I read on this forum about the 'sexual content' being partial nudity and the parental advisory is not yet posted so why the 'R' rating?
My parents want to go see it with me but I'd like to have a heads up before I go. It just says 'for language and sexual content' but 'R' rating seems a bit extreme for just partial nudity and a bit of profanity, don't you think?
Probably because it's a gay movie. It's a sad truth. You'll notice that most of the movies here http://www.gsanetwork.org/resources/posters-movies-and-more/recommende d-movies are rated R or not rated at all. Those are movies that are recommended for schools for a gay-straight alliance. Despite, the insistence by the Christian right that Hollywood has some sort of gay agenda, Hollywood does their best to hide films that deal with the subject.
sharethey probably could have argued with the MPAA ratings group to get the movie to PG-13 but they didn't. why? because they probably wanted an R rated film.
I bet they got that rating for all that implied sex with Ewan and Laurent. fornication = R.
"Tara: Stop with that treachery! I told the cat. And now I beg my mother sitting all alone."
The nudity consists of about 5 milliseconds of a female breast being shown from the side as a top is removed. There is zero other nudity or even any gay sexual activity. There is straight and gay kissing. Pretty chaste, actually. Having seen the film four hours ago, I can only conclude that the R rating is, indeed, due to the focus on gay characters. As for profanity, there is one brief moment in which a group of characters yell "F1ck!" at a party for a laugh. That's it. I don't even remember a single other swear word uttered by anybody. The rating is otherwise perplexing.
"Thank you, thank you--you're most kind. In fact you're every kind."
You say the F word enough, and you'll get a R rating.
shareI took my daughter to several PG movies when she was a child. Also to several PG-13 movies which, after careful consideration, I decided she was mature enough to comprehend without too much confusion or adverse reaction to the contents of the movie.
I also took her to a few R rated movies which, once she was 13 and older, and after much consideration, I deemed the same as above.
I never took her to an NC-17 movie. This is because I felt any movie rated stronger than an R rating could wait until she was certainly an adult who had already sorted through many of the emotional and ethical issues displayed in less volatile presentations.
This is what a parent does, if one truly understands the responsibility of guiding a young mind and heart, rather than plopping them in front of a TV, tossing books at them to avoid interactive discussion or giving them movie money without any further involvement.
This said, I would like to point out that I LOVED this movie, and would only have taken my daughter to it at around the age of 15.
This is due to the use of the F word multiple times and, yes, the bare breast which still showed nipple even though from the side view, and, in a young one's mind, those few seconds are a lifetime of exposure, trust me, I was young once, and I remember it well.
And, yes, she was allowed to go to movies with her friends as well as family time with me.
It is funny, but very true, that young minds are able to handle ethical issues much more maturely than nudity. I do not take nudity lightly because I love nudity and it is an important part of sexuality which should not be thrown at us until it no longer provides the same erotic responses it once did, but new responses of a gruffer kind.
What I don't understand is why there is an issue about a strong rating. If you are an adult, it should not stop you from seeing the movie! If you are a child, your parents should be happy that theaters will not allow you in to see it without adult supervision. If you are a parent who would rather your child be able to see R movies without an adult, which is the only reason I can think of why someone would be inconvenienced by the R rating, then shame on you for failing to be an active part of your child's growing years.
-----
Backseat Producers can't simply enjoy movies. They nitpick & complain about every imperfection.
As a gay man I think everybody here is off. I doubt very much that this got the R cause gay men are in it! The only gay activity in this is a few minor gay kisses which you can see on prime time TV! There is swearing and even though Laurent's nudity is brief that can be enough to give it an R rating. Also the subject matter is pretty extreme and, if I recall, there was sexual dialogue between McGregor and Laurent. Believe me--I'm the first one to protest if a film gets an R rating because of gay characters--but I don't think that's the case here. However it DOES deserve a PG-13.
shareThe use of the "F" word will get you a "R" rating. The minimum for an "R" was two instances of the word. As there was the fireworks scene and that is about all they said, that is what warranted the "R". Also, the partial breast of Laurent would have just gotten the movie a "PG-13" had it not been for the "F" word.
I do not believe that anything having to do with the gay subject matter was enough, only if they had shown simulated sex, which they did not.
That was definitely it. If they use that word more than once, it automatically gets an R rating.
Frankly, there was more nudity in The Right Stuff than this, and that got a PG back in the day.
That was definitely it. If they use that word more than once, it automatically gets an R rating.This is not necessarily true. There is a widespread, though incorrect, notion that if the "f-word" gets used more than once in a movie, the MPAA automatically gives that movie an R-rating. In fact, there have been many movies that have used the word multiple (in one case, 42) times and still received the PG-13 rating. The MPAA says it evaluates the context of the use, and professes to have no hard-and-fast rule regarding the number of times it is allowed. Since that is the case, and given the MPAA's well-known double standard regarding depictions of heterosexuality versus analogous depictions of homosexuality, I am afraid that pwilliz may be right that this movie got an R largely because some of the sexuality in it is gay. share
Which movie was that (that used the F word 42 times and got a PG-13 movie)?
I've done my research and while it is possible to use the F word a few times and still be PG-13 - the general consensus is that they can only use it once (maybe twice).
then explain the descendents? no nudity, no violence just the f word a few times and yet it has an R rating.
"Tara: Stop with that treachery! I told the cat. And now I beg my mother sitting all alone."
the word *beep* is said about 5 times, and there is like 2.1 seconds of slightly jiggly side boob. thats about it. but it's not like they were really gunning for a pg-13, its a pretty somber film, but ultimately one that is refreshing and hopeful
on my way to ignoring the entire population of imdb
I know they claim you can only say the F-word a couple times to keep a PG-13, but no one seems to recall the film Permanent Record from 1988, which used the F-word FIVE times in it and was only PG-13.
shareHow dumb is the ratings system that a couple instances of the F-word necessitates an R rating, which prohibits minors from viewing the film (theoretically), yet minors use the word far, far more frequently than most adults?
And for that matter why is there not an option in IMDB to disable profanity filters? I don't need a nanny, I make my own decisions thank you very much!
The film shows two characters painting graffiti on walls, and it's depicted as "fun". That scofflaw attitude may, or may not, be a factor.
Pretend something clever is written here.
The F-bombs would have been enough for an R rating. Several repetitions during the fireworks scene, plus the recitation of the most explicit lines of Ginsberg's Howl "who let themselves be *** in the *** by saintly motorcyclists" (that alone would probably rate it R).
shareThere's no violence in the movie. But the f word is used numermous times and at least one time referring to the sexual act. Plus we see the girlfriend's breast as she is putting her top on (I didn't think that was necessary, plus I'd rather see Ewan naked, he's a hot guy). I think it's ok that the movie is R as it is a movie obviously aimed at adults.
shareI was asking myself the same thing, I don't think this merits an R but then again as one poster said this is aimed at adults anyway.
Estas ahÃ?
Exactly. In the DVD commentary to Gosford Park Robert Altmans says he deliberately went for an R rating because he really didn't want kids in the audience. The same thing may have happened here.
shareIn Germany it's rated "FSK 0" wich means no restriction whatsoever. a three-year-old could come and see it on his own. That's how prude the US is!
shareIf only they could have been MORE "prudish" so that we could have been freed of seeing moronic exhibitionists on film and their always unnecessary nudity.
sharenudity is not always unnecessary. It's sex scenes with women still wearing their bras that are unnecessary. jeez.
why act at all and not just have people recite their lines if actually portraying things realistically is so "unnecessary"?
If you don't like nudity, don't watch movies containing nudity. IMDb has parental advisory notes for most releases, so just check to see if it has nudity before you watch it. Or just stick to PG-13 films. It's not like anyone's putting a gun to your head and forcing you to watch movies containing nudity.
I don't particularly like to eat eggplant, but I'm not egotistical enough to expect that all supermarkets stop carrying eggplants just so I can be "freed of" eating nasty-ass eggplants.
You sound like those lame ass Christian/Muslim fundamentalists who think just because their religion forbids them from doing something, that everyone in the world should be forbidden from doing it.
I think its mostly because of the gay thing, otherwise its the F work combined with the couple of seconds of 'side breast' when she gets out of bed
share[deleted]