Autobot032 wrote:5150 Cruiser wrote:Autobot032 wrote: Actually, this isn't quite correct. You could use the f-word once per film, in PG, in the '80s. Notable examples: Beetlejuice, BIG.
BIG was the game changer. When the boy used it, it made the MPAA crack down. That, along with a few other things made them change their minds.
One use, no matter the connotation behind it, will automatically net you a PG-13.
You may use up to three of them in a PG-13, as long as they're spaced out and without a sexual connotation. The instant it becomes sexual, it's automatically R.
Looks like you got me on a technicality, because i was thinking of beetle juice when i was typing my past post. Good Eye. But regardless, it wasn't the F-bomb that recieved iDOTM it's PG-13 rating since it wasn't used in the theater version.
BUt it sems that the MPAA comitte can in fact over rule this if they feel it nessasary. BUt it seems they do that more with the transition between PG-13 and R ratings.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_Pic ... ing_system
They certainly can. Which is kinda messed up. I've seen movies that clearly needed a much heavier rating and ones that weren't even close to a PG-13 but got it anyway.
The ratings system needs a massive overhaul, with public input to help them pin down exactly what goes where.
I agree with that, I don't understand how a few words or nudity is considered worse than horrific violence. What were the Indiana Jones movies rated? PG or PG-13, yet they have peoples faces being melted off, heads exploding, hearts getting ripped out, and people being burned alive. I think that's the kind of stuff they should be concerned with, not a few harmless words or body parts.