Do people whine about PG-13 because they're 13?

I'll admit this movie was garbage and shouldn't have been made. But as for the overall issue regarding movies rated PG-13; it's getting ridiculous. This movie, for example, wouldn't have been any better if it was rated R... A few *beep* nude scenes and gratuitous violence wouldn't have saved this movie from mediocrity.

I'm 36, so I was going to the theater to watch those older movies when they came out (or at least watching them with my dad on VHS, when it comes to earlier stuff like Terminator, Alien and the original Point Break). All these remakes the people whine about being PG-13; when the originals were rated R, they weren't good because they were rated R... They were good because they were well-written, well-directed and well-acted, or at least had one or two of these elements.

The issue isn't just limited to remakes, either. People complain about a lot of original IPs that are rated PG-13, as if the amount of swearing, violence or nudity is what makes or breaks a good movie -- which I think is completely ridiculous...

Yeah, it's true that some movies inherently need this type of content to bring a particular vision to life, such as Natural Born Killers. If a movie needs that content to tell its story, it usually will. I can only think of a few examples within the past decade of a movie that wasn't nearly as good as it would have been if the studio wasn't pushing for a PG-13 rating.

But it's certainly not as widespread a problem as anyone would believe from reading IMDB forums, though. A movie doesn't need an R rating to be good; it doesn't need the elements of an R rating unless a movie's thematic core would be compromised without those things. So when people are trying to argue that a movie like the Point Break reboot wouldn't have bombed if was rated R, it makes me wonder how many of the people behind that idea are 12- to 16-year-olds themselves...