I see that it is rated PG but I heard that there is violence and nudity in it. Is that true?
It has a few seconds worth of naked bottoms and a guy getting hit in the head with a stone (not actually shown -it's not a gore-film).
However, I'd hope that adults would talk with kids about this sort of film as the sheer creepiness of some of the stories could lead to nightmares.
Time is the fire in which we burn.
Meet me @ www.trekbbs.com
Non-sexual skinny-dipping scenes of men (bare bottoms)
Single shot (posed to hide anything distasteful) showing the full body illustration of Carl.
Camera following Carl as he walks around naked (bare bottom)
Scene of married couple in bed, both naked but highly obscured, no significant 'action' but implying it.
Some hand-to-hand scuffles, resulting in blood and injury. It is not like someone hacks of an arm with a chainsaw, but you do see a more realistic violent act.
Suicide, peaceful and non-graphic.
The central character is a strong and unpredictable alpha that could be a scary nightmare figure for young children.
There is some discussion about sex but kept in the allusive language of adults using phrases such as "touch you" and "trying to get laid".
Nothing gratuitous, explicit, or needlessly graphic.
But the larger danger of showing this to kids is the themes.
There is some non-sexual, but highly emotional interplay between men resulting in the above violence. The two well-developed characters perform or are subject to violence noted above that would be difficult to explain.
There are some events that I cannot mention (spoil) that would also be difficult to explain to children; they involve the relationship between children and parents.
I would say PG-13 or so. And well worth discussion with kids if they even pay attention to it.
Back in 1969 the rating system was less then two years old.
PG started as "M" then became GP, and then at last PG.
In any case they used to get away with more in the above ratings Matter of fact look how Beneath the Planet of the Apes was so bloody more so at the end and also the mutant scared humans and it got a "G", a showing some years back on one of the cable stations still had a G.
Over all back in the 1970s some features that should have been R got PG and some R films you couldn't understand why they were R. i.e. "Psychic Killer" should have been R and yet it was PG it had lots of both bloody and gore, plus a very sexy scene with a bimbo nurse
See some stars here
http://www.vbphoto.biz/
and what about Blood and Lace(1970)? The sickest film to ever get a PG rating.
shareYes saw that one a very stupid film sad way for Gloria Grahame to end her career.
And we were to take Melody Patterson as being only 20?
See some stars here
http://www.vbphoto.biz/
I saw "Blood and Black Lace" at a drive-in playing with "The Abomninable Dr. Phibes" way back when I was 8. "Phibes" didn't bother me but "Blood" did. The kid getting killed with the ax and the girl locked in the freezer haunted me for days afterwards. HOW did that get a PG???
shareI wonder if maybe there are payoffs sometimes
See some stars here
http://www.vbphoto.biz/
I seriously doubt this film would hold a child's interest for more than 10 seconds.
Right, then, old chap. Large brandies all around, what?
I've added information to the parent's guide -
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0064473/parentalguide
* God is an imaginary friend for adults. *