Let me talk about some history of Dimension:
First, Dimension wanted David Twohy to edit down BELOW from an R (rating) to a PG-13, and David Twohy declined that invitation. Later........... you know what happen to the film.

Secondly, Dimension's DARKNESS was given a R rating(for for terror/violence and language) ......... But now, according to MPAA offical site, this movie is edited down from an R (rating) to a PG-13.
http://www.mpaa.org/movieratings/search/index.htm


Now, according to MPAA offical site, CURSED was given an R rating.
http://www.mpaa.org/movieratings/search/index.htm



But Dimension wants to edit down CURSED from an R (rating) to a PG-13.

http://www.fangoria.com/news_article.php?id=3242

Well first of all, I've read the article about Wes Craven's "CURSED" going from Rated R to PG-13 and it was the same issue with ALIEN VS PREDATOR and the fans crying about them not getting there R Rated movie out of this and instead, got a PG13 Rating resulting in people crying over this.. I still maintain and always WILL maintain that yesterdays R Rated movies are today's PG-13 Rated type of movies and a good example of this would be, YES, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom with the scene of this guy's heart being pulled out of his chest while his heart was still beating.. Not bad for a PG-13 Rated movie huh??? By now, everyone should know that in this day and age, this is how movies are going to be released so that they can put more butts in the seats and make more $$$.. Then when the DVD comes out, you'll get an "Extended Edition" or "Unedited Edition" like they will for AVP, Regardless if the fanboys refuse to believe it, it will.. My view is that I see nothing wrong with this rating and the movie will be just as good one way or another..

In fact. MPAA has offically given CURSED an R rating(for for horror violence and language).

And then, according to Fox, AVP will not have any "Extended Edition", because it was filmed for PG-13. (But CURSED was filmed for an R rating).

And then, according to Quint (who has already seen CURSED), said "without the gore it's not worth shelling out the $8 bucks for".
http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=18959

Yeah, I read that, but also remember that this guy Quint and just about every other so called journalist on that site including Harry Knowles, are overly nitpicky about movies in general to the point of dissecting the fun out of fun... There movie nerds and movie nerds do that sort of thing.. If I were you and this goes for everyone else, I'd wait to see the finished product before hammering this film into the ground.. Remember that these were the same idiots as well as everyone else who shit on AVP because of the rating and yet, there wasn't 1 good goddamn thing wrong with that movie, not 1...

BKB have you made one post without AVP in it.

Many... But unfortunately, were discussing the rating of a movie like "CURSED" being PG-13 and it's resulting in the same brouhaha argument over and over like AVP did about it's rating and it's the better example to use.. It all boils down to the fact that you either accept how the studios rate these films now in this day and age in an effort to make more $$$ and an "Unedited Edition" of the film being released on DVD when it comes out or you simply boycott the movies like this and don't see them.. What are you going to do folks?? What are you going to do?? :?

As I said before, AVP and CURSED are two different case.

AVP was filmed for PG-13, CURSED was filmed for an R rating.

And most horror movies that cut down to get a PG-13 end up worse than they would have been if they stayed at an R rating.

Well, this is never going to change no matter how much people want it to.. It just won't so like I said, you either suck it up and see the movie or don't see it at all and boycott the studios that do this.. Look at "The Grudge"?? It was PG-13 and look how well it did for being a horror movie??? The rating didn't affect it from making a bunch of $$$ and judging from the $$$ it did make, I don't think the rating wasd an issue.. There is alot of $$$ to be made in Home Entertainment and DVD Releases and the thing to do now is release "Unedited Editions" of the movies on DVD to make more $$$ than the theatrcal releases... It may not seem right, but like I said, what can you do??

If that is all it has to offer, why does anybody care what happens to this film.

Well, If I were you as well as everyone else, I would take this guy's assessment of it with a grain of salt.. Again, AICN and the so called journalist at that site have a tendency to overblow things out of proportion and I'm pretty confident this movie will have gore.. Christ, what is it with the whole R-Rating kick that everyone has in that every movie has to be R-Rated??? Trust me, I've seen enough R Rated movies in the last 25 years to confidentally tell you that there not that big of a deal.. There not and too much is being made over nothing.. Giving an R Rating to a movie doesn't automatically make the movie better.. I think if anything, it has more to do with the fact that teens in this day and age want to feel grown up and feel they are if they can see an R Rated movie.. As a matter of fact, I would almost venture to say that's what it is.. They feel insulted when an R Rated movie is reduced to PG-13 and makes them feel like kids instead of grown up and like an Adult.. If that's the case and I'm sure it is, then simply get over it..

"Trust you"? I don't think so.
So because you are fine with movies being chopped up from R to PG13 we are supposed to be?
There is no excuse for a movie being toned down at the studios request. A director makes a movie, and edits the movie, and that should be that. Unfortunately it isn't. If a films a really gorey movie or a movie that has lots of nudity or other stuff that would get an R rating and then when editing decides that a bunch of it isn't necessary that is fine. If a movie is made as an R then it should remain R, regardless of what you think.

It is not that simple. Directors are not always the ultimate owners of the film, in many cases they are just another hired hand playing with someone's money. They also are not always the ultimate creative decision maker for a film. If you were a producer or studio that hired a director-for-hire to produce a film and they produced something you didn't feel comfortable with, you do have the right to change the film, if you are the owner.

This is not as serious as say... the rumors of the Weinstiens coming in and cutting Gangs of New York to pieces, a project that Scorsese had worked on for 20 years before it was released.

In this case, they feel that the the gore and the sex (I don't know what the film contains) is detrimental to this film making a lot of money. It is pretty obvious that this movie doesn't have any artistic ambitions, so why do you care so much?

The Butterfly Effect is a perfect example of a studio cutting a film and re-arranging it to fit a PG-13 audience and actually making it better than the director's vision

Uh Yeah, TRUST ME considering I'm probably older then 90% of this site and have seen more R Rated movies in my time then many of you have and YES, there not that big a deal when compared to a film rated PG-13.. There really not except for more profanity... I'm sorry but based on your reply, your overly hypersensitive to the fact that you and alot of teens feel underminded and insulted that you can't have your precious R Rating for a film and feel your being treated like a kid cause of the PG13 rating, but as Andaroo explained in his reply, it doesn't always work out that way with the Director getting his way on a film.. It's not his money, it's the studios and they are within every right to do what they want with the edits.. If your anyone else aren't happy with it, then don't see the movie and boycott it and let em know how you feel, but even doing that isn't going to be no sweat off their ass cause there are alot of others who don't give a shit whether it's R Rated or not and will see it anyways..

There are alot of reason behind the PG-13 and not making it R. I for one wopuld vote R cause it just seems more of a draw. I am sick of them dumbing down movies so kids can watch them. I'm suprised they did not make the other 2 Matrix PG-13 they could have been easly. But then again there are a few good PG-13 movies, I still wish movies like Willard and the Ring had been R. it would have made the movie so much better.

Baby, that's why they have "The Director's Cut" or "Unedited Editions" of these films when there released on DVD.. It's a $$$ factor and the only reason the Matrix films were R Rated really was more for the language than anything cause even I didn't see the need to make them R Rated.. However, like I said, I think teens in this day and age are more into feeling grownup and being able to say: "Hey, I saw an R Rated movie that's catered to the adults more than kids" factor.. Hell, I've seen an awful lot of R Rated movies over the course of 25 years and I'm telling ya, there really not that big of a deal.. There not.. I sort of have to laugh at it in how teens take this so seriously in this day and age.. If it worked for "The Grudge" and everyone thought it was as good as it was at PG-13, then really there shouldn't be a problem with the ratings issue..

All of the ghost films that were released on the heels of Sixth Sense use the PG-13 very effectively and really, outside of The Shining, there's no need for a ghost story to be rated R.

It wouldn't be true to the genre to gore it up, the exception being the Dark Castle films (named after William Castle) Thir13een Ghosts, Ghost Ship, House on Haunted Hill, and Gothika.

In the case of Cursed, has there ever been a PG-13 werewolf movie (The Wolf Man had no true rating)? Wolf, American Werewolf in London, Silver Bullet, Underworld, American Werewolf in Paris, The Howling, Brotherhood of the Wolf, Dog Soliders, none of these were rated PG-13.

By its nature, a werewolf movie needs to be rated R in order to be truthful to the genre.

Honestly, there's no room for debate on this one.

Oh I don't know about that Loyal.. There's always time for a debate on the subject as long as I'm around.. :wink: Chalk this up to the fact that times are now changing and what was once Rated R in the films you've mentioned above will now be PG-13 and still be effective.. It worked for "The Grudge" and while I'm thinking about it, I own The Howling and put that in the other night and based on the FX it showed as well as the so called gore in the movie if that's what you want to call it, by todays standards, it would be PG-13... There really wasn't anything that bad about that movie that warranted an R Rating and the only reason it received that is because back then, that's the only rating they could really give it other than what?? A PG Rating??? I guarantee if they had the PG-13 rating back then to offer in 1979 for The Howling, it would've received it...

Howling III was the only film in the series to not be rated R, and it suffered partly because of it.

A well done transformation scene alone would guarantee a R.

There's really no way around it. Unless you plan on making Teen Wolf, there's no way to make a true werewolf film rated anything other than R.