Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Harry Potter and the R-Rated Half-Blood Prince?

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 3)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3

Author

Topic: Harry Potter and the R-Rated Half-Blood Prince?

Galen Murphy-Fahlgren
Master Film Handler

Posts: 405
From: Canton, MI, USA
Registered: Oct 2007

posted 12-31-2008 12:56 PM

Mike, you're right. Attaching an age to it is flawed, but I don't have much to work with here. The thing we always come back to is that parents need to take some responsibility. It isn't our job to decide what is appropriate for whom, but parents try to hoist it off on us. This is just another case of people trying to avoid personal responsibility by moving the burden to someone else.

| IP: Logged

Greg Anderson
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 766
From: Ogden Valley, Utah
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 12-31-2008 04:05 PM

quote: Galen Murphy-Fahlgren
People are increasingly sexually active in their early- to mid-teens, before they can go see R rated movies that contain sexuality

And this is a good thing? How many movies show responsible sexual activity? How many of those increasingly sexual teens are responsible about it? I'm not defending the violent movies but at least they often portray the consequences of such violence... like people bleed and/or die. Maybe that's why becoming violent isn't so attractive after you see it in a movie.

Again, if parents had the guts to stand up to their kids' whims then -- Oh, wait. I'm living in a fantasy world.

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 01-06-2009 06:11 PM

Well here's a surprise. I just heard back from Mariel Diaz, western region manager for Exhibitor Services at Warner Bros. and she says the new Potter film is rated:

"PG" for "scary images, some violence, language and mild sensuality".

Cue discussion on how this will 'water down' the story....

| IP: Logged

Michael Gonzalez
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 790
From: Grand Island , NE USA
Registered: Sep 2000

posted 01-06-2009 08:34 PM

Not sure how you can have PG rated Zombies so there goes that scene. Other than the bathroom fight with Draco, everything else can pretty much happen off screen so I guess PG can be possible. The main story wont need to be watered down but certain scenes will need to be changed or removed.

| IP: Logged

Jonathan Althaus
Master Film Handler

Posts: 435
From: Bedford, TX
Registered: Dec 2008

posted 01-06-2009 08:42 PM

Personally, I don't know how they make the last 2 books not R rated, if they stick to the story.

| IP: Logged

Tony Bandiera Jr
Film God

Posts: 3067
From: Moreland Idaho
Registered: Apr 2004

posted 01-06-2009 09:06 PM

quote: Pravin Ratanm
...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.

LOL Now that was a funny contradiction....being "traumatized" by his nakedness and yet noticing a possible woody? [Razz]

I do agree that the acting was bad..but on the other hand I'd def not throw him out of bed..I think he's hot. [Smile]

Back on topic, I had recently finished the installation of the MPAA and CARA ratings board new screening rooms. I did get a chance to talk to some of the raters and yes, the ratings are in some sense "arbitrary" as they are determined by real, living, fallible human beings. Each rater brings his/her own judgment, life experiences and opinions as to what is something to push a film into one rating or another. So the ratings system is NOT perfect. They do have a "guide", written examples of what is/is not appropriate for each rating, but it is just that, a guide.

One question I did pose to them was why is it that you can show several instances/long duration shots of female genitalia and still get a "R", but show more than a few short (and non-erect) seconds of a penis and it's automatically "NC-17" or (now defunct I think) "X"?

I got a chuckle and a reply of that's just how it is.

And they confirmed that the first instance of allowing the word fuck in a PG movie was in the space epic "The Right Stuff", mainly because it was actually the expression (by Gus Grissom) "Fuckin A, Bubba" that was used several minutes apart and that the use of fuck was not in that context sexual.

It was still a surprise to me and a lot of other audience members when it was heard when the film was in first release. [Smile]

IIRC its re-release, had a "PG-13" rating. But the video version is still PG.

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 01-06-2009 11:54 PM

The most glaring example of multiple uses of "fuck" in a PG movie I've seen was "Tootsie." As I remember it, Dustin Hoffman is all nervous about going to do his acting thing and Bill Murray says "fuck you" to him at least three times (to break the tension, I suppose). I had always thought one or two non-sexual uses of the word would get you an automatic PG-13, three or more was an R.

| IP: Logged

John Wilson
Film God

Posts: 5438
From: Sydney, Australia.
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 01-07-2009 01:44 AM

Was there a PG-13 in 1982? I thought Temple Of Doom brought that in in 1984.

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 01-07-2009 01:58 AM

I guess you're right, "Tootsie" predated the PG-13 by a couple of years. I can see why they would have gone with PG for that instead of R...or else made the producers cut the language out. (I suppose this is one of those cases where the high-powered people involved - Hoffman, Murray and director Sydney Pollack - asked for a concession and got it.)

| IP: Logged

Frank Angel
Film God

Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 01-07-2009 07:41 AM

quote: Justin Hamaker
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.

Justin, did you add, "And for your information, madam, this theatre has created an addition rating that we like to apply to some of our patrons; I am happy to say, we would rate you IDP: (Incredible Dumb-Ass Parent)--for excessive stupidity and some mental defect, not suitable for procreation."

quote: Tony Bandiera Jr
One question I did pose to them was why is it that you can show several instances/long duration shots of female genitalia and still get a "R", but show more than a few short (and non-erect) seconds of a penis and it's automatically "NC-17" or (now defunct I think) "X"?

I have wondered that as well....seeems like a double standard, but then again, with a naked woman, at least in far and medium shots, all you really see is a dark patch (I've never seen a main stream where a naked woman is shaved). On the other hand, with at guy, well, there's just more "stuff." There's more junk in your face, so to speak....more to get upset about for those who think human body parts are shocking and immoral. I mean, not for nuthin, but Raddcliff's got one set of huge balls that you can't exactly ignore, while his female co-star's got, well, just a patch.

| IP: Logged

Pravin Ratnam
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 844
From: Atlanta, GA,USA
Registered: Sep 2002

posted 01-07-2009 10:06 AM

Tony, I was slightly joking about the trauma! Though I gotta confess that I wish he did not do that silly play. The acting looks really bad. If one is going to indulge in such scenes, at least do not look foolish doing so. Plus what was up with those dancers at the end of the scene? I wonder if he wanted to be taken seriously outside the Harry Potter world. Plus he has to do that on a daily basis?

As far as NC-17 awarded automatically for any penis shot, I don't think that's the case. Wasn't the Piano R? Or any movie with a naked Ewan McGregor?

| IP: Logged

Blaine Young
Master Film Handler

Posts: 477
From: Kirkland, WA, USA
Registered: Sep 2006

posted 01-07-2009 11:03 AM

Even the MPAA cannot follow their own guidelines. The entire "ok as long as not used in a sexual context" was out the window with "My Best Friends Wedding", when Julia Roberts clearly said "he just came in for a few hours to fuck me." I mean - that would seem to be a clear sexual context to me...

| IP: Logged

Mark J. Marshall
Film God

Posts: 3188
From: New Castle, DE, USA
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 01-07-2009 10:44 PM

I can't possibly see this movie being any kind of a faithful adaptation of the book with a PG rating. Most of the book deals with flashbacks to Voldemort's past, but there are also some definitely disturbing scenes near the end.

| IP: Logged

Tony Bandiera Jr
Film God

Posts: 3067
From: Moreland Idaho
Registered: Apr 2004

posted 01-08-2009 03:28 PM

Frank, I think you hit the nail on the (penis) head. [Smile]

It is because guys have more showing that people get their panties in a wad when a guy's "wedding tackle" (thanks Austin Powers) is out there for all to see. Personally I don't find the twig and giggle berries offensive (and not just because I'm a fag) but rather I find them amusing., Face it, a guy's hardware is somewhat funny looking. [Smile]

Pravin, I know you were kidding, but I did find the combination of comments amusing. You are absolutely right, that play is incredibly silly and the acting was bad, and I didn't see the point of the dancers either. [Smile]

(Unless the director just thought it would be amusing to see Harry Potter's hairy potter bouncing around. )

As for the ratings on those two films, I don't recall seeing how long the penis shots were or how many there were.. I think that does make a difference.

"Porky's" films for example actually showed a LOT of penis..IF you ran them at 1:37. [Smile]

The 1:85 plates cut off the shots at waist level. (The full-screen versions on the dvd set shows everything. [Smile]

)

Blaine, exactly. The MPAA is becoming more inconsistent than ever. I think they feel obligated to "keep up with the times."

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3

Printer-friendly view of this topic

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.