Is there a R rated Disney movie?

Well Disney owns Buena Vista so yes there have been R rated disney movies. Just under a different name.

Hell have no fury like revenge of a middle-aged woman.---Tracy Byrd.

Whether they have done R rated moives or not, Disney, in my opinion, just cant seem to keep up with the industry. Sure they may be doing the whole "family" thing, but seriously, they could step it up a notch.

oh, and i'm sure if my brain was working at the moment, i could think of Disney movies with "*beep*" words as you so put it, in them.



and with that, i say farewell, goodnight and may you know the truth.

I'm not sure about R, but I'm pretty sure Pirates of the Carribean was the first PG-13 film to be labeled directly under the disney license.

"Mein Fuhrer! I can walk!"

One of the main ideas behind the Disney subsidiary studios like Buena Vista, Touchstone (actually a subsidiary of Buena Vista, so a subsidiary of a subsidiary of Disney, so "twice removed"), an especially Miramax is to allow for the production of R-rated movies without having the Disney name go directly on them. The whole idea is to have a certain identity with each coroprate name, so that each produces films apropriate to its coproprate identity.

The Bette Midler film mentioned elsewhere in this thread is probably "Down and Out in Beverly Hills" or "Ruthless People" (both 1986), produced by Disney underlings Silver Screen Partners and Touchstone, and distributed by Buena Vista. The same is true of "The Color of Money" (also 1986), "D.O.A." and "Shoot to Kill" (1988). "Taking Care of Business" (1990) was from Holywood Pictures and Silver Screen.

Touchstone was in on the first Deuce Begelow movie (1999), but dumped out on the sequel, "Deuce Bigelow, European Gigolo" (2005) turning it over to Sony, due to its raunchy content.

Don't take my cursory research to be conclusive by any means, but here's a telling bit of info: as of the year 2000, Disney decided not even allow the showing of previews for R-rated moviesin theaters showing Disney-branded movies. Furthermore, ABC, another Disney subsidiary, does not show previews for R-rated films before 9:00 p.m. (as reported on the American Public Radio show "Marketplace" on 12 September, 2000). So, all in all, I can't say that Disney NEVER produced an R-rated film, but I seem to recall some other discussion of the question, and that the upshot of that discussion was that they haven't, and don't do so as a matter of policy.

-EdM.

The Buena Vista company distributed the movie "From Dusk Till Dawn"

It depends on what you mean by "made." The animated "Clerks" was rated R and Disney Animation was listed as a production company.

For starters, to my knowledge Disney and Buena Vista have never *produced* a movie with an R rating (though I suppose the "Clerks" TV series counts even if it was only rated R for the DVD release). In the cases of Ruthless People and Down and out in Beverly Hills, those movies were only *distributed* by Buena Vista. Though they're still valid to this discussion b/c regardles of whether a movie is produced or distributed by a given company, their name still appears prominently on the final product. And it's the name -- more to the point, the *image* -- of the company or subsidary that Disney is worried about protecting.

There have been a number of good examples given so far that Disney or one of it's subsidaries has distributed R-rated or otherwise "sensitive" movies in the past, but I just remembered two much more recent example of how they passionately avoid being associated with such movies.

First, anyone remember when Kevin Smith's Dogma was being prepared for distribution through Miramax and how the whole Disney family went apesh!t over it? Miramax almost axed the movie b/c of it's sensitive subject matter and it's R rating due to their position under the Disney family umbrella. In the end I believe Disney (via Miramax) refused to distribute the film in the United States and instead it went to theaters through Columbia/TriStar and Lions Gate.

The other (and probably better) example is Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 project in which Disney did everything in it's power to stop Miramax from working with Moore on the project. And, unlike the Dogma scenario, Miramax was *producing* the film and fought bitterly and managed to release it anyway (once again distributed domestically through Columbia/TriStar and Lions Gate). In fact, the fight was apparently so bitter that for all purposes it was the the end of the Disney/Miramax partnership.

On the other hand, as someone mentioned earlier, the twisted gore-fest From Dusk Till Dawn was technically part of the Disney family. It was produced by Miramax and later distributed on video by Buena Vista (not in theaters though, that was done by Dimension who are no strangers to R-rated violence). As far as Miramax goes, that was early on in their relationship with Disney so I can only guess that some over-the-top movies still made it to production and distribution back in those days despite the Disney alliance. As far as the later video distribution by Buena Vista goes, I'm stumped on that one. I wouldn't think they'd touch that one with a ten foot pole.

So the point being, Disney does have branches like Miramax (or rather *had* in that case) that are meant to handle movies that clearly fall outside the "family" and "children" classifications, but those subsidaries have limits of their own that are imposed by Disney. And that means avoiding R-rated or otherwise sensistive material. At least until that subsidary gives them the middle finger and splits. :)

There was a pg-13 disney movie, cool runnnings.