Comments on: When Ratings Didn’t Matter, or How The Andromeda Strain Got A “G” Rating

By: David

David — Tue, 24 Jan 2017 19:35:33 +0000

I’ve never seen The Andromeda Strain, so I can’t give my opinion on that film. But, as others have mentioned before, Jaws and Poltergeist (and, of course, the first two Indiana Jones movies) are given PG ratings and contain extreme violence and resulting gore. Those movies deserve to be rated R as they are too much for even a PG-13 rating, much less a PG rating.

I have no issue with nudity in films as long as they aren’t sexually-oriented or obscene. In fact, if I could rate films, non-sexual nudity would be allowed in G rated films. While most people can’t seem to separate nudity from sex, there is a such thing as non-sexual nudity. Why else are there nudist resorts that, for the most part, are family-friendly?

Also, I would add a couple of ratings and change one of the existing ratings to the system.

G
PG
PG-13
PG-15*
R
NC-17
NO-18*

*PG-15 and NO-18* are the new ratings I’d add and they would stand for “Parents Extremely Cautioned” and “No One Under 18 Admitted”, respectfully. With this, NC-17 would go back to its original meaning and stand for “No Children Under 17 Admitted”.

By: bill

bill — Mon, 16 May 2016 01:34:21 +0000

‘Extreme violence’ in Andromeda strain? Wth?

By: Justin Stewart

Justin Stewart — Sun, 20 Mar 2016 20:34:47 +0000

Jaws was rated PG. I remember a severed limb and characters getting eaten during that film.

By: WTFPhD

WTFPhD — Sat, 07 Nov 2015 02:34:05 +0000

*since. Apologies, tablets aren’t great for typing.

By: WTFPhD

WTFPhD — Sat, 07 Nov 2015 02:32:34 +0000

“Airplane!” and “Poltergeist” come to mind as similarly questionable PG ratings in the early 1980s. Those films were rated by “placed” MPAA voters, basically studio employees. Note those two releases coincide with the Reagan administration’s reversal of a 1945 court ruling that prohibited studio ownership of theater chains.

When the studio system potentially controlled exhibition, they manipulated the MPAA as a private alliance of film studios under the guise of public service. The PG made more money than an R rating. This absurd cycle of studio under-rating stopped in 1984 with “Temple of Doom,” with Paramount backing Spielberg’s “cinema hot sauce”– the PG-13, the most popular MPAA rating ever sense,

By: Ryan

Ryan — Mon, 18 Aug 2014 03:51:48 +0000

That’s a good point, although it seems a lot of parents approach the “G” rating as being appropriate for the whole family, and thus kids. I guess they don’t have a rating that’s specifically for kids?

By: Alfredo Pérez

Alfredo Pérez — Tue, 12 Aug 2014 14:20:59 +0000

G back then means “General Audiences” not for “kids”. G Rating ≠ Kids.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Fri, 24 May 2013 05:59:12 +0000

Hey Paul,

Thanks for the recommendation–I actually just watched that on topdocumentaryfilms.com based on your recommendation. You’re right, it’s pretty baffling how the system (doesn’) work!

We should start our own ratings board on Cinematic Attic.

By: Paul

Paul — Wed, 22 May 2013 16:03:04 +0000

Have you seen “This Film Is Not Yet Rated”? I’m pretty sure every film student has to watch it. It’s basically an exploration of this exact, very strange indeed, question. How did things change so much? It’s a great movie, and I highly suggest you check it out if you’re curious about ratings, and then be sure to note that it itself is rated NC-17, mostly because they show graphic parts from so many different movies. Pretty crazy.

By: Deuce

Deuce — Sat, 18 May 2013 04:27:27 +0000

Yeah, that movie is WEIRD!