To start with, I have learned from my sister that there is going to be one of the GREATEST art exhibits in Utah coming to the U! Picasso, Van Gogh, Matisse, Monet, all of the greats are going to be there, and I can't wait to see them. This is going to be so AWESOME. Everybody needs to go and look at this because when will you see a Van Gogh up close in Utah? Rarely.
Enough said about art. Now, I have been thinking about a question in my mind when my Victorian Lit teacher said today, "There isn't an Edward Norton movie that is bad. Name me one!" and I wasn't really able to name him one Edward Norton movie I've seen fully, because usually Edward Norton acts in movies that are given the R rating. Very troublesome in Utah, to say the least. I mean, I could pick up an Edward Norton movie at Hollywood video, but it isn't exactly the greatest thing to do when you're in an LDS family. Especially living at home. But this doesn't mean that I haven't seen rated "R" movies in the past. I just think it's overrated (pun?) when some movies deserve a wider audience, doesn't have some scenes usually given an R rating, yet still contain adult themes. Adult themes. Now, we have all gone to junior high, right? Have we learned about sex there? About violence? Extreme profanity? It isn't like we never see these things when we watch the news. So, I ask myself this question because I know this is a sensitive subject, but what is the big deal if the R rating is given to subjects that parents would know better not to let their children see, but they themselves know exactly what goes on in those movies, and won't be surprised?
An example: Psycho. That movie came out in 1960, yet still retains its R rating. Why? Because of the partial nudity in the shower scene. One that is suggested violence, because we see blood but never actually see the person get skewered, and the fact that this is scary. It is only scary because Hitchcock lets the audience believe what is happening, but never lets them see the action itself. And it is still rated R today, even though its entirety is played on tv, and I know many people who have seen this. Now, would this pass the standards of rated R today? No. But it still is.
A newer example would be Gosford Park. Now that, I would agree has an R rating, because it has the "f" word spoken twice I believe, as well as a reference to a sexual moment in a scene. It definitely fits the R category, yet I feel could be given a PG-13 rating because some of the parts included didn't need to be there. The story would have fit regardless of these few things, and I would add is a brilliant study of British society in the 1930s. So why do we think that R ratings are given to some movies and not others? Because Hollywood believes that the "f" word is rated R and the "s" word is PG-13? It just doesn't make sense to my mind. So, I have struggled with this conundrum for some time because, yes I pay for what I watch in the movie theater, but I still have the knowledge that I know what I'm about to see. So therefore, I would agree most others would be in the same place. You get what you pay for.
What I am willing to suggest is this: why do we set such high standards of a society that witnesses adult themes every day. Yes, I am excluding families from this topic because I know that this would not apply to them. Children shouldn't know about these things. But I am discussing about most of the population who do know. Would we still value Psycho in the future regardless of the R rating? Would we come to think that Gosford Park is a classic if we know that the "f" word is in there? I have suspicions that the world doesn't want another Lady Chatterley's Lover to be available, even though it's right there in our local libraries. So, might I add, is Schindler's List. I would never watch as a child, but still willing to learn about the Holacaust at age 22. Basically, I think like the pirates. The R rating is a punchline to a joke spoken through the ages. We still don't like to look at the news.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
It depends on what the director wants the audience to see. Some directors want a certain audience to see their film. Some will add scenes to make the movie R others will cut stuff out until it is PG-13. We can also blame the movie studios because they want to make a quota or profit.
There are many movie that you suggested that should be PG-13. But there are many PG-13 movies that should be rated R. Not only are the PG-13 movies that have the f-word multiple times that don't get bump up to R, there are also movies that are G or PG that should be bumped up. For example Shrek has a lot of adult humor and sexual innuendos that most kids would not understand.
You mention that Psycho should be rated PG-13, I agree. But that shows you at the moral drift of the rating board. I would be surprised if there is some bribery or negotiated ratings.
Post a Comment