The PG-13 Complaint

I'd complain if the movie was rated R and it was this exact product of film. It was always rated pg-13 as far as I knew about it so I knew it was going to be virtually gore-less (which it exactly was) However that's no excuse for the lack of comedy in the movie.

 I apologize for any spelling/grammar mistakes. I'm on my phone 90% of the time.

I think the complaint is more that the PG rating SHOWS. It's clearly watered down and it's a very shallow spoof of the genre because it couldn't go any further than it does. I assumed it was R rated until I started watching it and I quickly realised this wasn't really aimed at slasher fans. It doesn't need gore or nudity, but I felt it was a wasted idea because it decided to go for marketable rather than great. I don't think it's really disrespecting the genre or its fans, but is instead aiming itself at a different crowd.

Aristotle versus Mashy Spike Plate!

I'm fine with it heing rated PG-13. I do think wn R rating would've made it better though. The movie is an homage to 80's slasher movies. Those were all rated R. Which means Camp Bloodbath would be rated R. So to me, playing with the fact that they are in a rated R movie could've added to the comedy.You could've had more over the top kills. You could've played with language. I just feel that if you're going to pay homage to a type of movie, you need to have the same rating as it. There could've been a stipulation that the movie had to be PG-13, to get it made. I do think wn R rating would've made the movie a little better though. Not a hard R, where it's all of a sudden a cursefest or wall to wall nudity, but that is part of the slasher world. It would be like making a movie that is an homage to 80's teen sex comedies, like Porky's or Revenge of the Nerds and making it PG-13. You lose some of the homage in that.

And I'm more disappointed in the casting of Adam Devine. He's not a bad actor and funny in some things I've seen him in, but he was horribly miscast. I get that he's playing off type and that's part of the joke, but again you're playing on homage and a stereotype or the jock/bully character and if you cast a good looking, athletic guy, it would've played better. You needed a Billy Zabka type or like a young Kevin Bacon or someone like that. Adam Driver would've killed it.

more gore wouldnt fit the style

A homage to slashers should have some of the things a slasher has, don't ya think? this movie was a whiny little teenage girl crying about her dead mom. they didn't need to bring the slasher genre into it, if all it was going to be was be an extremely poor catalyst for the daughter/mom plot. It was bad, sorry to burst your bubble. But you're wrong.

The problem is that to capture the essence of the 80's slasher films you need to have the exploitation of women's bodies... that was part and parcel of the genre, lots of T&A followed by cheesy murder... To make a film that doesn't have those two things is like making a spoof of a western movie without horses or cowboys, kind of pointless.

I have no issues with the films rating. It could have upped the gore/nudity and been just as entertaining, but the PG-13 rating certainly doesn't hurt the film.



America isnt ready for a gay mexican chicken sandwich - Poultrygeist

lol these people complaining about a lack of gore should go back and rewatch the early slashers like Halloween, Friday the 13th etc, and notice the conspicuous lack of gore for themselves.

Fact is, this felt like an R movie just from the content alone.

I'm surprised about the rating myself--I'm sure they just set out to make a film and then took what they were given.