And for the record, apart from the horrendous sequence with Shia Laboef swinging through the trees, i actually quite liked IJ4, this negative reaction is mainly another one of those typically blown out of proportion reactions perpetuated by angry internet fanboys. It's not as good as Raiders or Last Crusade, but i thought it was about on par with Temple of Doom.
Good. At least I wasn't the only one then.
I'd read the reviews when the film first came out so never bothered going to see it at the cinema, but watching it on TV the other day I have to say I was pleasantly surprised.
Sure, the Mutt/monkeys swinging through the trees, and the gophers/rodents at the beginning, did smack of Lucas's digital dabbling but overall I enjoyed it just as much as the other films in the series.
This thread got me thinking about one of my fav films of all time 'Raiders of The Lost Ark'. I love this movie, but re-watching recently on DVD I am shocked at how much they got away with for a PG rated film. This movie features a guy getting speared through the throat, a gun shot to the forehead, brutal and bloody fist fights, a big bald nazi getting chopped up by a plane propeller and all topped off by scenes of melting faces and an exploding head!
I wonder how heavily edited this would be if shown again on afternoon TV?
It's an open secret that Spielberg enjoys (or at least for a long time, did) 'special dispensation' with the BBFC. Brit TV however, nada
Didnt they often get away with more in PG films in the 80's?
Mainly because there was no 12 certificate around until Batman in 1989, so some films that would have been 12's today were given the less box office harmful PG despite content that would almost certainly gain the film a 12 today. Obviously, this also meant that some family and young teen orientated films got a 15 rating when they blatantly shouldn't have been (e.g. Gremlins, or the uncut version of Temple of Doom which is still yet to see the light of day in the UK).
And for the record, apart from the horrendous sequence with Shia Laboef swinging through the trees, i actually quite liked IJ4, this negative reaction is mainly another one of those typically blown out of proportion reactions perpetuated by angry internet fanboys. It's not as good as Raiders or Last Crusade, but i thought it was about on par with Temple of Doom.
Hardly. It went well for about the first hour but after that even having Indiana Jones back couldn't disguise the weakness of the plot. And they'd literally spent years writing it too. I think that the main problem was that unlike the first 3 films the Macguffin at the end of 4 was a secondary interest to getting all of the characters in.
In the first 3 the quest for the McGuffin was primary and the characters fit in around it. In 4 they didn't care what the quest was about as long as they could slot in a famous face or a crowd-pleasing character. That is why it failed where the others succeeded.
I watched True Grit a few days ago - I think it was on ITV?
The famous scene where John Wayne faces 4 badguys and one of them says "That is bold talk coming from a one eyed fatman". John Wayne replies "Fill your hands you son of a bitch". That line was edited out. I would understand it if he had called him a ****. That version is over 30 years old and was given a U certificate on release.
WTF :eek: That's one of the famous movie quotes of all times. Like trying to censor out Rhett Butler's line near the end of Gone with the Wind (Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn!). Jeez
Been watching all the extras and commentaries on all the Lord of the Rings super extended DVDs... lush.
Various folk comment on the longer length scenes throughout the films that they could not have had in the theatrical version because it would have affected the rating. For example, a strangling scene had to be very short, decapitations shown for the briefest time, and no spurting blood from wounds. It's all laid down in the rules...
I didnt know that. But why does the EE have the same rating as the TCs then?
Wasnt Fellowship the first PG movie to give out consumer advice ("May not be suitable for under 8's)? I know it was fantasy but Fellowship was extremely violent for a PG over here, IMO.
I didnt know that. But why does the EE have the same rating as the TCs then?
Wasnt Fellowship the first PG movie to give out consumer advice ("May not be suitable for under 8's)? I know it was fantasy but Fellowship was extremely violent for a PG over here, IMO.
It was probably talking about the US ratings. LOTR being R rated would have definitely hurt the box offic takings.
As far as i can remember The Lost World: Jurrasic Park was one of the first to feature the 'may not be suitable for under 8s' advice, and that was in 1997, four years before Fellowship.
The cut that annoyed me most was when ITV cut the "Doggybag" scene from Dumb and Dumber one early saturday evening, the best gag in the film!
Also, I saw the original 1988 PG rated Hairspray on TCM before christmas. It has one instance of "spastic" and two "retards", which under the BBFC's current rules would certainly earn it a 12.
Perhaps it was temporarily sidelined amidst the nationally forefronted hysteria about what the nation's kids were being allowed to see (the distributors could always have accepted a 15 of course if they truly wanted to preserve 'art'). Things returned to normal soon enough.
Perhaps it was temporarily sidelined amidst the nationally forefronted hysteria about what the nation's kids were being allowed to see (the distributors could always have accepted a 15 of course if they truly wanted to preserve 'art'). Things returned to normal soon enough.
His special dispensation that year was with the MPAA who created the PG-13 rating specially for Temple of Doom.
I suspect the Bluray will be an uncut 15 otherwise Paramount will lose boxset sales to other countries.
They upped Wrath of Khan to a 15 so I think its time Britain was allowed to see TOD uncut after being banned from doing so for 27 years.
WTF :eek: That's one of the famous movie quotes of all times. Like trying to censor out Rhett Butler's line near the end of Gone with the Wind (Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn!). Jeez
What you're forgetting is that before the censors got their hands on it, Rhett Butler's line was supposed to be "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a f***!"
I see the 12 cert Angus, Thongs and Perfect Snogging is on Channel 4 tomorrow night, uncut according to the Radio Times but listed as a PG on the sky EPG which would imply otherwise.
What you're forgetting is that before the censors got their hands on it, Rhett Butler's line was supposed to be "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a f***!"
Selznick apparently had to pay US censors $5,000 to use the word "damn" in the film. Alternatives suggested included "Frankly my dear, I just don't care"
I'd bet on it being a 12 if TOD were to be classified now. I highly doubt it'd get a 15 rating.
I remember reading I think it was in Empire special that Paramount did resubmit the uncut version of TOD for the last boxset a few year back at it was still given a 15 rating, but Lucas refuses to release it as he thinks that rating is too high.
He did the same with Star Wars: Ep2 as that was originally offered a 12 rating due to the violence (ie. headbutting) so he cut down the violence in the UK version so it was granted a PG.
Glad to report that Raiders wasn't cut on Beeb last night, but then at that time it shouldn't be! Looked good in HD too!
I've never not known BBC to show this cut even during the day. I always remember when I was a kid seeing the gore and violence in it.
But the BBC can be hit or miss when it comes to showing cut films during the day.
Flash Gordon when shown on the BBC was never cut, but ITV cut it to hell although ITV I think are the worst for editing films. They edit them to fit into time slots which is pathetic!
However, its now at the broadcaster discretion whether they show PG rated films/programmes uncut during the day as OFCOM did a survey and are now allowing broadcasters to show content that contains mild language as nobody is really offended by mild language anymore.
I remember reading I think it was in Empire special that Paramount did resubmit the uncut version of TOD for the last boxset a few year back at it was still given a 15 rating, but Lucas refuses to release it as he thinks that rating is too high.
It was never rated 15. Maybe it was submitted to the BBFC who said they'd give it a 15 so the distributors withdrew it?
Comments
Good. At least I wasn't the only one then.
I'd read the reviews when the film first came out so never bothered going to see it at the cinema, but watching it on TV the other day I have to say I was pleasantly surprised.
Sure, the Mutt/monkeys swinging through the trees, and the gophers/rodents at the beginning, did smack of Lucas's digital dabbling but overall I enjoyed it just as much as the other films in the series.
I didnt know True Grit was cut, is the DVD uncut?
It's an open secret that Spielberg enjoys (or at least for a long time, did) 'special dispensation' with the BBFC. Brit TV however, nada
Mainly because there was no 12 certificate around until Batman in 1989, so some films that would have been 12's today were given the less box office harmful PG despite content that would almost certainly gain the film a 12 today. Obviously, this also meant that some family and young teen orientated films got a 15 rating when they blatantly shouldn't have been (e.g. Gremlins, or the uncut version of Temple of Doom which is still yet to see the light of day in the UK).
Hardly. It went well for about the first hour but after that even having Indiana Jones back couldn't disguise the weakness of the plot. And they'd literally spent years writing it too. I think that the main problem was that unlike the first 3 films the Macguffin at the end of 4 was a secondary interest to getting all of the characters in.
In the first 3 the quest for the McGuffin was primary and the characters fit in around it. In 4 they didn't care what the quest was about as long as they could slot in a famous face or a crowd-pleasing character. That is why it failed where the others succeeded.
WTF :eek: That's one of the famous movie quotes of all times. Like trying to censor out Rhett Butler's line near the end of Gone with the Wind (Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn!). Jeez
Various folk comment on the longer length scenes throughout the films that they could not have had in the theatrical version because it would have affected the rating. For example, a strangling scene had to be very short, decapitations shown for the briefest time, and no spurting blood from wounds. It's all laid down in the rules...
Wasnt Fellowship the first PG movie to give out consumer advice ("May not be suitable for under 8's)? I know it was fantasy but Fellowship was extremely violent for a PG over here, IMO.
It was probably talking about the US ratings. LOTR being R rated would have definitely hurt the box offic takings.
As far as i can remember The Lost World: Jurrasic Park was one of the first to feature the 'may not be suitable for under 8s' advice, and that was in 1997, four years before Fellowship.
The first JP should have been a 12, IMO.
Also, I saw the original 1988 PG rated Hairspray on TCM before christmas. It has one instance of "spastic" and two "retards", which under the BBFC's current rules would certainly earn it a 12.
Where was that special dispensation in 1984?
Perhaps it was temporarily sidelined amidst the nationally forefronted hysteria about what the nation's kids were being allowed to see (the distributors could always have accepted a 15 of course if they truly wanted to preserve 'art'). Things returned to normal soon enough.
His special dispensation that year was with the MPAA who created the PG-13 rating specially for Temple of Doom.
I suspect the Bluray will be an uncut 15 otherwise Paramount will lose boxset sales to other countries.
They upped Wrath of Khan to a 15 so I think its time Britain was allowed to see TOD uncut after being banned from doing so for 27 years.
I'd bet on it being a 12 if TOD were to be classified now. I highly doubt it'd get a 15 rating.
did he say "Holy sh*t !" ?
What you're forgetting is that before the censors got their hands on it, Rhett Butler's line was supposed to be "Frankly, my dear, I don't give a f***!"
Selznick apparently had to pay US censors $5,000 to use the word "damn" in the film. Alternatives suggested included "Frankly my dear, I just don't care"
I remember reading I think it was in Empire special that Paramount did resubmit the uncut version of TOD for the last boxset a few year back at it was still given a 15 rating, but Lucas refuses to release it as he thinks that rating is too high.
He did the same with Star Wars: Ep2 as that was originally offered a 12 rating due to the violence (ie. headbutting) so he cut down the violence in the UK version so it was granted a PG.
I've never not known BBC to show this cut even during the day. I always remember when I was a kid seeing the gore and violence in it.
But the BBC can be hit or miss when it comes to showing cut films during the day.
Flash Gordon when shown on the BBC was never cut, but ITV cut it to hell although ITV I think are the worst for editing films. They edit them to fit into time slots which is pathetic!
However, its now at the broadcaster discretion whether they show PG rated films/programmes uncut during the day as OFCOM did a survey and are now allowing broadcasters to show content that contains mild language as nobody is really offended by mild language anymore.
He expected a high rating because of the dark content of the film.
As for AOTC, I've got it on R1 and to be honest the only difference I've seen is where Obi Wan does a bit of headbutting during a fight.
It was never rated 15. Maybe it was submitted to the BBFC who said they'd give it a 15 so the distributors withdrew it?