Published: Sunday, June 9 2013 12:00 a.m. MDT
"And this year, of the 250 films that have opened so far, not a single one
has been rated G. Not one."This is PATHETIC! For those who
can't figure it out, this is a rhetorical question: Has society sunken
this far that the vast, vast majority of what is produced is trash? When I was
a kid, what is rated PG-13 today was once rated R. I've always believed
that if I have to keep my children from watching a movie, then why am I watching
it? Aren't we supposed to become as a little child?My dad
always said that the new morality is nothing more than an old immorality
that's been whitewashed.
Hmnnnn...Do you think that Hollywood will learn? Naw!
"Aren't we supposed to become as a little child?"In
Faith not intellect, the Bible would easily receive an R rating, then where
would you be?
I am confused about some of the comments. The rating system has actually became
more strict over the years.When I was a kid, I found that several PG
movies had nudity in them. Today, if there is any type of nudity most likely it
will be rated R, if not PG-13, but no way a PG.Seems like the rating
system has been improving, but I still don't understand how severe violence
is acceptable (PG-13 and under) and a little bit of nudity makes it bad (rated
R). Our culture is very unique.
There aren't many movies worth watching, but it seems the easily offended
will always attend.
The only problem with this article is that back in the day when we were
producing mainly PG and G movies, there were not a lot of other options as far
as other movies to see. Gone with the Wind is the highest grossing movie of all
time when adjusted for inflation. If as many movies were available for viewing
in 1939 as there is today, it wouldn't be in the top 100. Same goes for
Star Wars and E.T. Not just a lack of other options but also a lack of
technology that made these films one of a kind. I highly agree that societies
morals have severely degraded, but these "figures" are misleading. If as
many options as today were always available, PG-13 films would drastically
outweigh the others where box office gross is concerned.
The information in this article is rather meaningless. It is just cherry picked
data trying to glorify your average reader's religious bias toward G
movies. Unless you actually compare the money spent vs money earned for these
movies you aren't going to get a good idea of the value of each rating. A
significant portion of the PG - G movies are big budget disney/pixar films that
appeal to a large audience and have an enormous amount of funding to attract
that audience through marketing. Conversely, a significant portion of
independent and low budget films end up in the (R) range because the directors
are going for a more artistic appeal or have in mind a more narrow audience.
They don't make as much money, but they also didn't spend as much
money to make and promote the film.
To "Happy Valley Heretic" no it wouldn't. If you had an
incompetent director who just wanted to show all the gory and sexual thing in
the bible you would have an R rated movie. However, if you had a competent
director who knew how to convey the story without actually showing gory or
sexual images, then you could easily have a PG rated Bible movie.
Hollywood film makers have an agenda that seems to override the attendance above
a critical level. And that is to corrupt.
...and obviously making lots and lots of money is top priority among all things
@redshirt. How about as it was written, not as it would be scripted for the
blues clues age group.Your deceiving yourself to believe that
reading horrible acts is somehow less horrific unless you have no imagination or
visualization skills.The data is bunk, and America is not only
inhabited by children.
This is old news. Articles have reported similar movie ratings to earnings
ratios for close to 20 years now. Spaghedeity implies that the data in this
article has been skewed, to give good Christian readers a warm fuzzy feeling.
But other articles I have seen, are not based only on gross movie sales, but
have included net profit, and they still show that R rated movies are much less
profitable than G, PG, and PG13 movies. In fact about 10-12 years ago, one
article reported data showing that most R rated movies have a net loss in
profit.Discussions about this data include the importance of the
rights of movie studios to have the freedom to produce any type of art they
choose. I totally support our rights to freedom. But one would be hard pressed
to show that R rated movies tend to be more artistic than G, PG, and PG13
movies. If anything, I think the opposite is true. R rated movies tend to be
made to appeal to our base desires, for action, sex, and violence.
to RedShirtBut seriously, would Tarantino want to give us his take
on the Bible?
To "Happy Valley Heretic" I never said that the horrible acts would not
be included, but that if you had a good director you would not have to see blood
flying everywhere or watch any sexual acts.Just look at the LDS
films where they show Christ being crucified. No blood and gore is shown, yet
you can still get the full impression of the pain involved in the
crucifixion.As for sex scenes, look at the original Star Trek. Did
you ever see Kirk in the act, or just putting on his boots after? Did you know
what he was doing with all of the alien women across the galaxy?
Pg 13 movies didn't even exist until 1985, so the data is skewed based on
that. If Pg 13 had existed long ago then I suspect it would be a much larger
portion of the ratings, since most PGs would have been PG 13 under post 1985
criteria.Personally I'm really happy with the PG 13 rating. I
don't like "R"s because the content is too strong for me, although
I believe it is necessary in rare cases based on historical content, (like
Saving Private Ryan or Glory). However, I think that some violence and language
are part of life and essential to the story so PG 13 movies are great for me.
Just my opinion.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments