Your Highness

Cinema Releases, and Rumours/Discussion of Upcoming Films
User avatar
Shingster
Bruce Lee's Fist
Posts: 4140
Joined: 08 Sep 2006, 11:14

Re: Your Highness

Post by Shingster »

bradavon wrote:As you know, the MPAA consider nudity far, far worse than swearing and violence.
Actually they consider nudity worse than swearing and far far worse than violence. The MPAA have a very backwards policy towards swearing, although they do give a little leeway to the PG-13 rating.
Yi-Long wrote:I think it is. All this extra inconvenience imposed on all kinds of stuff, just so we can 'protect the children' from stuff they hardly need protecting from, is just annoying, plus it won't work either.
You're Dutch, you don't understand, you crazy fuckers believe in being open about what kids are getting up to! You'll never understand the benefits of "don't ask, don't tell" and blanket censorship to protect the children from any kind of reality! It's the British (and American) way! :D
Yi-Long
Bruce Lee's Fist
Posts: 8616
Joined: 26 Oct 2004, 13:46
Location: Alkmaar, Holland

Re: Your Highness

Post by Yi-Long »

Shingster wrote:You're Dutch, you don't understand, you crazy fuckers believe in being open about what kids are getting up to! You'll never understand the benefits of "don't ask, don't tell" and blanket censorship to protect the children from any kind of reality! It's the British (and American) way! :D
Listen, if my kids don't swear like they're in an episode of Deadwood by the age of 10, I must have done something wrong as a parent!

:D
Image
I was there, the big BNB blackout of november, 2008. We lost many that day...
User avatar
Markgway
Bruce Lee's Fist
Posts: 20194
Joined: 18 Feb 2005, 02:04

Re: Your Highness

Post by Markgway »

Yi-Long wrote:I think it is. All this extra inconvenience imposed on all kinds of stuff, just so we can 'protect the children' from stuff they hardly need protecting from, is just annoying, plus it won't work either.
You know perfectly well that the MPAA are gonna given an 'R' to a trailer that has the word 'fuck' in it so why make a big deal about it? You're right about their stances on nudity and violence being more lenient but that's besides the point in this case. The MPAA created a rod for their own back by having only two ratings for trailers 'G' and 'R' (helpfully colour coded green and red). Maybe if the trailer was 'PG-13' Natalie's lovely ass would've been left alone - but the 'fucks' would still have rated it 'R'. I think there's a huge difference between accepting that kids swear (we all did when I was at school) and saying it's 'OK, to approve swearing in films likely to be watched by young children'. It's also worth mentioning that an 'R' doesn't prevent kids from seeing the film - it's more of a parental guideance issue. Unlike the UK where age ratings are (12A excepted) strict.
Image
User avatar
bradavon
Bruce Lee's Fist
Posts: 24430
Joined: 27 Oct 2004, 20:30

Re: Your Highness

Post by bradavon »

Guys! It's a trailer for christ sake. Who gives a fuck what rating it gets :?.
Shingster wrote:Actually they consider nudity worse than swearing and far far worse than violence.
That's what I said :? :D
User avatar
Markgway
Bruce Lee's Fist
Posts: 20194
Joined: 18 Feb 2005, 02:04

Re: Your Highness

Post by Markgway »

bradavon wrote:Guys! It's a trailer for christ sake. Who gives a fuck what rating it gets :?.
The only reason the rating came up is because you were too dim to find the trailer with Portman's ass.
Image
User avatar
bradavon
Bruce Lee's Fist
Posts: 24430
Joined: 27 Oct 2004, 20:30

Re: Your Highness

Post by bradavon »

Oh Man Up Mark!
User avatar
Markgway
Bruce Lee's Fist
Posts: 20194
Joined: 18 Feb 2005, 02:04

Re: Your Highness

Post by Markgway »

bradavon wrote:Oh Man Up Mark!
What does that even mean?? :roll:
Image
Post Reply