Today Baby Doll would get a G rating......
In todays world this film would pass as a family film. It is tame by 2007 standards.
" All that there really is to life is what happens next " from The Misfits 1961
[deleted]
MovieChat Forums > Baby Doll (1956) Discussion > Today Baby Doll would get a G rating.......
Not a G. PG at the very least.
Heck, it has smoking in it. That is enough to get it an R rating nowadays.
Jumping the Shark Productions
Mores have changed so much in our country since the fifties that folks are likely to be puzzled and confused by the subject matter.
I recall and episode of 'Mama's Family' where president Reagan is condemned (by 'Mama') for being divorced and remarried. In the rural area I grew up in, my high school graduating class (of ~50, circa 1973) had no one with divorced parents. There were 2 boys that had their mothers pass away and then their dads remarried, and one girl whose dad had murdered her mother, but other than that, all the families were intact.
I remain amazed (and more than a bit confused) that Giuliani and McCain were deemed to be viable Republican (!)presidential candidates with their (per the fifties/sixties morality) sordid, squalid, and vile divorce/remarriage scandals. Particularly in regards to their open and notorious (self admitted too!) adultery.
I am particularly stunned there is no national debate at what Cindy McCain might be called should John when the election, as most folks whose morals were fixed in the fifties and sixties will be absolutely repulsed at calling her First Lady.
The controversy over Baby Doll must similarly be just an absolute puzzle to folks raised in the eighties and nineties.
"Baby Doll" might not be as shocking today as it was in the 1950s, but the quasi-pedophilia might still make viewers queasy today. A lot readers freaked out in the 1990s over Vanity Fair's pictures of Madonna dressed up like a little girl.
shareNo, I don't believe it would get either a G or PG rating. Why? Because of it's authenticity. Maybe if this storyline were acted out in a comedy faction, I could see it getting that kind of rating. However, I believe if it were released today, it would probably get an R rating. Morals do not become obsolete.
I live in a glass house, ergo, I throw no stones.
Baby Doll IS a comedy of sorts. A twisted, dark comedy-drama.
When it was released in 1956, the MPAA rating system didn't yet exist. Upon re-release in 1969, it was rated R and hasn't been re-rated since. Today it would probably get a PG-13, but that category wasn't created until 1984.
Baby Doll was made at a time when "adult films" actually meant films for grown-ups, rather than a euphemism for hardcore porn. While it has no nudity, graphic violence, swearing, or explicit sex, Baby Doll is definitely adult in theme, ideas and content. Most people younger than 16 or so probably wouldn't find it all that interesting or entertaining.
All the universe . . . or nothingness. Which shall it be, Passworthy? Which shall it be?
I must agree with you, scotbpens, that it is the kind of comedy you mentioned.
I live in a glass house, ergo, I throw no stones.
morals change, otherwise every other movie released nowadays would be condemned by the Catholic Church. morals change and adapt to the current and modern way of society in America as far as American morals go. that's why nowadays it would get a PG-13 rating instead of an R rating. what do we really have here that is that offensive or morally wrong? we have an almost 20 year old woman who is with a 40 year old man, that's not immoral or sinful.
and most people 16 or a little younger wouldn't find it disturbing or unsettling, so it shouldn't get such a harsh rating like R. they should automatically change it to PG-13 even if it's not resubmitted to the MPAA.
not true. morals do change as we become a part of the current and modern era. otherwise every other movie released nowadays would be condemned by the Catholic Church.
shareexactly that was kind of offensive seeing her as a sex object but also sucking her thumb but if you really think about it she wasn't a little girl she in the movie is about to turn 20 years old she just has a low intelligence. so nothing wrong with a 40 year old guy having a relationship with a 20 or even 18 year old girl. what I dont' understand is why was he spying on her through a peephole at the beginning even though they were in a relationship?
shareWith the penetration of a barely legal girl the big motivation in the movie, it would still not get a G rating.
shareI guess these days PG-13 passes as a family film, which this would surely be rated. This could air on television unedited, though, but they might run a disclaimer about the racial epithets.
share"I guess these days PG-13 passes as a family film" this is not true. but its' interesting how far we've gone down nowadays in terms of morals and family values. I mean sadly most parents would be totally fine with their kids who are under 13 years old watch a PG-13 rated movie and most parents would even be totally fine with their kids who are 13, 14, 15, or 16 years old watch an R rated action movie.
shareThere's no way this would be rated a G. There was too much sexually suggestive content. And come on, the entire premise of the film is that a guy wants to deflower his child bride. How is that a "G", even by today's standards?
---
Emojis=💩 Emoticons=
wait that doesn't make sense. why would he want to do it if he was married to her? why wouldn't he just do it with her?
sharethe entire premise of the film is that a guy wants to deflower his child bride.
Child bride? Are you crazy? She is 19 years old, plenty old enough for carnal relations, let alone with her legal husband, in most any country of the world.
That is my only quibble with the movie. Why sex with a 19-year-old wife was such a big deal. I imagine most girls in Mississippi were having sex at 16 then, and many at 14. Many would already have one or two children by the age of 19.
In fact girls of 15 can be married in Mississippi even today at 15 with parental consent, which was forthcoming in this case. The film would be more realistic if she were around that age.
share
I watched this and found it puzzling because I remember the big deal in 1956 about how shocking and suggestive it was. No, it's a lukewarm wacky comedy that makes no sense. I would rate it G. "Suggestiveness" is in the eye of the beholder, I guess. I am surprised by the reviews even now saying it's erotic, and calling her a "child bride." A child bride is by definition UNDER 18. This character was 19, and her 20th birthday would be the next day. As for the bride sleeping in a crib, it was not a crib by any definition, it was a day bed!!!!! And it was too short for an adult so of course she was all twisted up. Even if they tried to make her look like a child, sucking her thumb in her sleep, she was nearly 20 years old. And the whole plot was that the husband had all the furniture repossessed so it was the only bed in the house. As for the seduction by the Sicilian stranger, really, please spare me. He complimented her skin. So has everyone since the beginning of time complimented youthful skin. This is not seductive. He played hide and seek, made her think the house was haunted by swinging the chandelier, and so on. Yes he planned to have sex with her but if he did, we will never know. It was undetermined and unlikely. Nothing at all shocking or sensual about any of it! It makes me sad for this world that both in 1956 and now, this is considered by some people to be erotic, salacious, or dirty (as Time Magazine said). Wait, the interesting features are as follows: Karl Malden young, yet considered an old man; a folk song I have heard covered by Bob Dylan was played; the "Aunt Mae" character of Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, Madeleine Sherwood, has a small role here; Rip Torn plays a dentist. Carroll Baker never was a major star and never was considered "sexy." If there was an implied seduction scene either on the porch swing or when she sang to "the Sicilian" taking a nap in the "crib", it was cut. Why the "legion of decency" made a huge deal over this, I can't understand.
share[deleted]