When will the recent pussification of action movies stop?

[Dangerous J]

whats with all these action sequels being PG-13 when their predecessors were R-rated films?

AVP series, Terminator4, Die Hard 4, Robocop remake(rumored),
Beverly Hills Cop4 (rumored)....

Now I know the suits want PG-13 so more kids can see it, but its not like the original movies did bad at R rating.
Also, the R rating didnt stop merchandising from happening.
Hell, I think T2 and Alien3 had toylines and such when they were released.

the recent Rambo film and Matrix, 300, Sin city were action heavy films and did relatively well,
So why this mass neutering of action films?

discuss.

[DavDz]

Wait, there's a rumored Beverly Hills Cop 4?

[Kusanagi02]

Cause Hollywood feels that making movies PG-13 will make it appeal to everyone as opposed to making it R-rated.

Hopefully that Wanted movie will change it cause its actually R-rated.

[DavDz]

Even though its R-rated, that Wanted movie still looks like shit

[jae hoon]

Because PG-13 movies make more money, at least that is the belief. You can get parents to bring their kids to a PG-13 movie as opposed to an R Rated film. It is all about profit and trying to maximize it, even at the expense of the movie. They really dont care about how good the movie is, they just care about how much money it makes.

[scum gale 88]

I wish Paul Verhoven was making the Robocop remake, you KNOW he would go for a hard R rating.

[Gumbercules]

Die Hard 4 was awesome for a PG13 though, but action movies should take the Rambo 4 route

[DavDz]

I never saw Rambo 4. Was it shitty?

[uknowuwishuwereme]

^fuck No.

[Gord]

You try to pay off a movie with an almost 70 million dollar budget with an R rating today.

[DavDz]

Or, you could take a page from The Happening's book, and make it half-assed

[Swoops]

AVP2 was R and sucked horribly, I mean the gore and most of the action was pretty cool, but it was so hard not to laugh whenever anybody said something...actually I did laugh when anybody said something :p. Live Free or Die Hard was fucking bad ass and up there with the original, didn't matter that it was PG-13. I'm not exactly okay with going for a PG-13 rating to grab more people and I'd rather have them do whatever they want and slap an R rating on there if they have to. But Die Hard 4 proved you don't need the R rating to make a kick-ass action movie.

Wait...a robocop remake? How the hell did I not hear about this? Off to IMDb

[EvilSamurai]

A PG-13 rating means teenagers will actually PAY to see it instead of buying a ticket to some kids flick and sneaking in. The same thing is also happening to horror films. A PG-13 "slasher" flick is not a slasher flick. Look at the Hitcher remake for example. It was just Sean Bean showing up for a quick payday (he should really get to playing Snake in MGS: The Movie) and sucked balls.

- About RoboCop, Verhoeven's original cut was NC-17/X. It also had toys and shit made for it back in the day. RoboCop 2 was also barely an R and was somewhat watchable. RoboCop 3 just sucked balls. Actually, when you think about it, almost all of Verhoeven's good movies had to be cut down in order to get an R rating.
- Die Hard 4 was literally recut at the last minute by the studio according to the director (I forgot his name. He is married to Kate Beckinsale). When you watch the R/Unrated DVD it feels much more like a Die Hard movie even though it still is not as good as the original trilogy with the Brothers Gruber and an Oliver North-knockoff. Maggie Q should have been the main villain instead of the lame Timothy Olyphant dude who uses a computer to cast magic spells or something.

die hard 4 apologist

:tdown: Fail as Timothy Olyphant /= Alan Rickman. Hell even the Oliver North and Noriega knockoffs in 2 were infinitely better than Olyphant.

[orochizoolander]

Wow I thought this was obvious. If you make a movie pg13 then you make it more available to the masses which means more money which is what making movies is all about.

Also in recent years pg13 movies have been dipping into content previously only shown in R movies so there's not a HUGE difference between the two like there was 10 years ago.

[breakinmunkie]

This shit had bothered me for the longest, especially the alien vs. predator movie. How the fuck can you make a movie like this pg-13 when the previous five movies (the alien trilogy and both predator movies) were rated R and badass to boot? I refuse to watch avp for that reason. It's a damn shame because I think of what the movie could've been. Aside from the rant, an article I read a few years back pretty much stated that the Columbine drama is the reason that movies are watered down these days. Hell, what's rated R now was pretty much pg-13 back in the 80's and 90's. After Columbine happened, the MPAA turned bitch and started to make directors tone down their content to prevent another Columbine from taking place, hence the "director's cut" versions that come out months after the MPAA approved version and the new hard R bullshit, which really makes no damn sense to me. Also, I didn't know that Robocop was originally NC-17, or that Live Free or Die Hard was pg-13, and I went to see it. Can anyone tell me what made Robocop NC-17?

[MrQuotes]

no it wont

[pherai]

Also, I didn't know that Robocop was originally NC-17, or that Live Free or Die Hard was pg-13, and I went to see it. Can anyone tell me what made Robocop NC-17?

I know this doesn't answer your question, but the rating boards are very fickle. A couple f bombs can justify an R rating just as easily as the shit in hostel. Movie ratings are very absurd.

[DavDz]

Wasn't Raiders Of The Lost Ark rated PG/13 or some shit when it had a very graphic scene of a nazi's face melting off

[EvilSamurai]

Wasn't Raiders Of The Lost Ark rated PG/13 or some shit when it had a very graphic scene of a nazi's face melting off

Yeah. PG Ratings were much more liberal pre-PG-13. Fuck, they originally rated Temple of Doom R and Speilberg used his powers to get a new rating made up.

[Dangerous J]

Wasn't Raiders Of The Lost Ark rated PG/13 or some shit when it had a very graphic scene of a nazi's face melting off


IIRc, Raiders was PG when it came out. There was no PG-13 until 1984.
As the story goes, when movies like Temple of Doom and Gremlins came out, the parents thought PG was too tame a rating and studios thought R was too high a rating for those films. Allegedly, Speielberg talked to the head of MPAA to make a in between rating and thus Pg-13 was born.

[TS]

Barbarella was also rated PG, and was...weird and bad.

[gunners]

Money makes the world going around, by toning down the violence they can reach to a wider audience. Still movies like Beverly Hills cop I don't understand how that got an 18 rating, I guess back in the day they were stricter with the ratings.

[Night]

That's what I loved about PAUL FUCKING VERHOVEN. Verhoven pulled all the stops. He never pussied out on the bad language and especially violence. Almost every chance there was for something brutal to happen, he went all out.

Nowadays, bleh.

[YellowS4]

Spoofs, Hilton, Dane Cook, romcom films will almost always get green lighted no matter how shitty it is.

Retarded people love throwing away money.

[nGuman]

Heh, Freakazoid emphasized the wussiness of censorship by dropping an anvil on her.

[Colt Steele]

All those action movies from the 80s also come from an era where the entire worth of a film wasn't based solely on opening weekend. Back then if you didn't see it in theaters you were going to wait at least a year before it came to VHS. Nowadays that shit is available online usually by Sunday after it opens.

[maxx]

IIRc, Raiders was PG when it came out. There was no PG-13 until 1984.
As the story goes, when movies like Temple of Doom and Gremlins came out, the parents thought PG was too tame a rating and studios thought R was too high a rating for those films. Allegedly, Speielberg talked to the head of MPAA to make a in between rating and thus Pg-13 was born.

spielberg got swag son.

lol remember when u could see titties in a pg movie...not if u see a see-through shirt thats shits near r rating.

[Double Reppuken]

This thread reminds me of the MadTV skit: Sopranos on FX.

"HE WAS A MADE MAN! YOU FU--*cut scene*"

And yes, they make them pg-13 purely for marketability.

[Spinning Beat]

lol remember when u could see titties in a pg movie...

Jaws comes to mind.

[Satomiblood]

Cause Hollywood feels that making movies PG-13 will make it appeal to everyone as opposed to making it R-rated.

Hopefully that Wanted movie will change it cause its actually R-rated.

Wanted looks pretty fucking bad. I don't even think Morgan Freeman can save it. But the fact that Angelina Jolie - every bisexual girl's wet dream - is in it may do its part of roping in viewers.

[jae hoon]

Wanted looks awful, I really dont see it making that much money either.

[myleftshoe]

Wow I thought this was obvious. If you make a movie pg13 then you make it more available to the masses which means more money which is what making movies is all about.

Also in recent years pg13 movies have been dipping into content previously only shown in R movies so there's not a HUGE difference between the two like there was 10 years ago.

Seriously. pg13 still says fuck and shit. some nudity like butts, minimal boobage. Sex without showing anything if that makes sense. Killing, insinuated rape and all other junk.

Almost the same as R but makes safe enough for a family o take their kids "guilt free" knowing the movie probably will be harsh

[Darkstalker]

Wanted was surprisingly better than I was expecting it to be (shit). I even enjoyed myself a bit. Besides a few points about the main character and his buddy/girlfriend/workplace, it's pretty much nothing like the comic though.

Some good action sequences, particularly at the end, if you enjoy over the top stuff.

Nothing all that spectacular, but I enjoyed it well enough.