-
Website
http://www.slashfilm.com/ -
Original page
http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/09/06/max-payne-director-john-moore-upset-over-r-rating-claims-mpaa-gave-wb-a-blowjob-for-dark-knight/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
- Iron Man 2 Movie Trailer
- FBI Finally Make An Arrest in the Wolverine Piracy Case
- The Inception Poster: A Couple Things You Might Not Have Noticed
- Bryan Singer: “I Just Signed a Deal to Do an X-Men First Class Origins Picture”
- Family Guy Moving From Star Wars Spoofs To… Indiana Jones, Back to the Future and Star Trek?
Seriously, TDK has been my favorite film of the year so far, but was the hardest PG-13 I've ever seen.
That said I think the MPAA is a retarded organization and it should be left up to parents whether their kids see a movie. It's also bullshit that nudity gets more rap than violence.
I saw Schindler's List when I was 7, so don't give me this panzie-ass morality crap. God forbid your kid should see a gun, fake blood, or the side of some lady's breast! Grow up, really.
Listen, if 10 year olds are playing Grand Theft Auto then they can handle a grenade in William Finchner's mouth.
why the fuck are they shooting for a PG-13 with Max Payne anyway?
Something's gotta give. I can't stand the idea of perfectly good video game franchises just getting either hacked to fucking bits (resident evil) or completely bastardized (resident evil, every uwe boll film sub note: I know its not the best example but a lot of games to movie genre have been ruined by the bad doctor, Hitman). The best examples are the video games that make no sense to adapt in the first place a la Mortal Kombat or Double Dragon... well maybe double dragon.. BUT ANYHOW the point being....
Bummed out cop out for vengeance with a gun, kid friendly totally.
The RIAA too if we're gonna make an invitation list.
They're shooting for a wider audience.
btw why aren't there alternatives for mpaa rating system?
Without a PG-13 rating to appeal to the audience of kids who think it's cool, it's unlikely a movie like Max Payne would get made in the first place.
The game was rated M therefore it was meant for an older audience. Not to mention that the game is 7 years old so most of the core people who played it when it first came out(such as myself) and were big fans of it are much older now and would be able to get into R rated movies.
Honestly ratings should not matter. If you have a good movie people will go see it. Stop trying to make exciting trailers to spark interest in 15 year old kids and just make a good movie. I feel as though Mr. Moore doesn't have a lot of faith that the movie will do good hence his issues.
No language, no nudity, but would you take your 12 or 13 year old to see this?
This isn't Spider-man. The film isn't kid friendly ,but it had Warner Brothers, DC and Toy companies eager for that PG-13. And the MPAA gave in.
The Dark Knight should've been R for:
A) Violence
B) Adult Themes
C) Frightening Images - The Joker and Two-Face's Make-Up
Its a dark film, an adult film like Se7en. I wouldn't take my kids to see Se7en? The Dark Knight wasn't any less dark. I'd take them into Little Miss Sunshine (which is R) instead of the Dark Knight,but Batman still receives a PG-13?
I guess its my own parenting beliefs. Don't misinterpret. The Dark Knight was an excellent film. The MPAA are just incapable of rating movies appropriately.
I wish John Moore luck
Either way, this sounds like the pre-emptive damage control Lucas did for Indy 4. haha, remember that? I sure do!
the dark knight should have been rated R. when i went to see it there were so many kids that sat in front of me and they were freaked out with the amount of violence. afterwards i heard the parents yelling at some poor guy that worked in the theater and they were complaining about the pg-13 rating.
yeah the mpaa probably gave WB a blowjob for its rating, but this is the same mpaa who thinks smoking is a reason to consider a rating
Dave - The /filmcast should totally do The Dark Knight commentary.. Would be awesome to hear your thoughts in greater detail as we see the film (editing problems, etc)
Cases in point... Zack & Miri getting an NC-17 on first watch just because it's a Kevin Smith movie... the Z&M poster getting banned, despite Good Luck Chuck having the EXACT SAME VISUAL and getting passed last year... King Kong getting a PG-13... Prince Caspian getting a PG somehow... etc.
Also, that documentary "this movie has not yet been rated" has a bias against violent action movies. Its a sort of pacifist left wing documentary that argues that the MPPA is too lenient with action movies and too hard on movies with sex. Thats always the argument used by leftists. And thats not going to accomplish anything; it'll just lead to more censorship. All the MPPA will do is agree and be hard on violent action movies too. We should be for the MPAA being more lenient with ALL MOVIES, not try to play one genre against another.
I wish The Dark Knight went for the R rating - - - it would have been that much more awesome.
Crap film = low revenue.
It is true the Joker killed alot of people but if you go by that standard then the Narnia series should have been a freaking rated R movie or atleast PG-13 with all the violence it had. And considering it is a kids story that I read back in my elementary days that would have been disappointing.
Unlike all of us, he's actually seen both TDK and Max Payne and feels like they are comparable in terms of violence, tone, "objectionable content," etc.
It's the fact that the MPAA is inconsistent and doesn't actually communicate clearly with filmmakers or have an easily navigable appeals process that is really at issue here.
I would initially think an R rating would be appropriate for the tone of Max Payne, judging from playing the game, but while the game had a ton of violence, it didn't have any gratuitous sex and, as far as I can recall, a ton of F-Bombs like Grand Theft Auto, so, the more I think about it, the more I think that, going by TDK violence and tone standards set via the intro bank robbery scene, etc. that as long as it is comparably intense a PG13 could be successfully done in a Max Payne movie.
That said, is anyone else surprised about Righteous Kill going for a PG13 rating, especially after 88 Minutes, Jon Avnet and Pacino's earlier violent pairing this year?
This film is brutal, violent, harsh. I know these are some of the reasons, most of you like it, but come on! As far as I understand, PG13 means a kid younger than 13 is only allowed to see this film when accompanied by their parents. So let's say little Timmy wants to see this. He is ten years old. What's he gonna see? Well, this:
-A bank robbery where the joker kills his entire crew (4 dead in the first 5 minutes)
-He kills a guy with a pencil (off screen, but not matter, still kills him)
-He kidnapps a guy, films him being tortured and in fear of his life ("LOOK AT ME!!") and then kills this guy, this time, the dead body is displayed in the fake Batman costume for audiences to see, because HE IS HANGING FROM A BUILDING!!!
- Joker intimidates the black gangster boss and cuts him dead (kinda off-screen, but it is very intense anyway), then let's his goons fight for a free spot in his team (with a broken billiard stick!)
- There is a guy with a fucking cell phone inside his body, who explodes and kills many policemen!
- Hundreds of hostages on two boats in a psychological stand off
The list goes on and on. I don't know if little 10 year old Timmy could handly all of this without shitting his pants! I don't eaven know, if 13 year old Timmy is better off.
I didn't even get to TwoFace (yeah, Make Up isn't that scary, but he kills people, too) or even Batman himself (very ambiguos morals on his side). And let's not forget Rachel.
This movie can be very scary, mind you. I don't know about how tough you guys are over here. But come on, you got to at least acknowlegde the fact, that TDK is borderline rated R!
Oh, didn't SUPERBAD get an R-Rating. Why? Cause they say "Fuck" and show some tits? Actually... did they even show tits?
Do you really think, a boy like little Timmy would be more traumatized by SUPERBAD than by TDK? Really?
This is just another example of how full of shit the MPAA really is and that their system i rather... well, full of shit.
TDK got an FSK16 Rating in Germany. I am not the biggest fans of German Ratings (they sometimes force a distributor to cut down a film for better Ratings, which gave us a cut RAMBO version, as well as two different cut HULK versions). But I think, 16 years is a much better age to handle TDK without any problems.
BTW, I'm a 29 year old German dude, so don't hesitate calling me and old foreign fart, if you want to.
15 is the highest rating here and we don't have the "Rated R" or "Rated X". It's 7,11 and 15 over here.
it was dark, but not an MA15+ (America's R)
Max Payne looks like an MA (R)
the games were MA15+(R) in australia
i hope they dont cut it for a PG13
I am Legend was M15 (PG13) in australia in the cinemas and was the closest to MA (R) i have ever seen.
When released on DVD all versions were MA (R), even the ones with no special features. I dont get it.
Seriously. Grow up.
The thing about the Dark Knight is this: if you compare it to the violence in PG-13 films before the 21st century, it's definately more. The MPAA is schizo and inconsistent, and so nobody has ever really been clear about what the rules are or what makes a film an "R" film. For instance, they have a rule that using the f-word more than one time will result in an R-rating, but I've seen films where they definately miss an f-word here and there. And the film gets a pass; it's PG-13, and I'm like, woah how did that happen? How did they get that through? Or that sex scene through? How did the MPAA forget that sex scene and not even put it in the parental advisory caption. That's because the MPAA is asleep and obviously apathetic about their own rating system.
Anyway, the Dark Knight avoids an R-rating because of the editing! The movie is extremely violent, and we really need to be honest about that. The film starts with assault riffles going off willy nilly, the funny-face theives being taken out left and right, and a bank teller eliminated with a nerve-gas grenade. But the editing cuts the action so the blood is never shown. It spares us the refuse. But Nolan also shows a man being blown up. I mean, a man is actually blown up. I've never seen a guy get blown up in that close a proximity in some R-rated films. Don't take kids under 13 to see it. Despite this, though, the film turns out beautiful and this is for what it does and doesn't show. The thing about violence is that it's gory, yes, but it can also be beautiful if done right. I see why John Moore is upset. What Nolan does he does with style, and you really can't touch him.
You get the idea here Moore? Leave the fuckin film alone, I dont wanna see some kid friendly hacked up version at PG-13. You are ruining it for the real adult audience to bolster attendance. Well I will not lay down hard earned money for that, it really pisses me off when I here of directors doing this. If you are confident that you made a great product then it will be seen by the masses.
The only reason why people "think" TDK should have been an R is because we have never seen a Batman film done in this theme before. When people compare it to the bubblegum, campy, Burton and Gay Disco Shumacher films. TDK feels and looks like Se7en. If you read the Dark Knight Returns and even Year One. They're the same kind of tonal story-telling and visuals. This is why Nolan is great at what he does. He's creative enough to give you a film with this kind of feel and didn't need to reveal the full effect.
While I do think the MPAA is full of shit, has a horrible inconsistent record, and is entirely useless. It's also obvious you guys haven't seen enough films that did deserve that R rating. You guys have been brain-washed to think that anything and everything "dark" has to be within the R spectrum of film ratings. And has to show you everything to be "scary" or even "haunting".
I know in this day and age of the lazy CG film director it's rare that you find one that actually uses creative story-telling and camera work to get his point across without hitting you over the head with a sledge-hammer and attaching a 3d camera to everything. But they do exist people!
Why would Max Payne be any different. It´s just a movie about a guy running around and shooting everything and everybody. Give it a PG-13 and thats that.
Nobody anway follows the ratings. Not even the parents.
Moore's Max Payne got a R rating not for the content of the movie but the MPAA said it felt "dark".
It wasn't an attack on TDK at all. He is just saying his movie is nowhere near as dark as TDK.
Screw those damn MPAA retards
Let the PG-13 hijinks ensue.
www.movieguys.org
The film explains the way the MPAA rates movies, and why.
(There's also some cool pictures of the MPAA fortress.)
Hope some of you guys can check it out , let me know what you think,,,,
Cap Awesome, love to get your comments.
Thanks in advance for checking it out!