If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Den Of Geek)   Why unrated cuts on DVD do no service to cinema   (denofgeek.com) divider line 31
    More: Interesting, DVD, movies, Dredd, action cinema, family friendly  
•       •       •

9621 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 19 Sep 2012 at 2:29 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-09-19 01:45:29 PM
3 votes:
People are just figuring this out? As a horror movie fan, no matter how good the trailer may look, if we see "PG-13" my friends and I groan, ignore it, and maybe watch the extended cut on Netflix. They think they'll get more young people in, and maybe they do. But they completely cut off anyone I know (my whole group spans late 20s-late 30s) from going because we don't want to see a movie chopped up so the kids can (a) get in and be annoying and (b) enjoy it. So we pass.

I've been saying this for years, though. If they released good, (and while we're at it -- original, not remakes and reboots) horror movies that were R-rated? I'd go. Otherwise, maybe Netflix. Maybe HBO. Maybe never. PG-13 horror (or action) movies are rarely worth it.
2012-09-19 06:14:24 PM
2 votes:
I think people are missing the point arguing about gross and box office returns, from what I have understood it is all about distribution, and studios can normally get distribution companies to order more prints of PG, and PG-13 movies over R movies. Sort of a chum theory.

A lot of it is based on licensing agreements, and when deciding whether they want the PG-13 rating so they can hit more theaters than an R rating, while it may still be a box office hit, won't have the same distribution.


/my 2 cents
2012-09-19 05:56:49 PM
2 votes:
This "Unrated" business is bullshiat anyway.

All you have to do is alter the film in some way and NOT submit it to the MPAA.

You could add a scene to a Pixar movie and release it on video as "UNRATED".

All too often an unrated version of a film released on video would more than likely receive the exact same MPAA rating.
2012-09-19 04:00:38 PM
2 votes:

timujin: With few exceptions, I don't see movies in the theater anyway, so it makes little difference to me. However, I also don't see the problem with releasing an "extended cut" or whatever they call it. You have to deal with the market realities and while there are a lot of people like the author who would like to see the full version in the theater, more people buy tickets to movies rated lower than R... that's it, that's all it is, production companies don't make enough money off of rated R movies, generally, to justify their costs.



Wrong. And this is what the studios think, so they're wrong too.

People buy more tickets to see rated PG-13 Avengers because it's farking Avengers, not because it's "PG-13".

Being "R" has little to do with people wanting to go see a movie.

What happened with Terminator 2 and True Lies? Both were R yet people went to see them en-masse! Earning 519 and 378 million dollars of 1991 and 1994 money.

Lethal Weapon 2 and 3 also made big bucks around 227 millions of 1989 dollars.

People go to see a movie because they're thrilled about it, because the thing looks farking badass and because it's marketed right.

"Make it PG-13" is a marketing faux-pas and the sign of someone who probably has a 2 digit IQ. Movies have audiences, you can't alienate the audience for a movie and then complain no one went to see it.

This lazy marketing bullshiat is what's been decreasing hollywood's intake instead of the piracy boogeyman.
2012-09-19 03:50:36 PM
2 votes:

browntimmy: buntz: frepnog: Please don't lie to people about "Sex Drive", and if you truly aren't lying, then watch more movies so you have a frame of reference.

Sex Drive is one of those movies that I hate to admit I laugh at, but damn if it's on, I'm watching it!
And yes, it's the first time in history someone has said "Seth Green was one of the best parts of that movie!"

But it was a funny movie!

So just for reference, are you one of those people that thinks American Pie is one of the top 10 comedies of all time?


Yeah, that is another of those movies that are not nearly as good as some people think.

actually, that movie pretty much sucks. It was much better back when it was called "Porky's". My wife tried to convince me that American Pie was awesome. I had never seen it because I just KNEW it was a pile, but I gave in and watched it with her. Yep, as I thought, it was farking terrible.

Then I made her watch Porky's with me. Now she understands.
2012-09-19 08:28:55 PM
1 votes:
I dislike when the theatrical cut of a movie is done to achieve a rating of any type. and what they cut is put back in the uncut versions.

I do not mind extended versions of films having footage put back that was cut purely for time constraints such as for Lord of the Rings.
2012-09-19 08:03:52 PM
1 votes:

scottydoesntknow: PillsHere: Does anyone know why Titanic wasn't rated R? I'm not saying it should have been, but it doesn't make sense because we see Kate Winslet fully nude if I remember correctly. Isn't that one of the criteria for automatically being an R rated movie? I wonder if they just lobbied to get it PG13 since they spent so much money on it or something.

It was Cameron + $$$$$. He argued to heaven and back that it should be PG-13. Eventually the MPAA said that since the nudity was artistic in nature, and not sexual, it could stay in with a PG-13 rating.

The MPAA is a pretty corrupt organization. They've been paid off to let some stuff slide in a movie, while the exact same stuff in a different movie either garnered an 'R' rating or worse


After watching 'This film is not yet rated', with its glaringly obvious slant taken into consideration, I've always wondered why no one starts a simple, transparent, film rating system which contextualizes swearing, nudity, violence, assigns numeric scores and weights to them, and simply generates a 'rating' accordingly. Instead of the mystic magic voodoo mafia corruption thing that is MPAA.
xcv
2012-09-19 07:32:44 PM
1 votes:
Now that digital distribution is available to some theaters and films no longer have to be shipped on expensive reels, what's keeping studios from having offering capable theaters the choice of showing a PG/PG-13 cut during the day and an R/uncut version later in the evening?
2012-09-19 07:31:49 PM
1 votes:
timujin
>>> An extended cut is like saying, look there just wasn't enough time to tell the complete story I wanted.

It's not a "time" issue, an extended cut is usually like saying, "Look, the studio wouldn't let me tell the story I wanted." Whether that's because of length (Blade Runner...

Calling BS on both of those.
Lets use Blade Runner as the example since you brought it up.

BR had been out for awhile in the "standard" version. Market stared to dry up, so they release an extended version. Fans go nuts and buy again. Market slows, and they release the Definative director whatever-the-far they called it verstion. Fang go out and buy again.

Ridley Scott was NOT biatching the past 3 decades about not being able to tell his story. They saw a way to cash in and they did. Same for any of the other films where double, tripple quadripple dipping goes on. What are there now 5 versions of T2 ? bullshiat it's about "telling the story" it's a cash grab.
2012-09-19 06:01:55 PM
1 votes:

PillsHere: Does anyone know why Titanic wasn't rated R? I'm not saying it should have been, but it doesn't make sense because we see Kate Winslet fully nude if I remember correctly. Isn't that one of the criteria for automatically being an R rated movie? I wonder if they just lobbied to get it PG13 since they spent so much money on it or something.


It was Cameron + $$$$$. He argued to heaven and back that it should be PG-13. Eventually the MPAA said that since the nudity was artistic in nature, and not sexual, it could stay in with a PG-13 rating.

The MPAA is a pretty corrupt organization. They've been paid off to let some stuff slide in a movie, while the exact same stuff in a different movie either garnered an 'R' rating or worse
2012-09-19 05:51:00 PM
1 votes:
Wow, retarded article. Unrated DVD cuts aren't the probem, they are a weak band-aid on the problem. The problem is studios don't want to take a risk and let the story organically be either mature or not in theme. Money over art.

Directors film the stuff they want and then have to let the studio edit it to be PG-13. Having played the box office game the studios are then more than willing to boost DVD sales by putting out the unrated version as well.

At least we eventually get to see the more natural version this way.
2012-09-19 05:47:04 PM
1 votes:
This film is not yet rated.

Go watch it and understand why the ratings system is so screwed up.

But the other part is "We know you're stupid enough to go and be with your friends to see it, so be a pal and pay another $15 to purchase a copy of the movie you really wanted to see."
2012-09-19 05:32:35 PM
1 votes:

scottydoesntknow: And if you want to see an 'unrated' movie do right, just watch Sex Drive. The theatrical version was ok (has Seth Green playing a foul-mouthed Amish), kinda funny at times, but very typical. The unrated version, on the other hand, is farkin hysterical.

The directors even have a blurb at the beginning saying "Please watch the theatrical version first. If you don't you will hate this version because it will make almost no sense." Random naked chicks walking the background, scenes that go well past the 'cut' stage, them breaking character and laughing. It all combines to make a very funny movie.


Green screening naked chicks in just to make it worth the "unrated" label? Sorry, but that was pathetic. Either reshoot the scenes with the nudity (if that's what you want to show) or just leave it alone. If you want me to buy an "unrated" version on top of the regular version it needs to be worth it.
2012-09-19 05:28:12 PM
1 votes:

rocky_howard: timujin:Nope, I was just getting the numbers from here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_films

That list doesn't show Passion, so how did you get the numbers? Bad excuse.

I went by the $370M number because that was what taxandspend posted, I didn't actually look it up myself. $611M still puts it out of the top 50.

But not "barely half of what Twilight made".

Also, at some point Passion was on the Top 50, even Top 25. Movies make more nominal money as times goes by, news at 11. That's why the high majority of movies on the list are made within the last 10 years. Adjust for inflation and only Avatar and Titanic remain in the Top 10.

Try harder.


Fine, adjust for inflation and no rated R movie is in the Top 10:

1 Gone with the Wind $3,301,400,000 1939
2 Avatar $2,782,300,000 2009
3 Star Wars $2,710,800,000 1977
4 Titanic $2,413,800,000T 1997
5 The Sound of Music $2,269,800,000 1965
6 E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial $2,216,800,000 1982
7 The Ten Commandments $2,098,600,000 1956
8 Doctor Zhivago $1,988,600,000 1965
9 Jaws $1,945,100,000 1975
10 Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs $1,746,100,000 1937

And you're actually making my point for me... we're talking about movies released today, to today's audiences. Movies rated G through PG-13 make more money with today's audiences than rated R movies do. That is why movies made now are more likely to have stuff cut out that would put them over into the R rating, simple economics.


taxandspend: I posted both numbers in separate posts, clearly stating which one was US gross and which one was Worldwide. Don't blame me because your reading comprehension is that of a toddler's


You might want to try decaf if you're getting so wound up about this you need to resort to ad hominem.
2012-09-19 05:20:44 PM
1 votes:

rocky_howard: timujin: I don't believe that at all... Alien, as a quick example, is a much better movie than, say, Twilight. The content is leaps and bounds ahead. But the audience that wants to see Twilight is much larger. Make Twilight rated R, though, and that market segment that would have seen it won't be allowed to by their parents.

You don't believe what? Did you even read what I said?

Why are you comparing Alien to Twilight?

I said WHEN a movie makes boatloads of money it's the content/marketing that matters, not that all the movies with content will make boatloads of money.

Also, Alien being a better movie than Twilight has ZERO bearing on this discussion. The content of Twilight is what attracted the audience, not the rating.

See, that's the thing. You make a really good rated R movie and Mr. and Mrs. Consumer will go see it. Make a really good G through PG-13 movie and Mr. and Mrs. Consumer will go with their two kids.

More bullshiat. If that was the case G and PG movies would be the highest grossing ones.

Again, show me a single case where a PG-13 movie in a series made more money than an R one.

PG-13 having a potentially larger audience doesn't mean your movie would be a success just because it's PG-13. What about the hundreds of PG-13 movies that DON'T become major box office successes? Sometimes it's better to focus on your audience rather than trying to please everybody.


G and PG movies are the highest grossing ones.

And, sorry, but what do you mean by "in a series"? Do you mean franchises?

Here, let me set it out for you:

Highest Grossing films of all time:
Rank Title Worldwide gross
1 Avatar $2,782,275,172
2 Titanic $2,185,372,302
3 The Avengers $1,510,617,210
4 Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 2 $1,328,111,219
5 Transformers: Dark of the Moon $1,123,746,996
6 The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King $1,119,929,521
7 Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest $1,066,179,7257
8 Toy Story 3 $1,063,171,911
9 The Dark Knight Rises film currently playing $1,058,259,444
10 Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides $1,043,871,802
11 Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace $1,027,044,677
12 Alice in Wonderland $1,024,299,904
13 The Dark Knight $1,003,045,358
14 Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone $974,755,371
15 Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End $963,420,425
16 Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 1 $956,399,711
17 The Lion King $951,583,777
18 Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix $939,885,929
19 Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince $934,416,487
20 The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers $926,047,111
21 Shrek 2 $919,838,758
22 Jurassic Park $914,691,118
23 Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire $896,911,078
24 Spider-Man 3 $890,871,626
25 Finding Nemo $890,620,397
26 Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs $886,686,817
27 Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets $878,979,634
28 The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring $871,530,324
29 Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith $848,754,768
30 Ice Age: Continental Drift film currently playing $836,891,241
31 Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen $836,303,693
32 Inception $825,532,764
33 Spider-Man $821,708,551
34 Independence Day $817,400,891
35 Shrek the Third $798,958,162
36 Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban $796,688,549
37 E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial $792,910,554
38 Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull $786,636,033
39 Spider-Man 2 $783,766,341
40 Star Wars $775,398,007
41 2012 $769,679,473
42 The Da Vinci Code $758,239,851
43 Shrek Forever After $752,600,8673
44 The Amazing Spider-Man $748,605,830
45 The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe $745,013,115
46 The Matrix Reloaded $742,128,461
47 Up $731,342,744
48 The Twilight Saga: New Moon $709,827,462
49 Transformers $709,709,780 2007
50 The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part 1 $705,058,657

Of those, only one, Matrix Reloaded, is rated R.
2012-09-19 05:06:42 PM
1 votes:

rocky_howard: Even better, yes, it's true that the PG-13 market is nominally bigger than the R market, but the G and PG markets are even bigger, yet most big time grossing movies are PG-13.

When a movie makes boatloads of money, it's the CONTENT (and good marketing) that matters, not the rating.


I don't believe that at all... Alien, as a quick example, is a much better movie than, say, Twilight. The content is leaps and bounds ahead. But the audience that wants to see Twilight is much larger. Make Twilight rated R, though, and that market segment that would have seen it won't be allowed to by their parents.

See, that's the thing. You make a really good rated R movie and Mr. and Mrs. Consumer will go see it. Make a really good G through PG-13 movie and Mr. and Mrs. Consumer will go with their two kids.
2012-09-19 05:02:09 PM
1 votes:

timujin: The 19th highest grossing film is Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince at $934M. #50 is The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part 1 at $705M, Passion of the Christ is barely half that.


Look! It's the guy that uses DOMESTIC numbers for movies he's arguing against and WORLDWIDE numbers for movies he's arguing for.
2012-09-19 04:54:15 PM
1 votes:

downstairs:
Now... I didn't realize Passon of the Christ was R, and would not have even checked that.


Dude, that movie made Troma movies look tame. (And as if they had crack team of special effects people, to boot).
2012-09-19 04:32:08 PM
1 votes:

timujin: Parents these days don't take their little snowflakes to see rated R movies. The biggest franchises these days, the movies that makes the most money, are rated G through PG-13, there isn't a single rated R movie in the top 50. Sure, R movies can make money, but they don't make MONEY.


That's an important point, and it really makes this into a chicken vs. egg argument.

Are people not going to PG-13 movies because they expect the full cut to be out in 6 months, or are studios not making enough good R-rated films because they're afraid of losing crossover appeal, thus lowering the aggregate box office for grown-up movies? My two cents: Taken was a steaming pile of dogshiat and every man in America wants to see the sequel even less if it's PG-13 and thereby guarantees they see zero blood or titties.

Onion-belted/Libertarian rant of the day: I blame the ratings system. Airplane was rated PG, and it had violence, terrorism, suicide, wonderful breasts, fake blowjobs, fear, drug humor, alcohol abuse...and it was one of the highlights of my youth. Now you say the F-word, and show one drop of blood, or god forbid a female nipple, and theaters are afraid to let a human who's allowed to drive a car and risk of all our lives in to see it. All of us got more real sex in our teens than we were technically allowed to watch by ourselves on movie screens -- seriously, I could take a girl to a movie, not be allowed to see a boob, then go get a hummer in my '83 Mustang. What is that? I remember having graduated high school already and being turned town to take my high-school-senior sister in to see the South Park movie. It's nonsense.
2012-09-19 04:16:47 PM
1 votes:

rocky_howard: timujin: With few exceptions, I don't see movies in the theater anyway, so it makes little difference to me. However, I also don't see the problem with releasing an "extended cut" or whatever they call it. You have to deal with the market realities and while there are a lot of people like the author who would like to see the full version in the theater, more people buy tickets to movies rated lower than R... that's it, that's all it is, production companies don't make enough money off of rated R movies, generally, to justify their costs.


Wrong. And this is what the studios think, so they're wrong too.

People buy more tickets to see rated PG-13 Avengers because it's farking Avengers, not because it's "PG-13".

Being "R" has little to do with people wanting to go see a movie.

What happened with Terminator 2 and True Lies? Both were R yet people went to see them en-masse! Earning 519 and 378 million dollars of 1991 and 1994 money.

Lethal Weapon 2 and 3 also made big bucks around 227 millions of 1989 dollars.

People go to see a movie because they're thrilled about it, because the thing looks farking badass and because it's marketed right.

"Make it PG-13" is a marketing faux-pas and the sign of someone who probably has a 2 digit IQ. Movies have audiences, you can't alienate the audience for a movie and then complain no one went to see it.

This lazy marketing bullshiat is what's been decreasing hollywood's intake instead of the piracy boogeyman.


You're dealing with a much different parental mindset in 20012 than you were in the 80's or 90's. Parents these days don't take their little snowflakes to see rated R movies. The biggest franchises these days, the movies that makes the most money, are rated G through PG-13, there isn't a single rated R movie in the top 50. Sure, R movies can make money, but they don't make MONEY.
2012-09-19 03:53:35 PM
1 votes:

machodonkeywrestler: Sam Raimi's last 2 horror movies have been pg13, and they are scarier than all the rest of the garbage out there. You don't necessarily need blood and gore to make a great horror movie. Of course, most directors do not have a fraction of his talent.


I don't like going to theaters to see movies but the sound effects in Drag Me To Hell were really really worth it. That was f*cking freaky
2012-09-19 03:31:15 PM
1 votes:

liam76: CSB-

Had a friend in Indoensia (from Scotland) who heard good things about Old School. he was pumped when it came outon video and sprang extra for th e"unrated cut". Problem was "unrated" still had to meet indonesian deceny standards so he was buying a PG-13 version.

timujin: However, I also don't see the problem with releasing an "extended cut" or whatever they call it.

An extended cut is like saying, look there just wasn't enough time to tell the complete story I wanted.
here's some worthless scenes that add some sex or violence we cut out but otherwise these scenes slowed the pace down or were worthless but, by all means, pay another $15 for the same dvd you already own so you can see it 'uncut'.

I get that.

 

FTFY
2012-09-19 03:24:20 PM
1 votes:
I also will immediately skip any horror movie with a PG-13 unless word-of-mouth says it's amazing. Not because I want to see gore in all of them, but because that rating sends the message: "We made this movie to appeal to the average dumbass 13 year old." They need to stop doing that shiat.
2012-09-19 03:21:09 PM
1 votes:

Englebert Slaptyback: vudukungfu

Me, The less the butcher is involved, the better.
Whack his dick and horns of and bring me the rest.


I didn't know butchers had horns.


images2.wikia.nocookie.net
2012-09-19 03:17:25 PM
1 votes:

liam76: CSB-
Had a friend in Indoensia (from Scotland) who heard good things about Old School. he was pumped when it came outon video and sprang extra for th e"unrated cut". Problem was "unrated" still had to meet indonesian deceny standards so he was buying a PG-13 version.


Did he honestly expect any difference living in a country under Sharia law?
2012-09-19 03:12:38 PM
1 votes:
CSB-

Had a friend in Indoensia (from Scotland) who heard good things about Old School. he was pumped when it came outon video and sprang extra for th e"unrated cut". Problem was "unrated" still had to meet indonesian deceny standards so he was buying a PG-13 version.

timujin: However, I also don't see the problem with releasing an "extended cut" or whatever they call it.


An extended cut is like saying, look there just wasn't enough time to tell the complete story I wanted.

I get that.


He was biatching about telling a "toned down" story to try and pack more people in the theatre and then selling the non-toned down story on DVD.
2012-09-19 03:04:23 PM
1 votes:

scottydoesntknow: And if you want to see an 'unrated' movie do right, just watch Sex Drive. The theatrical version was ok (has Seth Green playing a foul-mouthed Amish), kinda funny at times, but very typical. The unrated version, on the other hand, is farkin hysterical.

The directors even have a blurb at the beginning saying "Please watch the theatrical version first. If you don't you will hate this version because it will make almost no sense." Random naked chicks walking the background, scenes that go well past the 'cut' stage, them breaking character and laughing. It all combines to make a very funny movie.


you must not watch many movies.

because Sex Drive is a cinematic turd. The extended cut is just more shiat on the pile. They KNEW the movie sucked so they just put random tits in the "extended version". The ONLY watchable parts of the movie are the Seth Green parts and even HE admits that the movie is a turd.

Please don't lie to people about "Sex Drive", and if you truly aren't lying, then watch more movies so you have a frame of reference.
2012-09-19 02:53:48 PM
1 votes:
Blame it on the MPAA's insistence of farking with the ratings system.

Case in point: "South Park: Bigger, Longer and Uncut."
2012-09-19 02:47:54 PM
1 votes:
And if you want to see an 'unrated' movie do right, just watch Sex Drive. The theatrical version was ok (has Seth Green playing a foul-mouthed Amish), kinda funny at times, but very typical. The unrated version, on the other hand, is farkin hysterical.

The directors even have a blurb at the beginning saying "Please watch the theatrical version first. If you don't you will hate this version because it will make almost no sense." Random naked chicks walking the background, scenes that go well past the 'cut' stage, them breaking character and laughing. It all combines to make a very funny movie.
2012-09-19 02:35:32 PM
1 votes:
'R' Rated movies make money. Fact.

To cater to some dreamt up PG13 demo is beyond retarded.
2012-09-19 01:34:03 PM
1 votes:
With few exceptions, I don't see movies in the theater anyway, so it makes little difference to me. However, I also don't see the problem with releasing an "extended cut" or whatever they call it. You have to deal with the market realities and while there are a lot of people like the author who would like to see the full version in the theater, more people buy tickets to movies rated lower than R... that's it, that's all it is, production companies don't make enough money off of rated R movies, generally, to justify their costs.
 
Displayed 31 of 31 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report