|
I just rewatched Invasion of the Body Snatchers '78 and I always forget that one's PG. Nudity, lots of icky body horror, and a head-caving-in scene that would do Gaspar Noe proud.
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 15:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 07:10 |
|
|
In retrospect, it's strange to think that it took the MPAA over a decade to fill the gap between PG and R.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 15:28
|
|
|
Samuel Clemens posted:In retrospect, it's strange to think that it took the MPAA over a decade to fill the gap between PG and R. What I think is crazy is how much it shifted. There were PG movies with boobs in them. But there are no pg-13 movies with boobs in them. So not only did they add an intermediate category, they moved some things all the way to the next category.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 15:30
|
|
|
Snak posted:What I think is crazy is how much it shifted. There were PG movies with boobs in them. But there are no pg-13 movies with boobs in them. So not only did they add an intermediate category, they moved some things all the way to the next category. I feel like that's a shift within American culture overall more than anything. PG-13 happened in the Reagan '80s.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 15:31
|
|
|
Part of it was that the X rating went away.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 15:44
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:I feel like that's a shift within American culture overall more than anything. PG-13 happened in the Reagan '80s. That's kind of the shift I was alluding to. HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:Part of it was that the X rating went away. I had not considered this.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 15:49
|
|
|
Snak posted:What I think is crazy is how much it shifted. There were PG movies with boobs in them. But there are no pg-13 movies with boobs in them. So not only did they add an intermediate category, they moved some things all the way to the next category. Titanic has boobs.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 16:13
|
|
|
Skwirl posted:Titanic has boobs. Oh poo poo. Good call.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 16:27
|
|
|
I think it's disturbing how a movie can be extremely violent, but get a PG-13 just because they don't show blood and gore.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 17:29
|
|
|
In Scream, Neve Campbell asks her boyfriend if he'll settle for a PG-13 relationship, then flashes her boobs at him. When I saw that as a kid I was like "that's not the PG-13 I'm familiar with" Well, bye
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 19:15
|
|
|
Samuel Clemens posted:In retrospect, it's strange to think that it took the MPAA over a decade to fill the gap between PG and R. In the 1960s and 1970s and earlier there were more people who weren't allowed to see films and culturally it was looked on in the same way like taking your family to the strip club or something. Things have changed obviously. When things slowly started to shift and more prudish kinds of people dared to walk into the I've heard funny stories from people expecting to be struck by lightning for daring to see Star Wars or The Sound of Music. Once the religious folk realized they wouldn't be annihilated the floodgates really opened. Snak posted:What I think is crazy is how much it shifted. There were PG movies with boobs in them. But there are no pg-13 movies with boobs in them. So not only did they add an intermediate category, they moved some things all the way to the next category. There were some in the 1980s and 1990s. Jodie Foster in Nell comes to mind. Most definitely an R these days. Uncle Boogeyman posted:I just rewatched Invasion of the Body Snatchers '78 and I always forget that one's PG. Nudity, lots of icky body horror, and a head-caving-in scene that would do Gaspar Noe proud. It gets confusing because a lot of films get retroactively rated. Netflix listed Barbarella as R. Bananas is now PG-13. The other confusion is when a film has multiple cuts with different ratings but the exact same title. I haven't seen that as often since the VHS days ended. Since DVDs inception they call it another edition or something. Egbert Souse posted:I think it's disturbing how a movie can be extremely violent, but get a PG-13 just because they don't show blood and gore. That's the more European sentiment but most in  don't seem to mind. It's interesting how emotional and intellectual sensibilities change over time and within different countries and cultures. Reading through reviews here it's very common to see our current zeitgeist applied to films from 20+ years ago that just don't jibe today.Makes one wonder future generations will say about these days.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 22:30
|
|
|
Somehow Psycho was re-rated R, despite being rated M for a 1968 re-release. M later became PG. THX-1138 went from GP (later PG) in 1971 to R for the director's cut, even though none of the nudity was removed or added between cuts.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 22:52
|
|
|
Zogo posted:In the 1960s and 1970s and earlier there were more people who weren't allowed to see films and culturally it was looked on in the same way like taking your family to the strip club or something. Things have changed obviously. When things slowly started to shift and more prudish kinds of people dared to walk into the Hopefully that we were loving barbarians and that things are much better where they are. Also that they will be right when they say it. I am sickened by the disassociation of violence and gore under the blockbuster model and genuinely consider it something that inures people to death and violence in a way that serves the interests of the state. It's loving horrible, like how the army lets movies have tanks and poo poo for free if the movie glorifies Our Brave Men Fighting Overseas but tells anyone else to gently caress off.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
Zogo posted:It gets confusing because a lot of films get retroactively rated. Netflix listed Barbarella as R. Bananas is now PG-13. The other confusion is when a film has multiple cuts with different ratings but the exact same title. I haven't seen that as often since the VHS days ended. Since DVDs inception they call it another edition or something. I was reading an interview with some animation director the other day (probably Bakshi but I'm not 100%) and he said that one of his films has so many cuts that there's G, PG-13, M and R cuts floating around out there.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 22:55
|
|
|
Egbert Souse posted:Somehow Psycho was re-rated R, despite being rated M for a 1968 re-release. M later became PG. Midnight Cowboy was originally X-rated and was later changed to R.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 23:19
|
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:I was reading an interview with some animation director the other day (probably Bakshi but I'm not 100%) and he said that one of his films has so many cuts that there's G, PG-13, M and R cuts floating around out there. Bakshi would make sense, considering he made loving Fritz the Cat.
|
|
#
?
Sep 28, 2016 23:21
|
|
|
Zogo posted:That's the more European sentiment but most in The biggest shift I've seen (more in life than films I guess) isn't with sentiment around violence/sex but with language/insults. When you wanted to talk bad about someone in the 90's in view of your parents you wouldn't dare say the words "poo poo" or "gently caress" but you'd happily throw around "gay" "retarded" "spastic". The attitudes to those words today has completely flipped. For example, watching early seasons of Survivor, Stephanie (who was the populations darling) insults things as "gay" or "retarded" on multiple occasions and people adored the girl. This is a G/PG rated show (sorry I don't know the US equivalent) on the most conservative/old people major network in the country.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2016 00:23
|
|
|
Looten Plunder posted:The biggest shift I've seen (more in life than films I guess) isn't with sentiment around violence/sex but with language/insults. When you wanted to talk bad about someone in the 90's in view of your parents you wouldn't dare say the words "poo poo" or "gently caress" but you'd happily throw around "gay" "retarded" "spastic". The attitudes to those words today has completely flipped. Rory on Gilmore Girls at one point complains that she has to "find a retarded kid and teach him how to play softball".
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2016 14:48
|
|
|
Looten Plunder posted:The biggest shift I've seen (more in life than films I guess) isn't with sentiment around violence/sex but with language/insults. When you wanted to talk bad about someone in the 90's in view of your parents you wouldn't dare say the words "poo poo" or "gently caress" but you'd happily throw around "gay" "retarded" "spastic". The attitudes to those words today has completely flipped. The original Bad News Bears is rated PG but seems very extreme at times with the racial and abusive language, not to mention just some of the content in general (e.g. Walter Matthau is driving a bunch of kids around while drunk). Was that movie seen as even remotely "shocking" (for lack of a better term) when it was released? I can't see it being released at all today (as is), but if it did get released, I have to think it would be rated R.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2016 15:04
|
|
|
Well they remade it recently (well 2005) and it's pg-13 Maybe someone who has seen both can chime in with what was changed on the remake.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2016 15:09
|
|
|
Sand Monster posted:The original Bad News Bears is rated PG but seems very extreme at times with the racial and abusive language, not to mention just some of the content in general (e.g. Walter Matthau is driving a bunch of kids around while drunk). Was that movie seen as even remotely "shocking" (for lack of a better term) when it was released? I can't see it being released at all today (as is), but if it did get released, I have to think it would be rated R. The 70s were a weirdly progressive time for media. The Chevy Chase / Richard Pryor SNL job interview sketch would never make it on network TV today. Hell, it'd be shocking on HBO.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2016 20:08
|
|
|
regulargonzalez posted:The 70s were a weirdly progressive time for media. The Chevy Chase / Richard Pryor SNL job interview sketch would never make it on network TV today. Hell, it'd be shocking on HBO. True, though it was a different "time" in more ways than one. Late night TV was way more of a dumping ground / wasteland than it is now and that was a skit from first season SNL after midnight so it had that anything-goes factor going for it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2016 20:14
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:I feel like that's a shift within American culture overall more than anything. PG-13 happened in the Reagan '80s. Troma's War, also known as 1,000 Ways to Die  Troma fought for us! Troma began production on what was intended as a criticism of President Ronald Reagan's attempt to glamorize armed conflict. wikipedia posted:The film premiered at the Tokyo International Fantastic Film Festival in October 1988 before receiving a limited release on December 9, 1988 in New York City. Its a pretty awful movie, but its a Troma movie. There is tits and softcore sax. Tenzarin fucked around with this message at 21:12 on Sep 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2016 21:04
|
|
|
Troma's War is wild-rear end
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:Troma's War is wild-rear end I can't tell if that's a good thing or a bad thing, but with Troma probably safe to assume both.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 01:10
|
|
|
Enos Cabell posted:I can't tell if that's a good thing or a bad thing, but with Troma probably safe to assume both. Definitely a little of both. I'd say it's one of the essential Troma movies, for what it's worth.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 01:13
|
|
|
Is there an uncut release of it?
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 01:38
|
|
|
got any sevens posted:Is there an uncut release of it? Oh yeah.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 01:39
|
|
|
Which cut of Phantom of the Opera (1925) should I watch?
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 01:45
|
|
|
Spatulater bro! posted:Which cut of Phantom of the Opera (1925) should I watch? It comes down to quality. The best image quality and score are the the 1929 cut on the U.K. BFI Blu-Ray, though the Kino edition is almost as good. The only decent quality 1925 version is on the BFI release. It's region free and only  No idea why no one has bothered reconstructing the '25 cut since there's only 15-20 minutes of unique footage. Egbert Souse fucked around with this message at 04:09 on Sep 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 04:04
|
|
|
How does Troma's War compare to Fortress of Amerikkka?
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 04:14
|
|
|
Snak posted:How does Troma's War compare to Fortress of Amerikkka? I don't know but I know for one thing, its not even close to Surf Nazi's Must Die! 
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 05:33
|
|
|
Jack Gladney posted:Hopefully that we were loving barbarians and that things are much better where they are. Also that they will be right when they say it. I have a feeling we'll be portrayed as barbarians because films have no problem condemning past people as such. I don't see the coupling of the military and Hollywood ending as long as the US remains the #1 superpower and weapons manufacturer. If history is any indication another country will eventually take the mantle anyway. Looten Plunder posted:The biggest shift I've seen (more in life than films I guess) isn't with sentiment around violence/sex but with language/insults. When you wanted to talk bad about someone in the 90's in view of your parents you wouldn't dare say the words "poo poo" or "gently caress" but you'd happily throw around "gay" "retarded" "spastic". The attitudes to those words today has completely flipped. Are you saying they can say "poo poo" and "gently caress" on a G rated show now in your country? 
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 06:04
|
|
|
Tenzarin posted:I don't know but I know for one thing, its not even close to Surf Nazi's Must Die! *doing a move* oh gently caress *cries like a person who's been caught crying*
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 06:06
|
|
|
None of that poo poo happens in Surf Nazis Must Die, though. It's way tamer than Fortress of Amerikkka. Fortress of Amerikkka has a guy get his feet chained to a stump and his arms chained to a car, and well, you know...
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 06:23
|
|
|
Snak posted:None of that poo poo happens in Surf Nazis Must Die, though. It's way tamer than Fortress of Amerikkka. No soz I only cry for the movie. If whoever old mand older than us who works the shob thinks we're crying? I'm gonna tell him yeah we crying.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 06:50
|
|
|
The Keeping Room is really good imo. Very well made ande sad and so on.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 06:50
|
|
|
Egbert Souse posted:It comes down to quality. I see that the version streaming on Shudder is only 79 minutes long. IMDB is telling me the 1929 cut is 95 minutes, which is the shortest of all the runtimes listed. Is this a difference in content, or is it a frame rate difference?
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2016 14:51
|
|
|
Spatulater bro! posted:I see that the version streaming on Shudder is only 79 minutes long. IMDB is telling me the 1929 cut is 95 minutes, which is the shortest of all the runtimes listed. Is this a difference in content, or is it a frame rate difference? I don't have a subscription, but they show cover art from Kino's Blu-Ray. It seems to match the runtime of the 1929 cut run at 24fps. 95 is correct for the same cut run at 20fps. Seems like a safe watch. The '25 cut runs just under two hours at 20fps.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2016 03:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 07:10 |
|
|
Just watched Deliverance for the first time and there was a shot I was curious about. It's maybe 20-30 minutes into the movie, they're on the river in their canoes and they go under a bridge. The banjo kid is standing on the bridge and the shot starts on the upriver side of the bridge, looking up at the kid, goes under the bridge, swiveling as it goes so you are looking at the bridge from the downriver side. Easy enough. But then the shot elevates and you're looking down at the bridge. So the camera moves in essentially a J shape motion where the bridge is in the bowl of the J. Seems like a crane shot would be tricky to pull off on the river, but not sure how else it might have been done. Wish I could find a video of the scene but not having any luck.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2016 04:32
|
|