MovieChat Forums > Stripes (1981) Discussion > Did this film really need to be rated R?

Did this film really need to be rated R?

posted 3 years ago by MovieChatUser497 (18943)
22 replies | jump to latest

Now before you say it I am not suggesting that this film is PG material, it isn't, my point is does the adult content really make the film any better? I honestly think they could have taken out the 4 F-bombs (well actually leave in the one where Murray says "have you ever seen a monk get wildly f-cked", that was actually funny), the nudity and the drug content and the film would still be just as funny. I don't think the adult content makes Stripes any funnier. In contrast let's take a movie like National Lampoon's Vacation, Clark's F-Bomb outburst in the car is the funniest scene in the movie, the profanity was part of the joke and it had a point: it was showing how desperate Clark was to have family fun and it showed that he was on the verge of losing his mind with everything that had gone wrong so far. If you remove the profanity like they do on ABC Family Channel the scene is not funny at all, but in the uncut version it's hilarious. In Stripes however the adult content I thought was gratuitous and didn't make it any funnier and if that's the case they should have just edited it down to a PG. Plenty of movies are funny and have a PG rating (Monty Python and the Holy Grail, Airplane, Ghostbusters, Dr. Strangelove, etc.)

reply

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7401) 3 years ago

I'm pretty sure the Fbomb you mention is considered sexual in nature so, that would already make it an R. Also it's been a while since I watched it but I am pretty sure there are shots of women's boobs in the shower scene.

reply

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

That wasn't my point, did the shots of the women's boobs in the shower make the movie funnier? In my opinion it didn't therefore it would have been better to just not show that scene and make a PG cut. If the boobs in the shower served a purpose then by all means leave them in.

There are PG movies with one F-bomb in them (Spaceballs, Beetlejuice, Big, etc.)

reply

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7401) 3 years ago

I wasn't talking about what's funny. The Fbomb you mentioned would make it R and the scene of nudity makes it R too and so therefore you'd have to take all that out of the movie to make it PG.

reply

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

So then do you think they should have been taken out? Unless they serve a purpose or make the movie funny I think they should be taken out. I don't think they did make the movie funny so if that's the case they'd might as well just cut it down to a PG.

reply

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7401) 3 years ago

I'd be fine with it. Though honestly I don't really care for this movie that much. I feel like both Harold Ramis and Bill Murray are idiots in it and I don't really feel sympathetic towards either of them. And it's a shame because I like other movies with them.

reply

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

Eh there are some funny moments, I actually liked Murray, Ramis and Candy, but Larroquette (sp?) really brings it down and in the final act things kind of fall apart.

reply

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7401) 3 years ago

I'd agree with that. The whole stealing the armed vehicle and then going and rescuing all their friends feels forced.

reply

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

Not to mention both Murray and Ramis would have gone to prison, they shouldn’t have been hailed as heroes as they were just correcting their own f-ck up. But as far as all of the dirty humor goes it comes across as the film just trying to be dirty for the sake of it which is actually a very childish approach, it’s the equivalent of a bunch of kids giggling at a playboy

reply

[–] csweetleaf2 (3537) 3 years ago

I agree Larraquette's character wasn't very likable and came across a total whiner, the movie was great up until the graduation scene, I was happy to see Larraquette's character not getting a happy ending.

reply

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

Well Ted Knights character on caddyshack the previous year was also not very likeable but there’s a difference: Ted Knight was funny

Edit; although I do admit Laroquette did have one funny line when he tripped and then he said something like “have that removed”

reply

[–] csweetleaf2 (3537) 3 years ago

I also liked Larraquette's line where he claims he wishes he was a loofah while looking at the girls bathing, the scene where he gets on a soldier's case for refusing to fire because he wasn't sure where to fire the coordinate was when i've started not to like him anymore.

reply

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

Yeah the shower scene I thought was pointless and immature but the worse thing was it wasn’t funny IMO

reply

[–] csweetleaf2 (3537) 3 years ago

I actually enjoyed the shower scene because I thought it was funny seeing Stillman being so incompetent as a Captain soldier, didn't he get demoted at the end of the film?

reply

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

Yeah he ended up being assigned to the Arctic Circle, in the words of Tony Montana "dress warm". But the shower scene just seemed immature and unnecessary to me, there are other ways to show his incompetence, in National Lampoons Vacation Clark is shown to be incompetent and it's done in a far more subtle, clever and funny manner.

reply

[–] csweetleaf2 (3537) 3 years ago

I thought the Colonel was being a jerk towards Stillman for telling him that if he screws up the EM50 project he's gonna be assigned to the Arctic Circle as a punishment, I can see why Stillman wasn't happy when Hulka's men were assigned to guard the EM50

reply

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

Yeah I think Stillman had a history of incompetence which is why I wonder why he hadn't been demoted?

reply

[–] FFNogoodnik (770) 2 years ago

They could have kept the shower scene just not shown the nudity.

reply

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 2 years ago

I didn’t even think the shower scene was funny. Sometimes making the joke dirty kills the joke.

reply

[–] ExTechOp (2741) 2 years ago

I recall a number of big 80s comedies had tacked on "adult" content specifically to get an R rating.

PG was deemed too "tame" for the comedy demographic back before PG-13 was a thing.

I actually believe this film *IS* indeed PG material, at least as far as the plot and humor go. The shower scene would've been just as funny, possibly even funnier, if we'd never seen Stillman's telescope view.

I believe the same could be said of "The Blues Brothers," "Caddyshack," "Trading Places" and "Coming to America."

I'd make an exception though if the otherwise-PG film had a necessary scene that was R-material. I'd point to "Planes, Trains and Automobiles" as my prime example. It's a PG plot (not even PG-13) with a single, essential and arguably perfect scene that earns a hard "R."

reply

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 2 years ago

Yes you are correct however the 19 word F Bomb scene in Planes Trains and Automobiles A) Had a point (showing Neil’s exploding frustration) and B) Was funny. The shower scene was neither.

reply

[–] Ripkens25 (1901) 2 years ago

The shower scene/nudity doesn’t NEED to be funny. It’s titillating. Remember, this movie was made before porn was omnipresent. Heck, finding a Playboy was like finding the Hope Diamond.

The movie is all low-brow, crude humor...geared primarily for a specific demo: teenage and college age boys.

A goofy, ridiculous, contrived and slapstick movie.....aiming for kids who love sophomoric movies.....is even better....with nudity. It helps check all the boxes for what would make a movie for that demo entirely enjoyable.

Was the nudity in Fast Times at Ridgemont High needed? Maybe not. It could have been inferred and the joke would still work. However....WITH that overt and gratuitous nude scene (Phoebe Cates removing her top)....it helped elevate the movie big time. And that scene became a classic.

But heck, I’ll even make the argument that gratuitous nudity in lesser movies make them entirely more enjoyable and bearable. Porky’s....better with nudity than without. Zapped.....better with nudity than without.

I’d go on and on, but instead...I’m going to go play the Stripes shower scene frame by frame. Does it add to the humor? (I actually think it does). But even if it didn’t....who the eff cares?? Seeing beautiful naked bodies in a shower soaping each other up....is better than NOT seeing beautiful naked bodies soaping each other up. Easy math.

I’m not watching Stripes for Shakespeare. I’m watching it for some escapist fun, some silly laughs and sure, some titillation.

reply

[–] SandyR (7341) 2 years ago

You don't seem to understand how much less uptight people were in 1981. Folks wanted to see boobs and a little bush and they understood people use colorful language. Much less Puritanical back then.

reply