DS Forums

 
 

Reclassifying Films


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 22-02-2015, 19:17
giratalkialga
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 238
There's a re-issue coming.
Sorry, there's not. It was for a one-off Halloween double bill of the Alien + Aliens director's cuts last October at Vue cinemas.
http://www.myvue.com/latest-movies/i...ts-double-bill
giratalkialga is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 22-02-2015, 19:23
giratalkialga
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 238
iTunes have a lot of catching up to do in terms of their film ratings:
Lethal Weapon 1, 2 & 3 are still 18
The Shining is still an 18
The Godfather trilogy are still 18's
American History X is still an 18
Alien3 is still an 18

All of the above should be rated '15'
giratalkialga is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-02-2015, 22:17
lady_xanax
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,042
Strange, I could have swore the DVD I have of it has a PG certificate on the front.

Pixar's 'PG' List is Toy Story, Cars and Brave. The rest are all U's.
Toy Story isn't a PG is it?

The DVD may have a PG on it; sometimes the special features will bump up the DVD rating. Lawrence of Arabia is a PG but DVD got a 12 because they explain in the making of how they conveyed someone's sexual gratification through coughing.
lady_xanax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-02-2015, 22:47
JCR
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland, UK
Posts: 16,707
Toy Story isn't a PG is it?

The DVD may have a PG on it; sometimes the special features will bump up the DVD rating. Lawrence of Arabia is a PG but DVD got a 12 because they explain in the making of how they conveyed someone's sexual gratification through coughing.
Nope, Toy Story 1 has always been a PG, for 'mild violence, scary scenes, dangerous behaviour'

As pointed out in the Watership Down thread, the bbfc are stricter about U these days than they were in the 80's-90's, you'd suspect some Disneys like The Lion King that are U would be PG if seen for the first time now.
JCR is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 25-02-2015, 01:30
Billy Hicks
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 443
As pointed out in the Watership Down thread, the bbfc are stricter about U these days than they were in the 80's-90's, you'd suspect some Disneys like The Lion King that are U would be PG if seen for the first time now.
But alongside this, the changing of the 12 rating to 12A in 2002 means that there are a huge amount of films that would have been unaccessible for children to watch in the 1990s that they can now view with parental supervision. I've seen and heard strong swear words, graphic violence/horror and moderate to strong sexual content in recent 12A films that I wonder how on earth would ever be suitable for children to watch, but if they're with an adult then cinemas are allowed to let them in.

Something I found interesting recently was when the first Woman in Black film was re-issued in cinemas last Halloween as a preview for the forthcoming sequel. When first released in 2012 it was given a controversial 12A rating and many complained it was far too scary for children to be allowed to watch. For the 2014 re-issue the rating was 15. Can't be many films in recent years they've actually had to increase the rating for, surely?
Billy Hicks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-02-2015, 05:36
lady_xanax
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,042
They increased the Ghostbusters rating I believe. Some films they won't do it for simply because they are well known now. The BBFC said that if Grease were submitted for the first time noe it would get a 12.
lady_xanax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-02-2015, 13:02
yaristaman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: London
Posts: 1,001
But alongside this, the changing of the 12 rating to 12A in 2002 means that there are a huge amount of films that would have been unaccessible for children to watch in the 1990s that they can now view with parental supervision. I've seen and heard strong swear words, graphic violence/horror and moderate to strong sexual content in recent 12A films that I wonder how on earth would ever be suitable for children to watch, but if they're with an adult then cinemas are allowed to let them in.

Something I found interesting recently was when the first Woman in Black film was re-issued in cinemas last Halloween as a preview for the forthcoming sequel. When first released in 2012 it was given a controversial 12A rating and many complained it was far too scary for children to be allowed to watch. For the 2014 re-issue the rating was 15. Can't be many films in recent years they've actually had to increase the rating for, surely?
Sounds like the re-issue was the uncut version. The 12A version was cut to get that certificate.
yaristaman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-02-2015, 14:24
pad_ehh
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 13,766
I believe "Toy Story" is a PG because it shows Sid holding and striking matches. Woody does it too.

"Lilo & Stitch" was edited to change a scene where Lilo hides inside a tumble dryer, Disney were offered an uncut 12 (or possibly 15?) if they wanted the scene left unedited. Instead, they edited the animation to make it look like she was under a table (the same size as the tumble dryer) with a pizza box lid (replacing the tumble dryer door) being moved to reveal she is hiding inside.

Full comparison of the two scenes here.

"The Secret Life Of Alex Mack" was rated 15 for DVD (despite being a kids TV show) because it has a scene where a character hides inside a tumble dryer and the BBFC don't want kids copying them. I guess it must have been the 15 cert they offered Disney for Lilo & Stitch!
pad_ehh is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 25-02-2015, 16:30
dodrade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,106
Sounds like the re-issue was the uncut version. The 12A version was cut to get that certificate.
Has the 15 certificate version been released on DVD yet?
dodrade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-02-2015, 17:24
roger_50
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,411
Although it was the uncut rerelease that got the 15 rating, the BBFC heavily implied they thought they got the original cinema release rating wrong regardless.

It was either last year or the year before they published a statement saying they will start considering more the tone and general mood of films while deciding the rating. Woman in Black was the main film that was talked about as an example (due to all the complaints about the 12A rating).
roger_50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-02-2015, 23:37
JCR
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland, UK
Posts: 16,707
The director of the Woman in Black sequel was unhappy and did interviews saying there was no way for the sequel to get a 12 rating and that the bbfc consider even mild quiet-quiet-quiet-boo scenes- slamming doors etc- to be at 15 level now.
JCR is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 26-02-2015, 01:54
bidleybip
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Bradford
Posts: 190
Never understood why the first three Star Wars films are U's especially The Empire Stirkes Back where film contains decapitations of limbs (Darth Vader's head being choped off in a dream sequence and Luke's hand cut off during a lightsaber battle with Darth)
bidleybip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-02-2015, 02:24
JCR
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland, UK
Posts: 16,707
Never understood why the first three Star Wars films are U's especially The Empire Stirkes Back where film contains decapitations of limbs (Darth Vader's head being choped off in a dream sequence and Luke's hand cut off during a lightsaber battle with Darth)
In short- from 1975-99 what ratings the major releases got was more or less the personal opinion of one man, James Ferman, and sometimes he made decisions that were eccentric or contradicted other decisions he made. There's a letter he wrote re Temple of Doom that touches on Star Wars- http://www.bbfc.co.uk/sites/default/...Indy-Final.pdf

I doubt any of them, or E.T., would be U if seen for the first time now, but it's subjective if it was the right decision. Of course, Watership Down remains the strangest U he handed out.
JCR is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 26-02-2015, 06:28
IWasBored
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 3,065
I think 2001 A Space Odyssey should be a 15 and certainly not a U (as it is on my copy of it on dvd). It has quite a strong menacing element with HAL that young children could be scared of
IWasBored is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-02-2015, 06:40
IWasBored
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 3,065
Agreed. One of his most bonkers decision was to award Licence To Kill a 15 certificate - the same as the far more violent Lethal Weapon 2 at the same time.
Don't forget that cut in teenage mutant ninja turtles of the sausages being used as nuchos
IWasBored is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-02-2015, 08:36
lady_xanax
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,042
Agreed. One of his most bonkers decision was to award Licence To Kill a 15 certificate - the same as the far more violent Lethal Weapon 2 at the same time.
It just missed out on the introduction of the 12 certificate so the options were PG or 15. As there is rape, drugs and a guy's head exploding, 15 was most appropriate. Also the fact that the Bond films were seen as light and comically violent, LTK was darker than an audience would expect. The BBFC are more lenient if the audience expect graphicness. Without the BDSM elements Fifty Shades of Grey would have been a 15 but the BBFC are hard on sexualised violence.
lady_xanax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-02-2015, 03:18
stripedcat
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,719
I think that Toy Story is a PG because of that scene with the dog having a toy in it's mouth and shaking it about violently. That seemed pretty intense - so I'm guessing that's what pushed it into PG territory.
stripedcat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-02-2015, 12:09
PhilH36
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London
Posts: 15,790
The reason I ask this is because the original Terminator, on VHS, was rated 18. I have yet to see an 18 rated version on DVD.

I also had on VHS, 18 rated versions of Terminator 2 and Die Hard 2, neither of which have ever shown up on DVD.
.
Sorry, but in regard to Terminator 2 you are wrong and justpootling is correct. The only 18-rated UK-release of T2 was the laserdisc.

As far as I know, there was never an 18 rated VHS version of T2, nor does the BBFC database list one. Pre-DVD, it was only released on Laserdisc at 18, a copy of which I own.
Originally Posted by justpootling
Die Hard 2 was originally released on VHS pan and scan only, and heavily butchered with a 15, with an uncut 18 rated widescreen version on VHS which followed later. I think the DVD/Bluray versions of Die Hard 2 have always been uncut with an 18.
This is also correct

Can't be many films in recent years they've actually had to increase the rating for, surely?
Diamonds Are Forever had its rating increased from PG to 12 for the most recent re-issues.
PhilH36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-02-2015, 12:41
dee123
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 22,432
Gremlins remained a 15 until recently i think?
dee123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-02-2015, 15:39
roger_50
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,411
Gremlins remained a 15 until recently i think?
Yes. It remained a 15 all these years simply because the film company had never re-released it with additional content - so the BBFC had no reason to reclassify it until a couple of years back.

There's probably untold thousands of films with 15 ratings that would be 12-rated. Likewise 18>15.
roger_50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-02-2015, 22:43
Grabid Rannies
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,456
I've just re-watched Airplane! for the first time in several years, on the '12' certificate DVD.

Hilariousness aside, re the thread I am simply astounded this was once an 'A'/'PG' film. Even the 12 isn't enough, it should be an all-out 15.
Grabid Rannies is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-2015, 12:53
lady_xanax
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,042
Watership Down is a U and that has swearing in!
lady_xanax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2015, 23:42
JCR
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland, UK
Posts: 16,707
I think 2001 A Space Odyssey should be a 15 and certainly not a U (as it is on my copy of it on dvd). It has quite a strong menacing element with HAL that young children could be scared of
Was given a A/PG then Kubrick told them he wanted a U and he got his way I believe.


There is a point there that certainly back in the day there is evidence directors Ferman liked or respected got away with more than directors he didn't respect (Poor ol' Michael Winner being the main loser in that.)
JCR is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 28-03-2015, 21:07
JCR
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland, UK
Posts: 16,707
Spielberg's Duel has been raised from PG to 12.
JCR is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 29-03-2015, 13:12
roger_50
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,411
That's a slightly odd re-rating, Duel perfectly fits the PG certificate IMO. I watched it when I was 6 and loved the excited nature of him being chased by the truck. I wasn't troubled at all by it.

It doesn't really make sense for it to sit in the same category as all these violent action movies like Jack Reacher and so on. Two entirely different viewing experiences in terms of severity of content.

I'm seeing the same problem with some 18-rated films that are being thrown into the 15 category with gay abandon. You've now got one category (15) which encapsulates very mild content all the way to uber gory/explicit stuff.

It always used to be easier to gauge content based on certificates but there's so much variance now in what you get in each one I feel it's become less intuitive. It's a lottery these days trying to get an idea of severity of content before viewing - and the extra BBFC info is useless: I've seen films with only brief, average violence get the 'Strong Violence' tag along with films utterly drenched in brutality and gore.

Just all seems a bit of a mess these days. The BBFC don't really censor stuff anymore - which is great - but they've gone backwards in terms of movie ratings IMO.
roger_50 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 22:01.