The constant mortal peril faced by the main kid in this movie--particularly at the hands of the perverse couple--makes this the very type of film for which NC-17 should apply. Trauma would be a reasonable response from many under-17 year old children, upon viewing this movie. Parents surely have the option of sharing it with their kid if they choose, but the warning that rating would offer would be appropriate.
shareThat's an interesting point. I just saw this tonight for the first time, and I have to agree that it was traumatic. It was like the setting was a special trauma universe, where every place you go, all you see is truly horrible people doing truly despicable things. There was not only the abused child under constant threat of being raped/killed, but also those horrifying zombie-like children living with the pedophile/child-porn couple, as well as constant threats against completely innocent women. I mean... the protagonist put a gun in the face of a woman holding a baby, and threatened her to get information about a guy whose only crime was finding a gun and taking it. And the protagonist was by far the least evil man in the movie. He also burned a guy to get information. And that guy hadn't really broken any laws other than fighting with the protagonist (using a blowtorch).
To me, there is no number of blown up buildings or shot up gangsters that should move a film beyond R to NC-17. But this kind of trauma and constant threat of rapes and murders against women and children... yeah... that seems kinda NC-17ish to me.
Good point.
When I was your age, television was called books!
That's because it's a fairy tale. The original kind.
Are you not entertained?!
Its surprising that it was not. Im glad it got the R though.
share