What is the PG-13 Movie that Gets Closest to an R?

[KAMALARAMBO: BOOMSHAKALAKA!!!]

I just watched Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark (2019) and this thought popped in my head.

I was pretty positive it was PG-13, but there were a few moments where I had to reconsider.

Also, there was a ton of stuff in 1990’s movies and earlier that were PG or PG-13 that wouldn’t fly today.

Boobs used to pop up all the time in PG and PG-13 movies. Maybe it’s getting that way again, but I don’t think so. I’m pretty sure now it’s an instant R rating unless it’s like a statue in a textbook in the movie or something. I was even going to say the MPAA cracked down on boobs even by the end of the 1980s, but then I remembered something. I was watching Chaplin (1992) on Hulu at the library during a study break in college and then sure enough…boobs!

[Larryhausen]

Recency bias, but I'm pretty sure Multiverse of Madness was one f bomb away from an R rating with some of the stuff they showed.

[Spider2024]

Jul 2, 2022 16:55:01 GMT -5 Larryhausen said:

Recency bias, but I'm pretty sure Multiverse of Madness was one f bomb away from an R rating with some of the stuff they showed.

Along those lines, Serving Sara, the Matthew Perry/Elizabeth Hurley movie from 2002. Feels like they trimmed it down to get it under an R rating, including eliminating the F bomb entirely. There's even a point where Vincent Pastore says "Hey, screw you!" where you know it would have been "F*** you" with an R rating.

[agent817]

I know this was released over two decades ago, but how in the hell did Nutty Professor II get away with a lot of its dirty humor with a PG-13 rating?

I also must note that Half Past Dead, that one with Steven Seagal and Ja Rule, was clearly going to be rated R but some things were edited. You could tell in one scene that Ja Rule was going to say MF-er, but the "F-er" part was cut out. Also, with the rap songs played, like "Gangstafied" by Ja Rule and other Murder Inc. rappers, as well as "Imma Bang" by DMX, those songs were edited. Not sure why some of the film was edited to tone down the profanity and stuff to make it PG-13. Did someone at Sony think that with Ja Rule's popularity at that time (this was 2002, still before 50 Cent made it trendy to hate on Ja) would appeal to teens to get more of an audience? Because I don't see Steven Seagal being that appealing to a younger audience, and just remember that a year and 2/3 prior that Seagal was in Exit Wounds with DMX, which was rated R.

By the way, when I said "more than a year and 2/3 prior," I mean that Exit Wounds was released in March 2001, while Half Past Dead was released in November 2002.

[DiBiase is Good]

I don’t know the US ratings but it still amazes me that Raiders of the Lost Ark is still a PG in the UK. It’s been up for classification in recent times and yet somehow it’s not been moved up to at least a 12.

[Natural Born Farmer]

Live Free Or Die Hard is really damn violent for a PG-13 film. Other than the language being cleaned up it's the same as any other film in the franchise.

[King Boo]

Jul 2, 2022 17:40:55 GMT -5 DiBiase is Good said:

I don’t know the US ratings but it still amazes me that Raiders of the Lost Ark is still a PG in the UK. It’s been up for classification in recent times and yet somehow it’s not been moved up to at least a 12.

I quickly looked it up to see, and the one rating we both have in common is PG. We call it the same thing, and use it for the same general level of restriction.

In looking this up (to see what Raiders is rated here - PG, but I just learned that PG-13 didn't exist here yet when it was first released), I did see that you guys apparently did change Raiders' rating to 12A in 2021? At least from what I can see online.

[schma]

I remember when the south park guys made their movie they talked about being utterly bewildered by the rating system. Initially they were NC-17 and I think they got it to pg-13. However, they mentioned taking out some of the stuff they were given notes on but then adding stuff they thought was worse and it getting by.

[Cranjis McBasketball]

Jul 2, 2022 17:40:55 GMT -5 DiBiase is Good said:

I don’t know the US ratings but it still amazes me that Raiders of the Lost Ark is still a PG in the UK. It’s been up for classification in recent times and yet somehow it’s not been moved up to at least a 12.

Canadian ratings are often lower than the US too. Back in the day, the VHS would have the American rating, plus a little sticker with a maple leaf and usually a lower rating.

I can’t think of any examples but I noted it a lot renting movies.

Slap Shot is definitely an R rated movie, but if your son plays hockey, they’ve probably seen it by age 8 or so. Tons of cursing, nudity and some language that wouldn’t fly today, but it’s a rite of passage.

[DiBiase is Good]

Jul 2, 2022 17:46:45 GMT -5 King Boo said:

Jul 2, 2022 17:40:55 GMT -5 DiBiase is Good said:

I don’t know the US ratings but it still amazes me that Raiders of the Lost Ark is still a PG in the UK. It’s been up for classification in recent times and yet somehow it’s not been moved up to at least a 12.

I quickly looked it up to see, and the one rating we both have in common is PG. We call it the same thing, and use it for the same general level of restriction.

In looking this up (to see what Raiders is rated here - PG, but I just learned that PG-13 didn't exist here yet when it was first released), I did see that you guys apparently did change Raiders' rating to 12A in 2021? At least from what I can see online.

It was re-released in cinemas last year for the 40th Anniversary, so it was re-submitted for release (any time a film gets a re-release whether it’s home release or cinema it has to be re-evaluated due to different standards over time) but it’s still a PG rating on the BBFC website. Last Crusade and Temple of Doom are now 12A but that’s only in cinemas anyway as the 12A rating doesn’t exist on home releases.

[King Boo]

Jul 2, 2022 18:26:53 GMT -5 DiBiase is Good said:

Jul 2, 2022 17:46:45 GMT -5 King Boo said:

I quickly looked it up to see, and the one rating we both have in common is PG. We call it the same thing, and use it for the same general level of restriction.

In looking this up (to see what Raiders is rated here - PG, but I just learned that PG-13 didn't exist here yet when it was first released), I did see that you guys apparently did change Raiders' rating to 12A in 2021? At least from what I can see online.

It was re-released in cinemas last year for the 30th Anniversary, so it was re-submitted for release (any time a film gets a re-release whether it’s home release or cinema it has to be re-evaluated due to different standards over time) but it’s still a PG rating on the BBFC website. Last Crusade and Temple of Doom are now 12A but that’s only in cinemas anyway as the 12A rating doesn’t exist on home releases.

Interesting. I'd think they'd sync up all the ratings, so I wouldn't have thought that. No idea if we do something similar here in that regard, since I've never really thought about it. I don't think so, but I'm by no means an authority.

[Mozenrath]

Jul 2, 2022 17:50:33 GMT -5 schma said:

I remember when the south park guys made their movie they talked about being utterly bewildered by the rating system. Initially they were NC-17 and I think they got it to pg-13. However, they mentioned taking out some of the stuff they were given notes on but then adding stuff they thought was worse and it getting by.

Some of it can be really arbitrary, plus sometimes people can state their case to get a compromise. I forget what film Rebel Wilson did this for, but she had a film she was in where she was able to argue it down to a lower rating than it was going to get by citing various examples of male comedies that had gotten away with similar jokes without the higher rating.

Additionally, context often matters, like saying, "F*** You" is treated very differently than "Let's F***", with the one with the sexual connotation being rated more harshly. Same goes for calling someone an asshole versus referring to an anus as an asshole.

[DiBiase is Good]

Jul 2, 2022 19:49:31 GMT -5 King Boo said:

Jul 2, 2022 18:26:53 GMT -5 DiBiase is Good said:

It was re-released in cinemas last year for the 30th Anniversary, so it was re-submitted for release (any time a film gets a re-release whether it’s home release or cinema it has to be re-evaluated due to different standards over time) but it’s still a PG rating on the BBFC website. Last Crusade and Temple of Doom are now 12A but that’s only in cinemas anyway as the 12A rating doesn’t exist on home releases.

Interesting. I'd think they'd sync up all the ratings, so I wouldn't have thought that. No idea if we do something similar here in that regard, since I've never really thought about it. I don't think so, but I'm by no means an authority.

It’s a good system as it judges films from a more modern POV. Like how in the 80s, a ton of action films were given 18 ratings here because violence in films was a massive concern at the time. Now, people have decreased their fears a lot more in that area so it’s not uncommon for films that were 18 rated for so long, to suddenly become a lower rating when they came out for the first time on Blu-ray or DVD.
There was a also a ridiculous fear of “ninja weapons” here in the 80s/90s. It’s why the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles cartoon (but not the films for some reason) was known here as Teenage Mutant Hero Turtles for a short period and a lot of films that used weapons like Nunchaku would be heavily edited. Thankfully, after a few years they realised it was a bit ridiculous and over the years, films have rated lower then they would have done in previous years.

[Deleted]

Split should have been R

[jimmyjackezekiel]

Jul 2, 2022 17:35:17 GMT -5 agent817 said:

I know this was released over two decades ago, but how in the hell did Nutty Professor II get away with a lot of its dirty humor with a PG-13 rating?

I also must note that Half Past Dead, that one with Steven Seagal and Ja Rule, was clearly going to be rated R but some things were edited. You could tell in one scene that Ja Rule was going to say MF-er, but the "F-er" part was cut out. Also, with the rap songs played, like "Gangstafied" by Ja Rule and other Murder Inc. rappers, as well as "Imma Bang" by DMX, those songs were edited. Not sure why some of the film was edited to tone down the profanity and stuff to make it PG-13. Did someone at Sony think that with Ja Rule's popularity at that time (this was 2002, still before 50 Cent made it trendy to hate on Ja) would appeal to teens to get more of an audience? Because I don't see Steven Seagal being that appealing to a younger audience, and just remember that a year and 2/3 prior that Seagal was in Exit Wounds with DMX, which was rated R.

By the way, when I said "more than a year and 2/3 prior," I mean that Exit Wounds was released in March 2001, while Half Past Dead was released in November 2002.

In the movie's defense it's not like we saw the Giant Hamster's d***.

EDIT: Also by that logic shouldn't Ace Ventura 2 have gotten an R as well. That movie also has an animal rape a human.

[tirtefaa]

I really hate PG-13.

It's just become the rating of pushing the envelope of "how far can we go without getting an R?".

At the same time, because "crude humor" is needed to sell family movies and also seen as low brow, just about every kid's movie is now PG.

And the G isn't really seen any more.

Honestly, I truly think there shouldn't be 'rules' to set a standard for what a rating should be. It's like some bad parent saying "Okay, you can say ONE F bomb, but no more". What kind of logic is that?

I wish common sense prevailed more with how these movies are given ratings. I am of the opinion that you can have a movie for a general audience that deals with real situations, real language and real people without rating it with an adult rating. The same applies for many movies that may not have swearing, nudity or violence...yet the story is built for adults...yet will get a PG or PG-13 rating and find a way to bore the kids.

As far as the answer to this, I'd say Titanic or Just One of the Guys. I'm sure there are other movies that contain nudity that got a lesser rating, but those come to mine.

[agent817]

Jul 2, 2022 21:08:25 GMT -5 jimmyjackezekiel said:

Jul 2, 2022 17:35:17 GMT -5 agent817 said:

I know this was released over two decades ago, but how in the hell did Nutty Professor II get away with a lot of its dirty humor with a PG-13 rating?

I also must note that Half Past Dead, that one with Steven Seagal and Ja Rule, was clearly going to be rated R but some things were edited. You could tell in one scene that Ja Rule was going to say MF-er, but the "F-er" part was cut out. Also, with the rap songs played, like "Gangstafied" by Ja Rule and other Murder Inc. rappers, as well as "Imma Bang" by DMX, those songs were edited. Not sure why some of the film was edited to tone down the profanity and stuff to make it PG-13. Did someone at Sony think that Ja Rule's popularity at that time (this was 2002, still before 50 Cent made it trendy to hate on Ja) would appeal to teens to get more of an audience? Because I don't see Steven Seagal being that appealing to a younger audience, and just remember that a year and 2/3 prior that Seagal was in Exit Wounds with DMX, which was rated R.

By the way, when I said "more than a year and 2/3 prior," I mean that Exit Wounds was released in March 2001, while Half Past Dead was released in November 2002.

In the movie's defense it's not like we saw the Giant Hamster's d***.

EDIT: Also by that logic shouldn't Ace Ventura 2 have gotten an R as well. That movie also has an animal rape a human.

Since you put it that way, you might be onto something. I remember I used to lurk on Kids-in-Mind and Screen It way back in the day (never really stopped with Kids-in-Mind, but Screen It has had the stupid membership thing for a while now) and seeing high ratings for sex/nudity and this was for PG-13 films. Some had "extreme" for Screen It, and Kids-in-Mind had ratings up to 6 or 7. This was all in the very early-aughts, too, like 2000 or 2001. Some movies with PG-13 ratings that came out in subsequent years had some high ratings for content.

If you want to talk about more recent examples, Old had some questionable content for its PG-13 rating, particularly the idea of aging little kids somehow getting hormones and having sex which led to a pregnancy. In all fairness, that scene was in the comic book called Sandcastle, which served as the basis for Old (you could call the movie an adaptation as well), but that comic had nudity and such. It's even more disturbing when you realize how old some of the characters were at the start of the comic, as well as the movie.

[Secret Clown]

Similar to this, I just saw the meme about Lord of the Rings being PG-13 and because of that they could use one F-word.
And putting it in various places makes the film seem much funnier.

[Vice honcho room temperature]

Jul 3, 2022 0:10:55 GMT -5 Secret Clown said:

Similar to this, I just saw the meme about Lord of the Rings being PG-13 and because of that they could use one F-word.
And putting it in various places makes the film seem much funnier.

The rule is one non sexual f*** per PG-13 movie. So Muppet Treasure Island where Tim Curry says "f*** my plans are foiled" PG-13. Tim Curry "f*** my plans are foiled. I also want to have sex with Kermit the Frog." PG-13 Tim Curry " I want to f*** Kermit the Frog sexually" R

[Clash, Never a Meter Maid]

Jul 2, 2022 22:02:59 GMT -5 tirtefaa said:

I really hate PG-13.

It's just become the rating of pushing the envelope of "how far can we go without getting an R?".

At the same time, because "crude humor" is needed to sell family movies and also seen as low brow, just about every kid's movie is now PG.

And the G isn't really seen any more.

Honestly, I truly think there shouldn't be 'rules' to set a standard for what a rating should be. It's like some bad parent saying "Okay, you can say ONE F bomb, but no more". What kind of logic is that?

I wish common sense prevailed more with how these movies are given ratings. I am of the opinion that you can have a movie for a general audience that deals with real situations, real language and real people without rating it with an adult rating. The same applies for many movies that may not have swearing, nudity or violence...yet the story is built for adults...yet will get a PG or PG-13 rating and find a way to bore the kids.

As far as the answer to this, I'd say Titanic or Just One of the Guys. I'm sure there are other movies that contain nudity that got a lesser rating, but those come to mine.

Often, PG isn't any more consistent than G. The 1994 Lion King is rated G, and that featured the death of Mufasa which upset many kids and shocked parents, similar to how the PG 1986 Transformers had the death of Optimus Prime. So I don't know how Toy Story 3, good as it is, got a G rating because that had kids and parents talking about the incinerator scene messing them up.

And PG used to have a much wider umbrella, like how The Spy Who Loved Me got a 1977 PG rating with tons of sexual references, violence and gunplay.

To answer the OP question, a few Christopher Nolan films like Tenet and Dark Knight do just enough to avoid R ratings. And even if Matt Reeves has no R-rated Batman cut, it really doesn't "feel" like a PG-13 film.