Should they lower the age required to see, buy, or rent an R-Rated Movie or game?

[psycheoutsteve]

I was looking at a previous rant about getting ID at Wal-Mart, and although the rant was unjustified due to store policies regarding the carding process, I thought i'd use it as a springboard for this rant. This has probably been said before, but children and young adults are subjected to violence, profanity, nudity, and whatnot in the media all the time, often at ages much younger than 17. I was able to handle some pretty hardcore rated R movies by age twelve, (which is not to say that all children could or want to) but depending on the child he or she might be able to handle it. I probably wouldn't lower the age requirement down to twelve though, I was thinking about 14 or 15 years old because that's about when people are entering high school and they've pretty much heard or seen it all in terms of rated R content. Some people feel as if lowering the age would be a threat to the older and more mature movie going crowd, but I say the type of people who always chat or do some obnoxious thing in a theater are always going to be there and are not limited by age, (I've seen obnoxious fucking forty year olds). Besides, kids will just sneak into R rated pictures if they can't get into them and that probably hurts the ticket sales for the movie. To bring up a point to parallel my argument, what do all you schmoes think increases aggressive behavior more, sports or R rated movies? The level of competition at the early high school level is fierce and the language and actions by players on the field can be brutal. I've even seen a kid grab another kid's soccer jersey and throw him head first into the boards of an indoor soccer arena, at age 14 no less. My point is that if kids can handle and be subjected to that type of intensity at an earlier age than 17, then why can't they see an R rated movie around the same time? I understand the fear people have in regards to violent movies and video games influencing violent behavior and I don't want to be disrespectful to them, but frankly I think that argument is ridiculous. What do you guys think?

[echo_bravo]

Absolutely not IMO.

Rated R films have been getting more and more over the edge as the years have gone by (torture porn, gross out comedies pushin the limits etc). I think the system in place right now is great as it is.

Just look at the upcoming Pathology trailer.:eek:
No way in hell I would let a 12 yr old see something like that.

[ilovemovies]

I personally feel that we should completely do away with NC-17 rating. It takes the decision away from the parents which IMO is wrong.

[God of War]

Totally agree with echo bravo on this issue. What's NC17 mean, ilovemovies? Over here we have different ratings system. MA for example means 15 years and over. The whole thing is confusing at times for me. :D

[The Postmaster General]

I agree with echo.

GoW - NC-17 means absolutely no one under 17 gets in, whereas R means 17 with a parent.

Maybe like 1 NC-17 movie comes out every 5 years.

[God of War]

A hah, I see. Thanks. Over here a movie with an R rating means that you must be 18 or over to get in. The remake of Halloween was R rated over here. And you don't need a parent for that. MA, you must be over 15 or have a parent or guardian. It's all confusing. lol.

Do you have an NRC rating over there? We have a PGR rating here. Most f the horror movies that get released at the cinemas here are rated MA. Even Hostel 2 was onlt rated MA. I think that 15 is too young for shit like that. But that's just me.

[The Postmaster General]

G = General Audiences
PG = Parental Guidance
PG-13 = Parental Guidance recommended for <13.
R = No one under 17 admitted without a parent or guardian
NC-17 = No one under 17 admitted (This replaced the X rating)

[a7xfan]

the US should have the same as UK

Uc- suitable for everyone, mainly youngsters
U- for everybody
PG- parental guidance
12- no one under 12
12a- under 12's have to be accompanied with adult over 18
15- no one under 15
18- no one under 18

[Tagia_Romero]

And just for the sake of it:

C- Children's Viewing
G- General Audiences
PG- Parental Guidance recommended for persons under 15 years
M- Mature Audiences
MA- Mature Audiences only
R- No person under 18
X- Speaks for itself

[The Postmaster General]

^^Where is that Tagia, and what is the difference between M, MA, R and X?

[Cronos]

http://www.movie-ratings.net/movie-ratings/australia.php

[Tagia_Romero]

^^Where is that Tagia, and what is the difference between M, MA, R and X?

Follow the road of Cronos my friend, and all will be revealed.

[psycheoutsteve]

Absolutely not IMO.

Rated R films have been getting more and more over the edge as the years have gone by (torture porn, gross out comedies pushin the limits etc). I think the system in place right now is great as it is.

Just look at the upcoming Pathology trailer.:eek:
No way in hell I would let a 12 yr old see something like that.

Two things...number 1, I agree with you stating a twelve year old shouldn't be allowed access to a rated R film, but what about a 15 year old?

number 2, if some R rated flicks are pushing the envelope these days in terms of questionable or extreme content, why not have the rating system re-evaluated to consist of a regular and hardcore R rating. There are films out there that get the R because of a couple of swears, and then there are the films that get the R for just about everything and then some. There's a big difference between Thank You For Smoking and Hostel.

[rilocay]

I always have the same opinion on the American rating system. It's inferior to other systems and need to be changed. Film like the Matrix and Die Hard where i am any 15 year old can see with no trouble, and so they should be able to, wheras last time i chekced they were R rated in the usa. For what...

[Cyclonus]

There's no way they'd get away with lowering the age limit. As it is, Hollywood gets enough flak about how they market horror movies to teens, and we all know a lot of theaters are pretty lax about enforcing the ratings in any case.

[psycheoutsteve]

There's no way they'd get away with lowering the age limit. As it is, Hollywood gets enough flak about how they market horror movies to teens, and we all know a lot of theaters are pretty lax about enforcing the ratings in any case.

I guess it just depends on the theater, but my local cinemas are not relaxed in the slightest about the rating system. They wouldn't let me into blade 2 when i was 16 and a half...and they card me now at 22 years of age every time i buy a ticket...And let Hollywood take some more flak anyways. I for one, would love to see some changes made in the way Hollywood handles things.

[Brando @$$ Fat]

This seems like an issue that I would've cared more about when I was under 17. I think the system is fine how it is. God, I never thought I'd say that.

[unspoken]

number 2, if some R rated flicks are pushing the envelope these days in terms of questionable or extreme content, why not have the rating system re-evaluated to consist of a regular and hardcore R rating. There are films out there that get the R because of a couple of swears, and then there are the films that get the R for just about everything and then some. There's a big difference between Thank You For Smoking and Hostel.

I agree with you, but if you have two levels of R, how many complaints are you going to have from pissed off parents who just saw the "R" in the hardcore R picture and thought it wouldn't be as bad as it was.

I actually think they should remove the stigma/barriers that a film with an NC-17 rating gets (limits on ability to advertise, some chains won't run it, etc.) and use that a little more frequently. Sorry to all the young people who are fans, but I think that this would be perfect for flicks like Hostel, all the Saw movies, etc. No way should anyone under 17 being watching that.

[Crazy Dud]

The problem with the R-rating is that it is way too broad. Films like The Matrix and Air Force One receive the same rating as Van Wilder and Hostel, which makes no sense whatsoever. I believe we need a rating between PG-13 and R. Maybe a PG-15, which could be given to such films as The Matrix and Air Force One. This would leave the R-rating designation for the "hard R's," such as the Hills Have Eyes remake.

[Draccoca]

Me Personally don't really care for the ratings system that we have over here. Who are these people to tell me what my kids can and can't watch? That job should be left up to me.

I guess that's my mom's raising coming out. Ever since I was 9 years old I've been able to watch whatever movie I wanted (except porn). When the video stores started to crack down on the ratings she told them that I can get whatever I wanted. And I'm the same way with my children. They are only 6 and 7 and we have watched halloween, jason, and many other horrors with no ill effects. They understand that it's just a movie and not real and that there's nothing to be scared about.

[psycheoutsteve]

The problem with the R-rating is that it is way too broad. Films like The Matrix and Air Force One receive the same rating as Van Wilder and Hostel, which makes no sense whatsoever. I believe we need a rating between PG-13 and R. Maybe a PG-15, which could be given to such films as The Matrix and Air Force One. This would leave the R-rating designation for the "hard R's," such as the Hills Have Eyes remake.

agreed wholeheartedly.

[X-Nightcrawler]

I'm with echo_bravo.

I was surprised to see that to R-rated movies you can still nonchalantly walk in if you have a 'guardian'. In here, no one under 18 gets to these movies, parent or no parent.

[SkyNet]

no they shouldnt, they should raise the age... i dont need MORE little fucking kids in a movie that dont know how ot shut the fuck up, or giggle when they see a titty

[psycheoutsteve]

no they shouldnt, they should raise the age... i dont need MORE little fucking kids in a movie that dont know how ot shut the fuck up, or giggle when they see a titty

And there aren't older people who do that? I snuck into blade 2 when I was younger and the most obnoxious person in the audience was a lady at of least 35 years of age. There are always going to be people in any location that do those kinds of things.

[sarah1980]

it don't matter if they lower the age rating or not kids no matter what age are gonna see Rated R films anyways

[Lost in Space]

it don't matter if they lower the age rating or not kids no matter what age are gonna see Rated R films anyways

I recently turned 17 and sarah is absolutly right. Even if we cant buy the ticket I could always sneak in or something like that. For me the rating system is a filter just for people who are going to be an idiot in the movie. an R rated moving wil (hopefully) have less 13 year olds screaming, giggling, and throwing shit.

[Dragula]

FOR KIDS:

G = You can go
PG = Who gives a shit about parents. They'll still let you in
PG-13 = Might wanna bring someone with you
R = Stay the fuck out
NC-17 = Wait until you'll older...trust me.

[ilovemovies]

I'm with echo_bravo.

I was surprised to see that to R-rated movies you can still nonchalantly walk in if you have a 'guardian'. In here, no one under 18 gets to these movies, parent or no parent.


In other words it's the American equivilant of the NC-17, which IMO is wrong because it's take the power away from the parents.

It should be a parent's decision, NOT the movie theater and the MPAA what a child/teen can or cannot see.

That's why I think the NC-17 should be done completely away with although it is true that NC-17 rated flicks are extremely rare.

[X-Nightcrawler]

In other words it's the American equivilant of the NC-17, which IMO is wrong because it's take the power away from the parents.

It should be a parent's decision, NOT the movie theater and the MPAA what a child/teen can or cannot see.

That's why I think the NC-17 should be done completely away with although it is true that NC-17 rated flicks are extremely rare.I do not understand your point.

By the time the kid is 18, he's theoretically old enough so that the parents don't need worry about him seeing blood, titties and profanity. If the parents want to allow the kid to see a "C" rated movie (Mexico's NC-17, which is more like NC-18), then allow him to rent it later. Parents don't give a shit, anyway.

This is I think the one thing Mexico did right. The concept of 7 year old kids being able to watch "Hostel" if they have any schlub to act as 'a guardian' is 'tarded.
The problem is that in America, it's like every movie ever is Rated R, while much fewer get the C in Mexico. But in such cases, they get the B-15, where you can't enter if you're under 15. Again, parent or no parent.

I like that the factor that decides is the kid's age, not that he may have some older guy with him that doesn't give a shit about how the kid watches the movie.

[Raimo69]

I want it to be better used don't let anyone in under at all. Use the Nc-17 rules on Rated R. I don't want to hear little kids scream when they see some chick naked. It's annoying.

[BondFiction]

Obviously my response is going to be a little biased because I'm only 16, but I think the policy is bullshit. I'm a junior in high school man, and if some executive somewhere thinks I can't handle fake blood, boobs or the word "fuck", then what kind of sheltered society are they hoping for?

[john_rambo]

We all went through it Bond... lol... but I dont think they should lower it cause i dont want MORE high schoolers at the R Rated movies damnit. It'll make the movies even more annoying.

[AceD]

"Uc- suitable for everyone, mainly youngsters
U- for everybody
PG- parental guidance
12- no one under 12
12a- under 12's have to be accompanied with adult over 18
15- no one under 15
18- no one under 18"

I honestly think that's incredibly absurd. Why not just convert it to Pg-3, 12, 11, 15, 16, 17....it's just dumb.

I think the American system is fine. I'm not saying I agree with every rating, but I don't think there's a great reason to have something in between PG-13 and R, or to try to distinguish between 'hard' Rs and the Air Force One types.

Also, the argument that 'kids see violence/sex/etc in the news all the time, so they should be able to see it in the movies' is ridiculous. That's like saying since kids sometimes get beat up by bullies, we should never try to stop it, because it's going to happen anyway. Please.

Kids (just like all people) should know there is violence in the world. They should know that guns kill, that punches hurt, that falls kill people. They don't need to be walking around scared of everything, but they don't need to be ignorant either.

That said, kids (or adults for that matter) also don't need to be scared of the boogeyman, or zombies, or ghosts, or other things that are not real. So there's a line here.

All in all, I think the rating system is fine. If anything, I'd change it to no alllow 10 and under into R-rated movies. I'm not saying all of them can't handle it, but there's no need, and it disgusts me when people bring their kids into gory and scary stuff or something like the Departed.

[psycheoutsteve]

"Uc- suitable for everyone, mainly youngsters
U- for everybody
PG- parental guidance
12- no one under 12
12a- under 12's have to be accompanied with adult over 18
15- no one under 15
18- no one under 18"

I honestly think that's incredibly absurd. Why not just convert it to Pg-3, 12, 11, 15, 16, 17....it's just dumb.

I think the American system is fine. I'm not saying I agree with every rating, but I don't think there's a great reason to have something in between PG-13 and R, or to try to distinguish between 'hard' Rs and the Air Force One types.

Also, the argument that 'kids see violence/sex/etc in the news all the time, so they should be able to see it in the movies' is ridiculous. That's like saying since kids sometimes get beat up by bullies, we should never try to stop it, because it's going to happen anyway. Please.

Kids (just like all people) should know there is violence in the world. They should know that guns kill, that punches hurt, that falls kill people. They don't need to be walking around scared of everything, but they don't need to be ignorant either.

That said, kids (or adults for that matter) also don't need to be scared of the boogeyman, or zombies, or ghosts, or other things that are not real. So there's a line here.

All in all, I think the rating system is fine. If anything, I'd change it to no alllow 10 and under into R-rated movies. I'm not saying all of them can't handle it, but there's no need, and it disgusts me when people bring their kids into gory and scary stuff or something like the Departed.

Um, maybe it's just me, but your comparison between bullying and subjection to violent movies makes little to no damn sense at all. It's not like anybody is physically abusing a kid when they watch an R rated movie. You also speak about the youth as if they're all a bunch of idiots, I guarantee that more than half of them can tell the difference between fantasy and reality. How the hell are they going to be ignorant of violence by watching an R-rated film? You need to explain that one a little better...You also say that kids and adults don't need to be scared by zombies, ghosts, or other non-real things, ummm ok....lets just stop making movies with intriguing elements such as ghosts or zombies because a couple people get a little scared while watching them...ya it's not like I or anyone else enjoyed getting a little scared by those kind of films as a kid because they were exciting...pffft...Man...you need to realize that not every parent that brings their youngsters to these films is irresponsible and that not every child that sees them grows up to be a fucked up individual and ignorant to real violence. It depends entirely upon the individual child and how mature he/she is.

[Jon Lyrik]

First of all, I'm 16.

Second of all, people who bring a 3-year-old to Saving Private Ryan should be punched in the fucking teeth.

Thirdly, the MPAA system has been dissected so many times now, I don't really think I can add anything. It's been proven to be biased, bullshit system that's basically used by both the industry powerhouses to bully more fringe-dwelling filmmakers and houses and also by former government employees (see Glickman and Valenti, the latter of whom was in the Kennedy motorcade) to keep a more underground government ball-grab of American films.

But for the ratings themselves? It's the product of such an environment plus the concerns of anonymous, mostly bed-wetting soccer moms and dads, some of whom haven't raised a kid in over a decade. So yes, it's an idiotic system. No, The Insider should not be rated R if something like Saw IV is rated R as well. No, they shouldn't grade profanity and boobies and mannequin sex more harshly than they do a guy getting his nuts hooked up to a car battery. Yes, the NC-17 rating is a modern-day offshoot of the Hayes Code, especially in the way it's used to destroy a film's chances at breaking even. But, it's just a product of a greater evil.

[athf1980]

Leave the system the way it it. It's not perfect but it works. If there is new system that system will be slammed to.

I also understand that some R rated movies that young teenagerss could watch like the Matrix-which I conisder very tame R and some teenagers should not watch like the torture prn crap.

The first R movie I saw in theater was Schlinder list. I was 12. I was forced to see that movie.