You're link is outdated; I'm assuming this is the movie you mean, "Gold": https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1800302/?ref_=ttmi_tt
It's not a sequel though; as McConaughey plays two different people, albeit similar. Like McConaughey, Adam LeFevre also appears in both films as a different character.
In a world where most movies are PG13, sanitized, watered down and most sequels to R rated movies are PG13 to make more money : Terminaturd 5, Die Hard 4, Expendables 3 (that never works) i'm happy to see they're finally doing R rated sequels to PG13 movies!!
The rating of a movie is irrelevant (G, PG, PG-13, R). Does more gore, more nudity, more cussing, more overt sexual situations determine the worthiness of a film? Maybe for 13 year-olds. Is "The Wizard of OZ" a lousy film because it's rated G? How about the original "Planet of the Apes"?
reply
share
[deleted]
5 years ago
Movie ratings were a little different at the beginning of the MPAA system.
"Planet of the Apes" and "The Andromeda Strain" certainly wouldn't be rated G today, as G is basically considered to be specifically for kids these days, whereas at one time it really was for "General audiences" as the rating was supposed to mean. General audiences include grown-ups, after all.
reply
share
Wuchak (8110)
5 years ago
Yeah, "Planet of the Apes" would be like PG today, I guess. It's adult-oriented with mature concepts -- definitely not kiddie-oriented -- and yet I remember loving it as a kid. I could always tell movies that were manufactured with kids as the target audience and they turned me off.
reply
share