Personal movie history

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 20 Jun 2009, 12:56

Thanks Mark for the explantion. I think I must have seen the film uncut then.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 20 Jun 2009, 15:04

bradavon wrote:Mrs Doubtfire definitely works better a a PG, although I don't reckon I've seen it uncut.

How can you judge then?

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 20 Jun 2009, 15:17

Because I presume words are cut and thus the feel of the film remains largely unchanged. In other words, like I said it works better as a family friendly PG.

Killer Meteor · Post by **Killer Meteor** » 20 Jun 2009, 15:49

Brad, do research, don't presume. It just makes you look like a dope

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 20 Jun 2009, 16:10

"Like"

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 21 Jun 2009, 00:28

I'm assuming what Brad means is that the film is 98% 'PG' family fodder with some coarse dialogue thrown in.

Thus an otherwise innocuous family film marred by some moderate adult material.

The uncut version deserves a '12' (seriously folks, gags about STIs and sex toys aren't suitable for youngsters).

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 21 Jun 2009, 00:40

Found a transcript on-line:

-That's a pretty impressive bauble you got her.

-Oh, thank you. Thank you.

-A fella gives a gift like that, he wants more than a piece of her heart, eh? Bit of a going-down payment, huh?

- Excuse me?

- You know, dear. Sink the sub. Hide the weasel? Park the porpoise? Bit of the old humpty dumpty? Little Jack Horny? The horizontal mambo?

- Mrs Doubtfire...

-The bone dance, eh? Rumpleforeskin? Baloney bop? Bit of the old cunning linguistics? Hm?

- Mrs Doubtfire, please.

- Am I being a little graphic? Sorry. I hope you're up for a little competition.

- I beg your pardon?

-She's got a power tool in the bedroom, dear. It's her personal jackhammer. She uses it and the lights dim. It's like a prison movie. Amazed she hasn't chipped her teeth. I hope you bring cocktail sauce. She's got crabs. And I don't mean Dungeness. I'm being blunt as a spoon, aren't I? Forgive me.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 21 Jun 2009, 12:05

That's rather strong for a PG.
The original novel wasn't real a "kids"/family book (well it WAS) but more for teens or older children at least.

gasteropod · Post by **gasteropod** » 21 Jun 2009, 13:21

That's clearly for the parents to laugh about whilst the kids don't have a flaming clue what she's talking about, I personally wouldn't have cut it out.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 22 Jun 2009, 03:13

gasteropod wrote:That's clearly for the parents to laugh about whilst the kids don't have a flaming clue what she's talking about, I personally wouldn't have cut it out.

You think kids are that ignorant of innuendos?

Shingster · Post by **Shingster** » 22 Jun 2009, 09:50

If the child can comprehend what those terms mean then they're ok to be exposed to them, as quite frankly the language in your quote is as edgy as a marshmellow. It's no worse than Eric Idle's "nudge, nudge" sketches from the 60s.

degeneration · Post by **degeneration** » 22 Jun 2009, 16:55

Shingster wrote:If the child can comprehend what those terms mean then they're ok to be exposed to them

I gotta completely disagree with that one.

I'm pretty sure some of the 13 year olds I teach know what double penetration is... that mean it is ok to expose them to it?

Most kids know different swear words. Is it then ok to expose them to it as well? Exposure will be seen as encouragement and increase the likelihood that they use language they hear. The last thing I want is more kids not only knowing the language, but being more than happy to use it.

Got to go now, going to watch South Park: Bigger Longer Uncut with my 8 year old nephew. Sure he'll love it.

HungFist · Post by **HungFist** » 22 Jun 2009, 17:02

degeneration wrote:Got to go now, going to watch South Park: Bigger Longer Uncut with my 8 year old nephew. Sure he'll love it.

Rated 7 in Denmark...

Shingster · Post by **Shingster** » 22 Jun 2009, 17:13

degeneration wrote:I'm pretty sure some of the 13 year olds I teach know what double penetration is... that mean it is ok to expose them to it?

Yes, because exposing a child under 13 yrs of age to Robin Williams rapidly quipping "the bone dance" and "Baloney bop" is exactly the same as exposing a 13yr old to hard core porn. What an utterly absurd statement!

My point that you so magnificently misunderstood was that the children who shouldn't be exposed to sexualised imagery wouldn't understand what Robin Williams means by "cunning linguistics". The children who do understand what those terms mean, aren't going to be corrupted by lighthearted exposure to them whilst under the supervision of their parents (afterall the PG rating means that the parents make the call).

I can't speak for you, but when I was a young child (under 10) almost everyone I knew understood and certainly had been exposed to and regularly used terms worse than "baloney bop". In fact I remember when I was 8 and our schoolteacher tried to explain where babies come from by saying "the hospital where you are born" and one kid in our class shouted out "from your mother's cunt!".

degeneration wrote:Got to go now, going to watch South Park: Bigger Longer Uncut with my 8 year old nephew. Sure he'll love it.

One moronic over-exaggeration in one post is bad enough, but two? Glad you are logging off, maybe the hours away from the forums will give you some perspective!

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 22 Jun 2009, 17:35

Double penatration in a Williams film! what a thread this has turned into.

degeneration · Post by **degeneration** » 22 Jun 2009, 17:46

Shingster wrote:
degeneration wrote:I'm pretty sure some of the 13 year olds I teach know what double penetration is... that mean it is ok to expose them to it?
Yes, because exposing a child under 13 yrs of age to Robin Williams rapidly quipping "the bone dance" and "Baloney bop" is exactly the same as exposing a 13yr old to hard core porn. What an utterly absurd statement!

Absurd is far from the word I'd use. I think calling it an exaggerated statement would be more apt. It was made because exaggeration is commonly used by people to highlight a point. That point being me completely totally and utterly disagreeing with your statement saying that if a child can comprehend terms then they are ok to be exposed to them.

Who's to draw the line at what terms are ok if you think going as far as hard core porn is absurd? Baloney pop etc is fine.. ok. How about the word crap? still ok? Then we get to more serious words like shit and bastard... is that too much to expose them to? I'm sure they'll comprehend the meaning, so by your statement they are ok to be exposed to them. Something I disagree with.

<Editted out - reread the post and pretty sure my thoughts were wrong here>

And as far as your forum discussion style goes, you've called me deliberately obtuse in one thread and now moronic in this one. I think that is enough with the verbal name calling. Just cause you disagree with me or whatever doesn't give reason for that. So leave the name calling to people who don't know better. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you do.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 22 Jun 2009, 19:01

Words like crap, shit and bastard are used in PG films so they're fine. When I was young I wasn't allowed to watch certain stuff, I remember watching The Day Today etc when I was 12/13 and not really getting all of the jokes, loved the Speak Your Brains part at that age

I first watched Red Dwarf when I was about 11 (IIRC).

romerojpg · Post by **romerojpg** » 22 Jun 2009, 19:13

Yeah Grim but some on here were watching double anal penatration porn when they were like 5 years old, and sicko banned films when thye were toddlers. They had great parents and turned out fine

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 22 Jun 2009, 19:30

It depends on the person I guess

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 22 Jun 2009, 19:49

Markgway wrote:I'm assuming what Brad means is that the film is 98% 'PG' family fodder with some coarse dialogue thrown in.

Thus an otherwise innocuous family film marred by some moderate adult material.

Yes correct. Whereas Spider-man which is clearly too violent for PG.

Markgway wrote:The uncut version deserves a '12' (seriously folks, gags about STIs and sex toys aren't suitable for youngsters).

They aren't suitable for Mrs. Doubtfire. What were they thinking? It's very much a family film.

Now, whether what you quoted is suitable for PG I'll let you guys discuss.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 22 Jun 2009, 21:40

Shingster wrote:In fact I remember when I was 8 and our schoolteacher tried to explain where babies come from by saying "the hospital where you are born" and one kid in our class shouted out "from your mother's cunt!".

So by your logic it would OK to use the word 'cunt' in a 'PG' film because 8 year olds already know what it means.

What I'm saying is that younger kids shouldn't be exposed to unsuitable innuendos. Whether they understand them really isn't the point.

I watched films on TV and video when I was a kid that were rated above my age group but I would never have expected the censors to say "aw, fuck it" they kids are probably watching anyways so why bother?

Shingster · Post by **Shingster** » 22 Jun 2009, 21:55

Markgway wrote:So by your logic it would OK to use the word 'cunt' in a 'PG' film because 8 year olds already know what it means.

What? Of course not! What is it with the members of these boards and making extreme assumptions from the comments of others? That was an example to highlight that kids today are more aware than many adults assume they are.

I think too many people in this country equate PG with a U rating and forget what it is meant to represent: "General viewing, but some scenes may be unsuitable for young children"

By that definition Mrs Doubtfire feels like a PG film, there are a couple of scenes that may be too sexualised for young children and it's up to the parent decide.

I'm saying that the risque scenes in this particular film are not graphic, yes they may be unsuitable for some kids, but they're not going to make many other kids blink, and IN THIS SPECIFIC CASE it should be left up to parental discretion. Ergo I think PG is a fair rating for the film - but I also don't think a 12 rating is particularly excessive.

That's it, you can insist on trying to paint me as some reckless liberal who wants to expose children to all sorts of profanity all you want, but that was never my intention.

Shingster · Post by **Shingster** » 22 Jun 2009, 22:08

degeneration wrote:And as far as your forum discussion style goes, you've called me deliberately obtuse in one thread and now moronic in this one. I think that is enough with the verbal name calling.

For a start, I never called you obtuse or moronic, I said anyone exclaiming that they don't know the reasons Bladerunner is well loved was being deliberately obtuse - ie: blatantly ignoring very widely established facts that are all over the internet. Bladerunner is one of the most analysed films in existence, were you really that flummoxed as to its appeal?

I've never called you moronic, I said your statements were moronic because they were deliberately gross exaggerations that were designed to goad my previously stated opinion (which quite frankly was not that extreme!). They hold no relevance in the context of a extremely tame comedy such as Mrs Doubtfire. Yes I was being harsh, but you were suggesting I was ok with exposing children to porn, you better believe i'm going to come back at you when you throw something as damning as that at me!

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 23 Jun 2009, 07:45

I think a PG rating is fair enough. These days I think you can get away with more at PG/12 though. I couldn't believe Casino Royale was a 12 and Spiderman 2 is probably about as violent as 1 yet its a PG and the 1st is a 12. Why?

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 23 Jun 2009, 13:13

Shingster wrote:What? Of course not! What is it with the members of these boards and making extreme assumptions from the comments of others?

I probably do it from time to time but it is something Mark in particular revels in. Boy it can be annoying.