How Can This Be Rated PG-13 is Beyond Me
How can this movie be rated PG-13 and show a full view of breasts and nipples?
shareHow can this movie be rated PG-13 and show a full view of breasts and nipples?
sharebecause you need to stop being irritated about showing a human beings private parts in a movie and enjoy it for what it is..are you too immature to handle seeing breasts in a movie without giggling and widening your eyes? Does that one brief part in a movie stick in your mind because you are so immature and can't get over the fact that you saw nudity? Then did you realize you are seeing a pg-13 movie? stop complaining and, also, it wasn't even explicit or shown in a sexual matter. *beep* OFF
shareDid the OP say anything about being "irritated" about the seeing breasts? If so, I didn't see that, just that there was a double-standard in the rating.
And why does saying anything negative about nudity (esp. when it's pointless) in a film automatically make someone either immature or puritanical?
I'd rather live with a lesbian than a cat...unless the lesbian sheds
[deleted]
It was what? 3 seconds? Titanic ring a bell?
shareYeah, "ding ding ding" on the TITANIC recollection/comparison.
http://shareddarkness.com/2010/07/08/alexis-dziena-hot-sprawl.aspx
^ THIS was nice, though, as long as we're reminiscing.
It's a DISCUSSION board for the film.
They are DISCUSSING the rating of the film.
It has nothing to do with maturity, and imo it's more immature to attempt a lame insult at someone just because they don't agree with you.
I'd rather live with a lesbian than a cat...unless the lesbian sheds
[deleted]
IMO, the problem is that the MPAA is inconsistent, and so secretive that they refuse to actually publish the standards that they use for ratings. Also, big budget films are given much more leeway in ratings than smaller, indy types of movies. IMO, based on past precedent, both Nell and Titanic should have been R. It has nothing to do with the fact that I personally dislike nudity (frankly, I'm indifferent to it, but I also respect other peoples' opinions and don't jump down their throat just b/c they don't speak glowingly about every nude scene in every film ever made), but if a past precedent is made and then later broken, it just goes to show how inconsistent they are, imo.
I'd rather live with a lesbian than a cat...unless the lesbian sheds
Very childish topic if you ask me. Everyone has breasts ....grow up and get on with it.
If a 3 second clip of a nipple offends you then maybe evening mass would be the most suitable venue for your family's entertainment.
Children of all ages have unlimited access to hardcore porn. And countless sources confirm that most kids around 13 years of age are already having blow job parties after school. I think a little nipple flash is the least of your concern.
Amen.
shareYou guys should stop dissing the original post. Each parent has different opinions about what they want their kids to see and concerned parents simply want to be informed in order to make decisions about movies. This is not an indicment of nudity or any other content. I have absolutely no problem with nudity in film or in society in general. I do, however, know what my kids can handle and what they aren't yet prepared for. All kids are not the same. My advice to parents is to read about content here and also on movie mom's website to get specifics before taking the kiddies. I was already aware of the content and thus was able to make an informed decision not to let the kiddies watch this one. There is indeed inconsistency in MPAA ratings, so I don't trust them.
Whoa... Mikey... what're you doing out of your room...?
It's up to the MPAA to decide. Their guidelines for rating are not explicitly stated.
But when did you see a full view of breasts and nipples??
Did we watch the same movie?
I think you saw them when they tossed Matthew McConaughey a beer while he was hanging on to the cooler to stay afloat. Right before they save him, one of the girls flashes him. So maybe if they're shown from far away it downgrades the rating? But yea I think it is a very subjective rating system.
share The people who are saying "your too sensitive" need to wind back. The people who thing think this is bad, need to do the same. I agree this is a little much for PG-13. I think this shouldn't have been PG-13 because technically children under 13 can see this movie without a parent's consent and that means preteens would see that. I really think we have a terrible system in place for movies. Movies like Get Smart get a PG-13 and so does Live Free or Die Hard which is beyond me. I think this scene should have said something to the MPAA. A new rating system is needed badily.
MPAA ratings are flawed. If a film is rated R than a parent should be able too look at the box below and see everything that could be called unsuitable for ANY age below 17. Instead, everything that could have just made it PG-13 is ignored. Say a movie is Rated R for violence and nudity. But if you'd take away that violence and nudity than you have a PG-13 movie and there's a bunch of reasons it's PG-13 that they didn't tell you about why it's R. So if it just says "violence" for and R movie a parent may decide the child can see it not knowing about language, blood, and a few other things that the parent may object too.
I belive the ratings should be E,5+,12,15,17+, and 17R.
E for everyone. 5+ for most children, 13 for teenagers and up, 15 for 15 and up, 17+ for seventeen (suggested - not enforced), and 17R for 17 Restriced meaning you have to be 17 or MUST have parent with you at the box office.
E would be like Barney's Movie, 5+ would be like Shrek, 12 would be like Get Smart, 15 would be mabey Accepted, 17 being like Live Free or Die Hard, 17R would be like Beverly Hills Cop or South Park Movie. And it should all it's possible objectionable content not just why it's R. It should also include why it wasn't PG-13.
Or maybe parents can try watching the movie themselves first to see if it's okay for their kids, instead of trying to rely on some arbitrary rating system made by somebody else.
shareBecause it was for about 2 seconds tops?
On the bed, on the floor, on a towel by the door, in the tub, in the car, up against the mini-bar
OP but i know your signature "On the bed, on the floor, on a towel by the door, in the tub, in the car, up against the mini-bar " from somewhere and its bugging me, its a song right?
and i'll never understand how horror movies get pg-13 in the states and everyones fine with it but as soon as there's just a lil part of sex or swearing its supposed to be R ... weirrrrrrrd
"I'm Fooking Matt Damon
I hate the way signatures on IMdb look the same as everything else
[deleted]
I agree, but also have to mention Airplane. It was pg and have about 2 seconds of female breasts.
sharethats a everyday thing unless you never go out of your house,,go to the lake,,boobies,,go to mall,,boobies,,i think its jus gettin to be a little more open minded,,and step into the real world
shareYeah, not to mention all the gore. What with all the shooting and blood. I was more wondering about the rating because of the violence.
I can't even remember any boobs...where were there boobs???
But I agree that it was probably because of the violence...i can totally see why children under 13 shouldn't see this film...even for the sake of the nudity, the talk about sex, violent language and all the blood...
however if you wanna *beep* up your kids it's all up to you...pg13 is not a law it's just a warning!!!
Correct about this just being guidance--it doesn't mean children under 13 can't see this.
I thought this was pretty tame, and the boobs and talk about sex in the church were added to prevent the dreaded "G" rating.
Compare this with "Kite Runner", also PG-13, with a scene were a young boy is raped.
Generally the ratings system for PG, PG 13 and R as it pertains to nudity, is in the context of how the nudity is viewed.
I have seen PG Movies (1978 Invasion of the Body Snatchers) where Brooke Adams was seen in full frontal nudity. The context was non sexual, therefore it received a PG
Titanic, the nudity of Kate winslet was a breast, but the context of teh scene was erotic, therefore PG-13
Monsters ball, full frontal nudity with charged sex scene, R Rating.
It all depends on teh context.
One thing still holds true, for full frontal MALE nudity, regardless of context, will stil receive an R- Rating.
Room With a View featured a scene longer than 2 seconds with full male nudity somehow rated PG.
Back to female nudity: Sheena featured a full frantal nude scene of Tanya Roberts, rated PG. And that scene in Airplane was a close up of the jiggling boobs.
Under our clothes, we are all naked!
this is straight from the MPAA website A PG-13 rating is a sterner warning by the Rating Board to parents to determine whether their children under age 13 should view the motion picture, as some material might not be suited for them. A PG-13 motion picture may go beyond the PG rating in theme, violence, nudity, sensuality, language, adult activities or other elements, but does not reach the restricted R category. The theme of the motion picture by itself will not result in a rating greater than PG-13, although depictions of activities related to a mature theme may result in a restricted rating for the motion picture. Any drug use will initially require at least a PG-13 rating. More than brief nudity will require at least a PG-13 rating, but such nudity in a PG-13 rated motion picture generally will not be sexually oriented. There may be depictions of violence in a PG-13 movie, but generally not both realistic and extreme or persistent violence. A motion picture’s single use of one of the harsher sexually-derived words, though only as an expletive, initially requires at least a PG-13 rating. More than one such expletive requires an R rating, as must even one of those words used in a sexual context. The Rating Board nevertheless may rate such a motion picture PG-13 if, based on a special vote by a two-thirds majority, the Raters feel that most American parents would believe that a PG-13 rating is appropriate because of the context or manner in which the words are used or because the use of those words in the motion picture is inconspicuous.
Restricted. Children Under 17 Require Accompanying Parent or Adult Guardian.
An R-rated motion picture, in the view of the Rating Board, contains some adult material. An R-rated motion picture may include adult themes, adult activity, hard language, intense or persistent violence, sexually-oriented nudity, drug abuse or other elements, so that parents are counseled to take this rating very seriously. Children under 17 are not allowed to attend R-rated motion pictures unaccompanied by a parent or adult guardian. Parents are strongly urged to find out more about R-rated motion pictures in determining their suitability for their children. Generally, it is not appropriate for parents to bring their young children with them to R-rated motion pictures
as it says above an R rating can be given if the nudity is sexually oriented. if the nude scene is not sexually oriented then it can be rated PG-13
[deleted]
I have always been annoyed by PG-13 movies that have nudity. I don't think my children should be exposed to it, plain and simple. I agree with the OP.
shareI agree our rating system is very flawed. This Film is Not Yet Rated is a great documentary that exposes the secretive nature of the MPAA and the issue of being more concerned with sex over violence in movies.
Isn't it ironic, all you wanna do is smoke chronic
So I suppose breast feeding is unacceptable to you, they'll see boobies! Damned prude America needs to get over it. It shouldn't be a problem seeing breasts on TV either. We need to evolve and get over the jesus influence. And yes. the jesus influence is what causes this aversion to naked human bodies. Religion is a mental illness.
share