why rated R - My Left Foot: The Story of Christy Brown (1990) Discussion

[–] saffym 16 years ago

I just finished watching it and as far as I can tell, the only reason it would have an R rating is because the word *beep* is used maybe a dozen times.

You mean what's silverware doing in the pancake drawer.

reply

[–] SAVA1224 16 years ago

wow the word beep....that's unbelievable I can't belief the vulgar filth and offensive garbage they allow in film

what's next the word....censored

it's all downhill from here

reply

[–] jp_palomba 16 years ago

I'd have to say... probably the dozen or so F bombs, the 2-second fully nude female picture in the magazine, and the drinking. But I think the MPAA rating system should go back and retroactively re-rate every movie to current standards.

This movie today would be... PG 13.

reply

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Batman5833 16 years ago

Ocean's 11 had two, and it was PG 13, but one was the asian guy and you couldn't really hear what he was saying. Titanic was PG 13 and it had that whole scene with Kate Winslet

reply

[–] KTope 12 years ago

Kate Winslet topless is not on par with the full frontal photo in this movie.

You see, how it works is, that dark patch of hair that is way different that other human hair is the only thing covering skin that is way different that the skin on the rest of the human body. I would love to be there when someone tries to explain this line of reasoning to an extraterrestrial visitor someday.

I am Jack's IMDb post.

reply

[–] KTope 12 years ago

Kate Winslet topless is not on par with the full frontal photo in this movie.

You see, how it works is, that dark patch of hair that is way different that other human hair is the only thing covering skin that is way different that the skin on the rest of the human body. I would love to be there when someone tries to explain this line of reasoning to an extraterrestrial visitor someday.

I am Jack's IMDb post.

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] quack_a_roni 16 years ago

And only about 6 of those dozen times it is used can you tell that that is what is being said.

The R rating may be because the MPAA might consider it mature subject matter, but honestly, I think it would be fine as PG-13

...go out there and win one for the Gipper.

reply

[–] temptresstoo-1 8 years ago

But you can hardly understand any of the "bleeps" being said. :D

reply

[–] zgin1 16 years ago

funny little six degrees thing here, check out this little tidbit (different movie, same actor, same subject we are talking about)::

There Will Be Blood was originally given a 12A rating in the UK, meaning that children of any age could see it, with adult supervision if they were younger than 12. In a curious move, the distributors subsequently appealed to the British Board of Film Classification to consider raising the certificate. The BBFC agreed, and the film was subsequently uprated to a more restrictive 15, preventing anyone under that age from being admitted to screenings regardless of parental supervision.

reply

[–] Miss_Weasley_Potter 16 years ago

I think this movie was most likely rated 'R' because of amount of Fs and some drinking and, geez, I didn't even notice any naked women !

Ask your child what he wants for dinner only if he’s buying- Fran Lebowitz

reply

[–] wontgetfooledagain17 16 years ago

it's extremely brief, they kids are looking at a dirty magazine for a grand total of like two seconds, if you look away you'd miss it.

i'm okay with being unimpressive, i sleep better

reply

[–] zevotoys 12 years ago

"Hero" with Dustin Hoffman and Geena Davis was rated PG-13 and I counted a total of 8 uses of @#$%. This was made in 1992. "American President" with Michael Douglas had 3 uses and was rated PG-13. This was made in 1995. These both had intense dramatic and sexual situations, and the MPAA still made light of these situations. Apparently kids these days can handle intense subject matter and adults have everything sugarcoated...America

reply

[–] Brysonashultz 16 years ago

I disagree about the subject matter. The Elephant Man had similar, if not more mature, subject matter and it only recieved a PG rating. I agree with the f-word philosophy. However, I read that a PG-13 film can have up to four f-words depending on the context in which it is used.

"It rubs the lotion on it's skin, or else it gets the hose again." - The Silence of the Lambs

reply

[–] ColossOkami91 16 years ago

Hey Bryson. the kite runner has the f word a couple times, but they are all in once scene: Baba(making a toast): f the russia! a couple guys: f the russia.

"Pig n a poke." - Dean

reply

[–] Doc80 16 years ago

That's right Bryson. I don't know what the limit is on the word use in total because there is a point when it's an automatic R. But if you use the word in reference to sex I believe it can only be said once, anymore after that and it's R.

One other note, I saw people mentioning the drinking. This movie was made in 1989, the ratings board didn't really do anything about heavy drinking in a movie. Plus it's accurate because the main part of the movie features a poor Irish family around the time of WWII and after.

reply

[–] Strong_Mad 16 years ago

Like said before, about a dozen F-words and brief mature subject matter. Why that's worse than the violence that appears in PG-13 movies today, I'll never know; if I ran the system I'd be OK with this being a heavy PG or light PG-13.

A squid eating dough in a polyethylene bag is fast and bulbous. Got me?

reply

[–] bringbacktheblue 15 years ago

I think another part is that with an R rating they can somewhat control their audience. I've read somewhere that Altman put cursing in Gosford Park only to get the R rating, because he didn't make a movie for younger people. That may not be the case, but I don't think I would've appreciated this film as a young teenager as I do now.

My DVD Collection:
http://www.dvdaficionado.com/dvds.html?cat=1&id=bringbacktheblue

reply

[–] granwyth-1 15 years ago

The F-word is used several times, and some scenes depict heavy alcohol abuse. For the most part I think the film's rating is due to its mature subject matter. This is definitely not a popcorn flick, it is a character driven film that explores the human condition and is therefore not really suited(IMHO)for the average teenager, of course there are many teenagers mature enough to grasp the content of the film. As far as objectionable material goes I think the film should be rated PG-13, there are far worse scenes in The Dark Knight, and the Indiana Jones films than this one.

reply

[–] rockmail 14 years ago

"R" does not mean "BAD". It means that there may be material that you wish to filter from certain audience members (usually children) by not having them attend the movie. It's all just fine for adults. Nothing to do with "Bad".

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] geoffrey-jackson 11 years ago

I would go along with the others and say it's because of all the F words. To be honest, I didn't realise this film was R rated until I noticed this thread.

It reminded me of a film I watched recently while listening to the commentary. It might have been Ryan's Daughter (1970) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0066319/. Anyhow, in the commentary they said that they deliberately included the required number of F words in order to make the film R rated. Had they not done so they thought it would be more widely watched and generally less well appreciated. The same ploy might have been used in this film.