my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » Harry Potter and the R-Rated Half-Blood Prince? (Page 2)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Author Topic: Harry Potter and the R-Rated Half-Blood Prince? Jonathan Althaus Master Film Handler Posts: 435 From: Bedford, TX Registered: Dec 2008 posted 12-27-2008 02:28 AM                     I'm a pretty big fan of the books and I don't see how the last 2 aren't R, judging on other R-rated flicks, unless they take the road TDK did and just not ever show blood.  |  IP: Logged Justin Hamaker Film God Posts: 2253 From: Lakeport, CA USA Registered: Jan 2004 posted 12-27-2008 06:49 PM                        quote: Bobby Henderson most kids tend to grow out of the Harry Potter type of thing as they get farther along in their teens I disagree with this statement. People who are fans of the books seem to be very loyal HP fans. I know many older teens and even adults (like me) who have read each of the books multiple times. I also disagree that the PG-13 rating for the last 2 movies was a bad idea. The simple fact is those two movies have much darker and more mature content than the earlier books. Watering them down for a PG would have been the disastrous mistake. The last two films (actually 3 films) should both be PG-13. There is nothing in the books that would suggest an R rating - no sex, no nudity, no profanity. Aside from some kissing, there really isn't anything that even hints at sexuality. Really the only way they could turn them into R rated movies is to add things that aren't in the books or to make the various battles graphically violent. I do think it's possible, although unlikely, there could be a red band trailer.  |  IP: Logged Mark J. Marshall Film God Posts: 3188 From: New Castle, DE, USA Registered: Aug 2002 posted 12-28-2008 09:00 AM                    You don't need blatant sex, violence or language to get an "R" rating. Mature themes, dark subject matter and other story telling devices (tension, scariness, terror, etc.) all count too. As someone who has also read all of the books multiple times, I can say that with each book, the tension rises. Harry is in real mortal danger at this point, and main characters are dying. Voldemort is a scary dude, and depending on how they translate that to the screen, it could be very terrifying for young kids. However, I agree an "R" rating in the cinema would be a bad idea. But I don't think an unrated version on video would be out of the question. Whether or not they do that, I don't know. I wish they would have shot extra footage for the video releases of the last three movies. I'm glad the last book will be two movies. There's way too much going on there to cram it all into one film. It's sort of like one of those epic video games where the story just keeps unfolding and unfolding and unfolding. I also don't agree that kids grow out of Harry Potter. I think it's safer to say that some people have grown INTO Harry Potter as the films have become less and less like children's films. I know a couple of people that fall into that category.  |  IP: Logged Eric Hooper Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 532 From: Fort Worth, TX, USA Registered: May 2003 posted 12-28-2008 11:15 AM                     The Dark Knight should have been an R in my opinion. Let's call a spade a spade. I see no problem with an R Harry Potter. Parents would actually heed the rating system and it would actually do what it's intended to do. (We all know PG-13 is a joke). The other day I watched Urban Cowboy on DVD. Tons of swearing, lots of sex, including a three-way scene, adultery, violence, abuse, etc. Clearly an adult film. and it was rated PG?  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 12-29-2008 12:07 AM                        quote: Eric Hooper Parents would actually heed the rating system HA HA HA! You're killing me! Tell another one! An R-rated Potter would cause the largest swarm of rating-avoiding kids (and parents who try to drop them off unaccompanied) in the history of movies.  |  IP: Logged Eric Hooper Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 532 From: Fort Worth, TX, USA Registered: May 2003 posted 12-29-2008 08:20 PM                     quote: Mike Blakesley An R-rated Potter would cause the largest swarm of rating-avoiding kids (and parents who try to drop them off unaccompanied) in the history of movies. Oh ok. So instead, we'll just call it a PG-13 because it'll be easier all around for everyone. Forget ethics and pride. Mind as well legalize drugs while we're at it...  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 12-30-2008 09:49 AM                        I never said that was a good thing. I just said what would happen. And you know I'm right. You can actually show just about anything you want in a PG-13 as long as you don't step over a certain line which will make it an R. - Violence: Don't show a lot of blood, or weapons piercing the skin - Language: Say whatever you want, but don't use the F word more than once or twice (or even once in a sexual context) and don't use any of the other sexually explicit anatomical terms (except all the slang words for breast get a pass) EDIT: I sent an email to Exhibitor Relations at Warner Bros to ask about this and will report back what I hear, if anything. I'll bet I set off a flurry of phone calls between WB and Fox! [ 12-30-2008, 01:40 PM: Message edited by: Mike Blakesley ]  |  IP: Logged Pravin Ratnam Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 844 From: Atlanta, GA,USA Registered: Sep 2002 posted 12-30-2008 03:00 PM                     Show the parents this piece of crap and they will be thankful that the new Harry Potter may only be an R at worst. The clip from Equus . Whatever the new HP is rated, the acting cannot be anywhere close to as awful as what you see of D Radcliffe's acting in this clip and nowhere as traumatizing as his naked self on lengthy display. P.S.: Is that actually a tiny woody I see in that clip? What the hell? Not even soft porn has the actors sporting woodies.  |  IP: Logged Galen Murphy-Fahlgren Master Film Handler Posts: 405 From: Canton, MI, USA Registered: Oct 2007 posted 12-30-2008 03:13 PM                     Eric, the MPAA and its rating system is already a sham. Nothing is greater evidence of this than the "two fuck" rule. If I say "fuck" again... oh wait, now this entire thread is rated R. Except that I knew that word when I was like 8, at the latest, so why again does using that word twice get you an automatic R? The rating system should be a guideline to help parents decide what their children can watch (and for adults to make decisions about what they feel like watching). Nothing as simplistic as the G-PG-PG13-R etc scale is going to realistically do that. There is no ethical imperative to ratings, either. Your drug legalization comment is a red herring. Parents need to know how much sex, violence, drug use, and language is in a movie, and they need to use their brains.  |  IP: Logged Chris Slycord Film God Posts: 2986 From: 청주시, 경북도, South Korea Registered: Mar 2007 posted 12-30-2008 05:27 PM                     quote: Eric Hooper Mind as well legalize drugs while we're at it... Yeah because movies are the equivalent of heroin?[/sarcasm] And personally, I think most drugs should be legalized. But that's because I'm a Libertarian and think the "drug war" is an utter failure.  |  IP: Logged Justin Hamaker Film God Posts: 2253 From: Lakeport, CA USA Registered: Jan 2004 posted 12-31-2008 05:51 AM                        quote: Galen Murphy-Fahlgren Nothing as simplistic as the G-PG-PG13-R etc scale is going to realistically do that The current system is fine if people would just pay attention to it. I had a parent bring a group of 8-10 year-olds to Yes Man about a week ago. About half way through they walked out and wanted a refund because they felt the content was inappropriate for that age group. I pointed out the movie was rated PG-13 'for crude sexual humor, language and brief nudity'. To which she replied that she would not have taken the kids if she knew that ahead of time. Never mind the fact it's on our recording and web site; it's posted with the movie descriptions in the box office window; and it's on the poster displayed in front of the theatre. I don't think it would be possible to come up with an easy to use ratings system that would give people all the information they need. I do think the MPAA ratings system - in conjunction with the rating explanations is pretty good. If for no other reason, the MPAA system is good because it's been around for so long and most people know basically what the ratings mean - even if they don't agree with them. One improvement that I would like to see is something between a PG-13 and an R rating. Keep the R rating for films with truly adult content and use the in-between rating for things like The Matrix, Hancock, Terminator, 300, etc. I also think the MPAA needs to quit making the 'F' word so taboo.  |  IP: Logged Pravin Ratnam Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 844 From: Atlanta, GA,USA Registered: Sep 2002 posted 12-31-2008 08:01 AM                     Matrix is one of the most ridiculous R ratings I have seen slapped onto a movie. What was it rated R for? I would have been pissed if I was unable to watch that movie as a kid with my friends.  |  IP: Logged William T. Parr Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 823 From: Cedar Park, TX Registered: Nov 2000 posted 12-31-2008 09:33 AM                     quote: Adam Martin I haven't received a weekly ratings email since July. WTH? And you just now noticed? Did the move to Arizona turn you into a Slacker Adam? Oh well at least the Cardinals made the playoffs and Dallas didn't, Thank God.  |  IP: Logged Galen Murphy-Fahlgren Master Film Handler Posts: 405 From: Canton, MI, USA Registered: Oct 2007 posted 12-31-2008 11:21 AM                     Justin, the little descriptions on the rating band give just about enough information, but those aren't part and parcel to the rating. Nobody has "R, for adult activity, persistent violence, and sexually oriented nudity" on their marquees. A better system would specifically codify appropriateness of content. Off the top of my head here, something like "16VSC" for "appropriate for 16+, contains violence and sexual content." Furthermore, the very Victorian views of sexuality need to go. People are increasingly sexually active in their early- to mid-teens, before they can go see R rated movies that contain sexuality, but I don't personally know anyone who is yet a violent murderer or torturer and has been exposed to that, even among people who are old enough to go see Saw movies. Anyhow, to remain somewhat on point, the last Harry Potter movies should be PG13. There is nothing to merit an R rating. As Mark points out, there is "scariness" and "tension", but I can't possibly see these as escalating above PG13 level. The idea that it should be rated R because people ignore PG13 is weak, because that does as much to weaken people's attention to the rating system as any incongruous rating.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 12-31-2008 12:09 PM                        A rating like "16VSC" wouldn't work. Some movies have violence, language, sexual content, smoking, and scary situations, and even such things as "intense depictions of bad weather" (Remember Twister?) among other things. Your alphabet-soup rating system would just cause confusion. The rating information is easy to get if people would just look at it. And, putting a number on it is not the best idea either -- what's appropriate for one 16 year old might not be appropriate for another. (I think they should have used "T," appropriate for teens and up, instead of "PG-13" myself.) A simple letter rating like "R" lets each parent, who knows his own kid better than anyone, decide what's appropriate. The real problem is parents who won't take that responsibility.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.