om...
> Ok, I can't believe I'm asking this...
> I've got a 14 year old daughter who likes the Friday the 13th/Freddie
> Kruger/Halloween movies. She's a very mature, bright kid but likes
> scary movies. They're fun to her. When they originally came out,
> the R rating was much more like a pg13 rating of today. Back then
> it was a bit more tame.
>
> I just rented Freddie vs. Jason. I was going to watch it with her. I
> usually screen them first. I screened it. There are some things that
> I'm just not comfortable having my kid watch here. It's much worse
> (sex/gore) than it used to be.
>
> My question (sorry it took so long)- Is there a place to rent DVDs
> that are R rated but have PG/PG13 edit versions on them? Seriously, if
> these horror movie makers were smart, they'd put a lower rated version
> on the disc as well. There's plenty of room to do this.
>
> Yeah, I know it's kind of a prudish question, and I know that the
> movie was
> rated R, but these movies are totally aimed at a TEEN audience. I
> don't understand why they make the movies that are aimed at teens not
> suitable for them. You can still have the same kind of flick without
> it being closer to an NC17.
>
> Just askin'

Ollie T

Monte Castleman wrote:
>
> >Yeah, I know it's kind of a prudish question, and I know that the
> >movie was
> >rated R, but these movies are totally aimed at a TEEN audience. I
> >don't understand why they make the movies that are aimed at teens not
> >suitable for them. You can still have the same kind of flick without
> >it being closer to an NC17.
> >
> >Just askin'
>
> A few thoughts as to why R ratings are harder:
>
> 1. Many parents nowdays don't have time to take their kids to movies
> anymore, so nowdays a R cuts out a large portion of the audience. The
> result is that the PG-13 rating gets pushed to the limit. In the LOTR
> commentary, Jackson makes a few comments of things he had to do to just
> squeak by with a PG-13.
>
> 2. Back in the old days a very few successful movies came out with an X
> rating, but nowdays the NC-17 rating is the certain kiss of death. The
> result of this is the R rating gets pushed to the limit. The most common
> scenario is a film that rightfully should get a NC-17 has a few small
> cuts made, resulting in a very hard "R". I heard that The Crow and
> American Pie were two examples of this.
>
> 3. Freddy and Jason were shocking in their time, but with all the
> sequels and clones, audiences have become acclimated, so the producers
> probably felt they had to do things to push the envelope again.
>


Not targeting any previous posters, but am I alone in feeling the MPAA
(and the FCC) is ridiculously prude? Can anyone explain to me how a
movie like American Pie can be damaging to a 14-15 year-old? Are we
afraid teenagers might be traumatised, corrupted by it? Is there anyone
naive enough to believe there's anything in that movie that teenagers
don't already know about? It's pretty clear that the primary target
audience of the film is teenagers and young adults.

I watched About Schmidt last weekend; it was rated R for brief nudity
and language, IIRC. Now, I can understand that the theme might not get a
teenager's interest, but I can't see what in that film required the R
rating. There is no sex; though we get a brief glimpse of Kathy Bates
naked (I can concede that this might be disturbing to some, but that's
not the point). Is it the language then? There might have been a few
cuss words here and there, I didn't take notes, but it's certainly not
Tarantino territory.

Here's where I come from: my parents weren't the kind of people to get
offended easily, and they certainly didn't want their kids to be any
different. Even as young as 8 or 9 we were watching horror movies, but
never on our own. There was always a parent present, and I can only
remember 2 times where my mother fast-forwarded through a scene she felt
was inapropriate. Most of these movies contained violent scenes, and
some of them had light nudity as well.

I find it sad that a parent might feel that a brief glimpse of a breast
could be harmful to a kid. I do feel differently about violence, in that
if kids are allowed to see it, it should be in very close supervision;
but because my sister and I could take it, my parents never saw anything
wrong in allowing us to watch horror films. I certainly don't believe in
censoring violence, but I do believe it can be harmful to impressionable
kids, and that it's the parents responsibility to control what their
kids watch.

Then again, I don't live in the US and ratings are much more looser here
(Quebec) and I tend to believe people in general are less prude (I never
saw any local politicians go on a crusade against the use of cuss words
on broadcast TV; that made me laugh out loud). Often, a movie gets an R
in the US, and gets rated lower here, especially if the justification
was nudity or language. The same can be said about TV.

JF

JFR

Hi Kaboomie, thanks for replying. Actually she's seen both of those.
The Ring she thought was a waste of time, which I agreed with. She
knows what a good movie is, horror or otherwise. She even saw Wrong
Turn which we really liked. There just wasn't as much in your face sex
stuff, etc. Even some of the older 13 movies she's seen. This new one
though, pretty rough. It's not the gore that she's into so much as the
stories and just being scared. One of her favorites is 'The Others'.
Great movie, no gore, just a great story.
Thanks

> **I know what you mean. Why don't you try checking out older slash
> movies like Prom Night? (cheesy but Jamie Lee and MaryBeth Ruebens are
> cute) After teen slashers got popular, the market got flooded.
> Sadly, the more recent stuff is pretty gross instead of scary. I bet
> the guys in this NG have a lot of suggestions. Has she seen The Ring?
>
> kaboomie

barry womb

(barry womb) wrote in message
news:<. com>...

> Ok, I can't believe I'm asking this...
> I've got a 14 year old daughter who likes the Friday the 13th/Freddie
> Kruger/Halloween movies. She's a very mature, bright kid but likes
> scary movies. They're fun to her. When they originally came out,
> the R rating was much more like a pg13 rating of today. Back then
> it was a bit more tame.

Actually I would argue the opposite. If anything R-rated films are
weaker than they were back then. Even PG movies were more risque (can
you imagine a PG film being made today with a topless woman? Of course
not, but it happened in Airplane.)

> My question (sorry it took so long)- Is there a place to rent DVDs
> that are R rated but have PG/PG13 edit versions on them?

There was, but due to legal complications I'm not sure if they're
still around or not. CleanFlicks IIRC.

- Jordan

Jordan Lund

(barry womb) wrote in message news:<. com>...
>She
> knows what a good movie is, horror or otherwise. She even saw Wrong
> Turn which we really liked. There just wasn't as much in your face sex
> stuff, etc. Even some of the older 13 movies she's seen. This new one
> though, pretty rough. It's not the gore that she's into so much as the
> stories and just being scared. One of her favorites is 'The Others'

Freddy Vs. Jason hardly even has a plot. It was clearly meant to be an
action movie w/ T&A. Its not scary at all. So do your daughter a favor
and don't show it to her she probably won't like it based on what
you've said about her. And if she still wants to see it, have her wait
till its on network TV, and you can watch it for free.

Mike

"a PG film being made today with a topless woman? Of course not, but it
happened in Airplane.)"

I remember this all happened before there was a PG-13 rating. 16 Candles,
Sheena and a few other movies all had topless women back in those days. I
always thought that the horror flicks of the 80's were much more violent
than movies of the 90's. Recently I have noticed much of the good old
violence returning.

HDTV games lists and discussions
http://www.hdtvarcade.com
Online shop now open with apparel & misc items

"Jordan Lund" <> wrote in message
news: om...
> (barry womb) wrote in message
> news:<. com>...
>
> > Ok, I can't believe I'm asking this...
> > I've got a 14 year old daughter who likes the Friday the 13th/Freddie
> > Kruger/Halloween movies. She's a very mature, bright kid but likes
> > scary movies. They're fun to her. When they originally came out,
> > the R rating was much more like a pg13 rating of today. Back then
> > it was a bit more tame.
>
> Actually I would argue the opposite. If anything R-rated films are
> weaker than they were back then. Even PG movies were more risque (can
> you imagine a PG film being made today with a topless woman? Of course
> not, but it happened in Airplane.)
>
> > My question (sorry it took so long)- Is there a place to rent DVDs
> > that are R rated but have PG/PG13 edit versions on them?
>
> There was, but due to legal complications I'm not sure if they're
> still around or not. CleanFlicks IIRC.
>
> - Jordan

Ollie T