Page 1 of 2
Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 10:01 pm
by Leisher
Trailer.
Looks kind of good and kind of bad.
P.S. For those who haven't heard of it, this is based on the video game series.
Edited By Leisher on 1189476112
Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 7:46 am
by DoctorChaos
Damn, I was hoping it was based on the comic. That shit would be twisted...
Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:22 am
by Malcolm
DoctorChaos wrote:Damn, I was hoping it was based on the comic. That shit would be twisted...
Yea, that flick'd be seen by a mass market of about a dozen people.
Posted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 10:50 am
by Leisher
I forgot all about the comic. I remember it being very good stuff.
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 6:03 pm
by Malcolm
Rumour has it that Fox, in its infinite wisdom, has 86ed the director in postproduction cos his version would've been rated R. Fox wants PG-13. Fucking hell. It's a movie about KILLING PEOPLE. The name literally says it. PG-13? Fuck you.
Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 12:49 pm
by Leisher
Hollywood needs to get over it's infatuation with PG-13 action movies. No theater in the country is checking IDs. Make a good action film, R rated or not, and people will go see it. Stop trying to sell a shit film to a bigger wider audience of people who don't want to see it and start selling good films to a smaller audience who will be dying to see it.
Of course, the Hitman news doesn't affect me as I thought it was a rental the first time I saw the trailer. I'll just hope for a "Director's Cut".
Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 12:55 pm
by Malcolm
I'm trying real hard to think of the last good PG-13 flick I saw. I just can't recall. I know I must've seen at least one, I just don't remember.
Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 1:10 pm
by GORDON
Red Dawn? The first and last good PG-13 flick?
Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 1:20 pm
by Malcolm
GORDON wrote:Red Dawn? The first and last good PG-13 flick?
I was thinking "Raiders of the Lost Ark." However, that was PG. However, the original rating appears to've been R. Damn. "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade," PG-13.
Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 4:17 pm
by GORDON
It was because of the facemelting in Raiders there there was a big push for the new rating, Red Dawn being the first movie with a PG-13.
Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 10:58 pm
by Paul
GORDON wrote:It was because of the facemelting in Raiders there there was a big push for the new rating...
I'm pretty sure it was Temple of Doom, specifically because of the heart scene.
Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 11:04 pm
by GORDON
Saw a documentary about it that showed a bunch of "parents" or whatever were pissed about the face melting in Raiders, but then it was the heart-ripping-out-of in Temple that helped push the MPAA to invent the PG-13...
"Parents" were also pissed about Poltergeist having a PG, iirc.
Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 11:36 pm
by Malcolm
Ah, the MPAA. Forced to form under the jackbooted heel of the fed gov't.
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2007 5:59 am
by TheCatt
So why do TV, video games, and movies get ratings but not books?
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2007 7:50 am
by Leisher
So why do TV, video games, and movies get ratings but not books?
That's a hell of a question.
I don't want to give them ideas, but I would bet that the written word has influenced more people than any movie or video game.
Magazines should be rated too.
How about newspapers? Those things are full of violence, drugs, genocide, brutality, crime, and sex.
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2007 8:23 am
by TheCatt
The only arguments I could come up with were:
1) The other 3 media are visual.
2) Books have been around forever, and no one thought of it back then.
3) It's just a question of time until they do it.
It certainly seems as if the content in books can be much more graphic, yet be targeted towards younger people without issue. Any kid reads Harry Potter, but the latest movies were PG-13, iirc.
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:46 am
by Malcolm
The other three are indeed visual. Apparently, if you don't hear or see anything, it's ok. But there's definitely places w\ certain books on shit lists. Like schools that won't let their students read Book X or something.
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2007 5:01 pm
by GORDON
Hell, some schools don't like Huck Finn.
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2007 5:16 pm
by Leisher
Just remembered that comic books have ratings.
Maybe being visual is the key to having ratings forced on you?
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2007 5:24 pm
by Malcolm
I think, yea. Hell, I bet a twelve year old could buy copies of "Mein Kempf" or "The Turner Diaries" but couldn't get a Lobo backissue.