Here's what I have observed: I first watched this film when it came out on basic cable on either AMC or one of the Turner stations. It was only a few years later I rented it, but couldn't pick out anything that I didn't see on cable, nor was there anything that isn't now allowed on network TV, either. It just seems to me that this movie could easily be re-rated PG-13.
shareIf it were made in 2004, I think it would be regarded as PG-13. In the 80s or 90s, I still imagine it would warrant an R-rating for the throat ripping and neck snapping scenes. It's a pretty weak R-rating, but it was an R and would have been for a number of years.
That is unless I'm forgetting some scene which would unquestionably leave it as an R-rating still today.
No--it's a PG-13 all the way today. Even back in 1979 the R rating was little extreme. I heard it got it for the neck snapping, Mina's appearance as a vampire and the dead baby.
shareAll those things appear on non-premium channels all the time now. I remember first seeing Renfield's neck snap when this aired on TBS back in 1990, so it's hard to imagine this as 'R' now, or even in 1984 if you ask me.
shareActually I remember hearing the neck snap when it played on NBC back in 1981 or so. All they cut out was him spitting out the blood and the dead baby was darkened so u couldn't get a good look at it. Definetely a PG-13 today.
shareEven back in 1979 the R rating was little extreme.Yes, it was. We were, like, "Why is this an 'R'??" even then.
Good question:) I think the dead baby might have pushed it into the R--but that was seen from a distance. It's strange--that same summer "Prophecy" (a LOUSY horror film) got a PG even though it's gorier than this!
share