'Not One Frame' Of Prometheus Will Be Cut Says Tom Rothman

[bleau]

^^ this is some what true. They can cut anything just for tone, it has happened to a lot of low budget movies from a while back. I think this film is more than safe. Christ Hunger Games got PG13.

[OpenMaw]

I don't know if I agree with that honestly. I've seen several pretty intense films that never hit the R rating.

Some will probably laugh, but I felt Cloverfield did a very good job of creating high levels of tension, and it came in very smoothly at PG-13.

I'm certainly not denying that the rating system is buggered. As Geroge Romero pointed out with Land of the Dead, it was a matter of cutting just a few frames in some spots to achieve an R rating vs NC-17.

[Vickers]

^^ this is some what true. They can cut anything just for tone, it has happened to a lot of low budget movies from a while back. I think this film is more than safe. Christ Hunger Games got PG13.

You don't actually see anything in The Hunger Games what with all the shaky cam.  That being said, I understand the need for The Hunger Games to be rated PG-13 considering the majority of the fanbase.

[OpenMaw]

You don't actually see anything in The Hunger Games what with all the shaky cam.  That being said, I understand the need for The Hunger Games to be rated PG-13 considering the majority of the fanbase.

You don't have to see for it to be considered intense. That was part of Ridley's entire creative idea with Alien. It was what you didn't see, or what you thought you saw, that made it scary back in 1979.

and there is nothing outside of the chestburster scene that wouldn't work in a PG13 movie. Hell, they used to air the film on TV all the time without editing much of any of the violence. I still have my old VHS of Alien from the mid 90's. "Brought you by Tylenol" for all thoes head-bite induced migraines.

[Vickers]

You don't actually see anything in The Hunger Games what with all the shaky cam.  That being said, I understand the need for The Hunger Games to be rated PG-13 considering the majority of the fanbase.

You don't have to see for it to be considered intense. That was part of Ridley's entire creative idea with Alien. It was what you didn't see, or what you thought you saw, that made it scary back in 1979.

and there is nothing outside of the chestburster scene that wouldn't work in a PG13 movie. Hell, they used to air the film on TV all the time without editing much of any of the violence. I still have my old VHS of Alien from the mid 90's. "Brought you by Tylenol" for all thoes head-bite induced migraines.

Read what Cvalda and I said about the MPAA above though.

[SiL]

It's not just blood. The original chest-bursting is drawn-out and violent -- much more so than the ones that came later. On top of that, there's too much swearing throughout the film to get a PG-13.

As for PG-13 not being able to get the same mood, or make it scary enough, however, I call bullshit. Jaws is freakin' PG.

[Cvalda]

As for PG-13 not being able to get the same mood, or make it scary enough, however, I call bullshit. Jaws is freakin' PG.

PG back then didn't mean what it means now in the slightest. Body Snatchers '78 is rated PG, and features full frontal nudity and gore, for example.

Ratings today are f**ked.

[OpenMaw]

It's not just blood. The original chest-bursting is drawn-out and violent -- much more so than the ones that came later. On top of that, there's too much swearing throughout the film to get a PG-13.

As for PG-13 not being able to get the same mood, or make it scary enough, however, I call bullshit. Jaws is freakin' PG.

See my previous post, and the following, SiL. 

Hell, I think that pretty much gives up that ghost. JAWS.

Read what Cvalda and I said about the MPAA above though.

I did, and I think just showed where that's not entirely true. Yes, it's true that intensity can and is sometimes considered in ratings, it is not one of their higher tier deciding factors nine times out of ten. They'll look at explicitly nudity, language, violence and gore before they factor in a vague sense of dread or foreboding. Alien would have made PG-13, had it existed in 1979 with very little changes. You the bits of gore, and a few naughty words, and it would have made it under the bell curve just fine with no other distinct changes. if it can be broadcast on TV before 10 O'Clock when kids can still watch it, it's going to get by the ratings board.

[bleau]

Leatherface: The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 3 got cut and edited 11 times for an R.
I believe Army Of Darkness got cut for an R. There are many other films. The point is bigger budget movies have less chance of being cut for violence or tone.

[SiL]

PG back then didn't mean what it means now in the slightest. Body Snatchers '78 is rated PG, and features full frontal nudity and gore, for example.

Jaws was going to be rated R, but the producers argued -- insanely -- that it was okay because it was a shark killing people, not humans. The second they throw in Brody's uncensored "Smile, you son of a bitch" line into making-of features and the home release rating goes up (From PG to M15+ in Australia, 12 to 15 I think in the UK).

Even back then Jaws wasn't supposed to be PG.

Tolerance to nudity seems to have gone way down since the 70s (Logan's Run and the original Clash of the Titans are PG despite bare breasts), but there's always been a lot of leeway with tone and violence.

Shit, look at any kid movie by Don Bluth and tell me you can't have an adult feel at lower ratings.

[Vickers]

It's not just blood. The original chest-bursting is drawn-out and violent -- much more so than the ones that came later. On top of that, there's too much swearing throughout the film to get a PG-13.

As for PG-13 not being able to get the same mood, or make it scary enough, however, I call bullshit. Jaws is freakin' PG.

See my previous post, and the following, SiL. 

Hell, I think that pretty much gives up that ghost. JAWS.

Read what Cvalda and I said about the MPAA above though.

I did, and I think just showed where that's not entirely true. Yes, it's true that intensity can and is sometimes considered in ratings, it is not one of their higher tier deciding factors nine times out of ten. They'll look at explicitly nudity, language, violence and gore before they factor in a vague sense of dread or foreboding. Alien would have made PG-13, had it existed in 1979 with very little changes. You the bits of gore, and a few naughty words, and it would have made it under the bell curve just fine with no other distinct changes. if it can be broadcast on TV before 10 O'Clock when kids can still watch it, it's going to get by the ratings board.

Alien would have made PG-13 in 1979 with little changes, yes.

But in 2012, the MPAA (consisting of a random group of conservative so-called parents, half of whom may not actually be parents) can decide which films to slap an R rating on or not.

I'm using this as an example even though I know not many people may like the film.  Aeon Flux experienced hell with the ratings boards AND the studios.  Eventually it was a PG-13 watered down version and at least 25 minutes was cut from the film.  25 minutes!  The MPAA and the studios felt the original cut was too bizarre and in some scenes too intense for mainstream audiences.  That wasn't 25 minutes of blood and sex.  There were mature themes in it that maybe they didn't personally agree with...  So the PG-13 cut got its theatrical release and got slaughtered and it's even more difficult now to get the original director's cut out there on DVD.

The MPAA is a corrupt ratings system.  It's extremely subjective and there's no actual strict system they stick to when rating films.

[SiL]

Goes with any censorship body. It depends on the people who are in charge at the time of the film's release. Some people are more lenient than others -- Australia's had a wondrous history of swinging between people who want to be looser with the ratings and people who want everything ever banned.

[Cvalda]

I'm using this as an example even though I know not many people may like the film.  Aeon Flux experienced hell with the ratings boards AND the studios.  Eventually it was a PG-13 watered down version and at least 25 minutes was cut from the film.  25 minutes!  The MPAA and the studios felt the original cut was too bizarre and in some scenes too intense for mainstream audiences.  That wasn't 25 minutes of blood and sex.  There were mature themes in it that maybe they didn't personally agree with...  So the PG-13 cut got its theatrical release and got slaughtered and it's even more difficult now to get the original director's cut out there on DVD.

Aeon Flux got cut for it's "implied" sexuality--especially Aeon's bisexuality, of which only one line remains in the film: "This kind of thing used to be fun." While I don't think the original cut of the film is probably great by any means, I still remember how pissed I was back in 2005 as a huge fan of the series and hearing about all the rumored shit that was being done in post.

[bleau]

It's not just blood. The original chest-bursting is drawn-out and violent -- much more so than the ones that came later. On top of that, there's too much swearing throughout the film to get a PG-13.

As for PG-13 not being able to get the same mood, or make it scary enough, however, I call bullshit. Jaws is freakin' PG.

See my previous post, and the following, SiL. 

Hell, I think that pretty much gives up that ghost. JAWS.

Read what Cvalda and I said about the MPAA above though.

I did, and I think just showed where that's not entirely true. Yes, it's true that intensity can and is sometimes considered in ratings, it is not one of their higher tier deciding factors nine times out of ten. They'll look at explicitly nudity, language, violence and gore before they factor in a vague sense of dread or foreboding. Alien would have made PG-13, had it existed in 1979 with very little changes. You the bits of gore, and a few naughty words, and it would have made it under the bell curve just fine with no other distinct changes. if it can be broadcast on TV before 10 O'Clock when kids can still watch it, it's going to get by the ratings board.

Alien would have made PG-13 in 1979 with little changes, yes.

But in 2012, the MPAA (consisting of a random group of conservative so-called parents, half of whom may not actually be parents) can decide which films to slap an R rating on or not.

I'm using this as an example even though I know not many people may like the film.  Aeon Flux experienced hell with the ratings boards AND the studios.  Eventually it was a PG-13 watered down version and at least 25 minutes was cut from the film.  25 minutes!  The MPAA and the studios felt the original cut was too bizarre and in some scenes too intense for mainstream audiences.  That wasn't 25 minutes of blood and sex.  There were mature themes in it that maybe they didn't personally agree with...  So the PG-13 cut got its theatrical release and got slaughtered and it's even more difficult now to get the original director's cut out there on DVD.

The MPAA is a corrupt ratings system.  It's extremely subjective and there's no actual strict system they stick to when rating films.

I know this movie and own it. The director was fired and there were a lot of reshoots. The original director was a lesbian. MTV fired her and made the changes.

[Cvalda]

I know this movie and own it. The director was fired and there were a lot of reshoots. The original director was a lesbian. MTV fired her and made the changes.

Yup, Karyn Kusama. Like The Invasion with Nicole Kidman, Aeon Flux underwent so much shit behind the scenes in post production it's ridiculous.