???
| World of KJ http://www.worldofkj.com/forum/ |
|
| Why do most people don't want another mpaa rating? http://www.worldofkj.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4725 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | teenman [ Sun Feb 20, 2005 1:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Why do most people don't want another mpaa rating? |
I thought it was a good idea at first, but i was responded that it would give complication and more greed among filmmakers if another rating is added. Oh well, that's a conservative idea to me and most likely other KJers right now, but many Americans think it'd be a good idea. |
|
| Author: | andaroo1 [ Sun Feb 20, 2005 2:01 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Why should there be another rating at all? Where is the proof that Americans want another rating? Huh? |
|
| Author: | teenman [ Sun Feb 20, 2005 2:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
andaroo wrote: Why should there be another rating at all? Where is the proof that Americans want another rating? Huh? Cons (why they don't need it): Another rating means "bad" quality If a movie was previously rated R, filmmakers and/or studios would edit some scenes into another rating; so they need more quantity rather than looking at quality. If a movie was previously rated something, filmmakers and/or studios would edit some scenes into pg-13; so more quantity rather than more attention on quality. A war between pg-13, another rating, and r Pros (why some need it): Audience need more contents in a movie. It develops satisfactory on many people based on individual opinions. That's all Also, many Americans need another rating for more likely conservative reasons than liberal reasons. |
|
| Author: | xXVincentxX [ Sun Feb 20, 2005 2:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I don't think it is necessary at all. We have more than enough ratings already, and I think if they added another rating it would cause more harm than good. |
|
| Author: | Mister Ecks [ Sun Feb 20, 2005 2:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Are they making a new one? How about a H-rating? This movie has been rated horrible. You've been warned. |
|
| Author: | xXVincentxX [ Sun Feb 20, 2005 2:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Mr. X wrote: Are they making a new one? How about a H-rating? This movie has been rated horrible. You've been warned. That would be a great one! =D> |
|
| Author: | andaroo1 [ Sun Feb 20, 2005 3:14 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'm not following your logic. Quote: If a movie was previously rated R, filmmakers and/or studios would edit some scenes into another rating Like PG-13? Quote: so they need more quantity rather than looking at quality. Ratings have nothing to do with quality. Quote: A war between pg-13, another rating, and r ?????????????????? Quote: Audience need more contents in a movie. As you said, content will be delivered to what ever rating they choose to make. Quote: It develops satisfactory on many people based on individual opinions. What? Quote: Also, many Americans need another rating for more likely conservative reasons than liberal reasons. More ratings are not necessary, in addition to the ratings we also now have small sentences about the contents of the film: "Some Mild Language. Fantasy Violence" "Pervasive Adult Content and Language. Gore" etc. Another rating isn't needed. There doesn't need to be an R-17, as R films can get away with a ton. What other rating do you all think would even make a difference at this point? Do you think a 13 year old will care if there is a difference between a R-17/PG-17 and an R film? If anything, PG-13 should have been PG-15, and left it at that, but there is no reason to change it. |
|
| Author: | Anonymous [ Sun Feb 20, 2005 4:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
| ???
|
|
| Author: | Bodrul [ Sun Feb 20, 2005 4:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Another rating wouldn't be too much of a bad idea. A rating in between R and PG13 would be quite a good idea actually, as many movies these days are being cut from R down to pg13. Over here we have 12a, 15 and 18 ratings. They work well. |
|
| Author: | Michael. [ Sun Feb 20, 2005 5:28 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
hans wrote: Another rating wouldn't be too much of a bad idea. A rating in between R and PG13 would be quite a good idea actually, as many movies these days are being cut from R down to pg13. Over here we have 12a, 15 and 18 ratings. They work well. My fucking ass they do, The Grudge was a 15 here, when it was only a pg-13 in America The british cinematic industry in general is a joke |
|
| Author: | matatonio [ Sun Feb 20, 2005 5:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
:???: well over here we have A, B, B15, C and D A= G B= PG B15= PG-13 but over 15 C= R (no one is allowed Under 18 even with a Adult, you aint coming in) D= NC-17 (i think you have to be over 21 not sure)) |
|
| Author: | Bodrul [ Sun Feb 20, 2005 6:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Michael wrote: hans wrote: Another rating wouldn't be too much of a bad idea. A rating in between R and PG13 would be quite a good idea actually, as many movies these days are being cut from R down to pg13. Over here we have 12a, 15 and 18 ratings. They work well. My fucking ass they do, The Grudge was a 15 here, when it was only a pg-13 in America The british cinematic industry in general is a joke Wow. So rating The Grudge as a 15 makes it a joke? |
|
| Author: | teenman [ Sun Feb 20, 2005 6:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'm sorry about my English. It is that I have either a middle or high school skill. I bet you think my English skills are like elementary or below. But hey! I need to improve my skills since my high school probably has better AP classes than regular classes. I thought we need another rating. But since I read replies back from BOM forums; I would state their responses that if another rating is added, there'd be protest outside MPAA. If those who protest lose a battle to mpaa, I think filmmakers will make a pg-13 vs. another rating (pg-15 maybe) based on mpaa standards. In other words, either several rated R movies or several movies containing nudity in theatres. That's what some of you are afraid of: mpaa standards or filmmakers' common greed. I think in the future there will be another rating added, but some KJers and/or some BOMers would have a naked or hunger peaceful protest against it (while police would like to have a physical fight against you people) since they thought it shouldn't be another rating in the future. You know a difference between a future and a history whether it was or wasn't meant to be |
|
| Author: | andaroo1 [ Sun Feb 20, 2005 7:02 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
hans wrote: Another rating wouldn't be too much of a bad idea. A rating in between R and PG13 would be quite a good idea actually, as many movies these days are being cut from R down to pg13. Over here we have 12a, 15 and 18 ratings. They work well. In the US, PG-13 is obviously 13 and R is "17 years or older". We don't need another rating to cover the 4 years in between. |
|
| Author: | andaroo1 [ Sun Feb 20, 2005 7:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
want2write wrote: I'm sorry about my English. It is that I have either a middle or high school skill. I have no problem with your English (it isn't everybody's first language) but I did have problems follwoing your logic. Quote: I think in the future there will be another rating added, but some KJers and/or some BOMers would have a naked or hunger peaceful protest against it (while police would like to have a physical fight against you people) since they thought it shouldn't be another rating in the future. You know a difference between a future and a history whether it was or wasn't meant to be Why would anybody protest. Most people on this board can see rated-R movies any time they want to, and if you are in the US, anything after 17 doesn't really matter. The MPAA is not forcing these horror films this year to cut to a PG-13, it's just a supply and demand thing. They see that it is easier to market to an audience which is younger, so they cut a bit and they get kids to see movies at a younger age. It's greed and commerce, but so is 95% of film. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|