-

Jump to content



Photo

LOTR:TTT Extended Edition to be Rated PG-13


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
28 replies to this topic

#1 of 29 OFFLINE   GlennH

GlennH

    Screenwriter

  • 2,125 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 28 1998

Posted April 01 2003 - 09:17 AM

I think it had been reported some time ago, based on Peter Jackson's comments in an interview, that the upcoming Extended Edition (EE) of Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers would include more intense battle scenes that may bring an R rating.

I just noticed that TTT EE version is now listed at www.cara.org, and it has a PG-13 rating, same as all previous LOTR:FOTR and TTT versions.

If that turns out to be the case, it's good IMO.

The entire epic is really one continuous story; I think it's best to have a consistent rating throughout. To do otherwise may alienate part of the audience that has already been developed.

I also don't think there needs to be any additional excessive gore in this film. It's intense enough to tell the story at the PG-13 level.

It's not like going to the R level would sell more copies.

#2 of 29 OFFLINE   Gary->dee

Gary->dee

    Screenwriter

  • 1,923 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 14 2003

Posted April 01 2003 - 09:26 AM

Yeah I remember the rumors of the extended cut of Fellowship being rated R for violence and that didn't happen. But it does lead me to a question: How much or what kind of violence, especially in a fantasy genre such as LOTR, could provoke an R rating?

#3 of 29 OFFLINE   WillG

WillG

    Producer

  • 5,219 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 30 2003

Posted April 01 2003 - 09:27 AM

Yeah, I think the same thing happened last year with FOTR:EE where is was rumored that added footage would up the rating to a "R" but still PG-13
STOP HIM! He's supposed to die!

#4 of 29 OFFLINE   GlennH

GlennH

    Screenwriter

  • 2,125 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 28 1998

Posted April 01 2003 - 10:20 AM

I would think that any more intense scenes of gratuitous decapitations or limb hacking accompanied by lots of blood would get an R. And I for one don't need to see it to enjoy this series.

#5 of 29 OFFLINE   DavidBL

DavidBL

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 204 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 19 2002

Posted April 01 2003 - 11:33 AM

We've been discussing this lately in the Movies forum under the ROTK/TTT:EE spoilers thread. A comparison was made between Pearl Harbor: Director's Cut, and FOTR:EE. Both had more violence in the extended editions vs. theatrical versions, but PH cranked the graphic violence WAY up to Saving Private Ryan-type war gore, while the additional violence in FOTR was not drastically more graphic than what was already there, just a little more of it. Thus PH got an "R" and FOTR stayed PG-13.

And I agree 100% with Glenn's sentiments that the "high PG-13" level of violence and gore in the LOTR series is sufficient to tell the stories in all theatrical and extended versions. No fan of these films is going to say "dang, I'm not buying that 4-disc extended edition because it's not gory enough."

Some concern has been expressed about a particular scene in ROTK involving catapults, but that's a possible spoiler so I'll refer anyone interested to the Movies forum thread for further discussion on that.

#6 of 29 OFFLINE   Nathan V

Nathan V

    Supporting Actor

  • 960 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 16 2002

Posted April 01 2003 - 01:41 PM

I'm quite satisfied with the level of violence (hard PG-13) in the series. I'm glad it isn't PG, like SW. The battle sequences have an energy that Pearl Harbor (theatrical), or any other recent PG/PG-13 offerings lack. It actually reminds me a lot of Kurosawa. Fierce action/atmosphere without graphic gore; most directors can't/don't do that. Of course, I wouldn't have objected to seeing orc blood spattering the camera Posted Image, but I guess that's why we have Black Hawk Down (which, for those of you who don't know, will be a 3-disc set in june).

Regards,
Nathan
The Tree of Life / Brad Pitt / Sean Penn / Directed by Terrence Malick / 2010

#7 of 29 OFFLINE   Stephen_Ri

Stephen_Ri

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 96 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 10 2002

Posted April 01 2003 - 01:52 PM

You know, I think Ralph Bakshi's animated LOTR is actually more violent that FOTR;EE. More bright red blood filling the screen. The series does get more and more brutal as it goes on, however, so an R wouldn't be too suprising. It doesn't matter to me either way, and I don't think an R would alienate very much of an audience.

#8 of 29 OFFLINE   MarkHastings

MarkHastings

    Executive Producer

  • 12,013 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 27 2003

Posted April 01 2003 - 02:25 PM

Didn't PJ say (in the FOTR commentary) that the orc blood didn't get an R rating because it wasn't red?

#9 of 29 OFFLINE   Malcolm R

Malcolm R

    Executive Producer

  • 11,612 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 08 2002
  • LocationVermont

Posted April 01 2003 - 02:50 PM

Quote:
Didn't PJ say (in the FOTR commentary) that the orc blood didn't get an R rating because it wasn't red?

I'd imagine that's it. Most of the violence in LOTR is inflicted upon non-human characters, many of which seem to have non-red blood and guts. If everything was bright scarlet red, I think the "R" would be applied pretty quickly.
The purpose of an education is to replace an empty mind with an open mind.

#10 of 29 OFFLINE   Nathan V

Nathan V

    Supporting Actor

  • 960 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 16 2002

Posted April 01 2003 - 02:57 PM

Yeah. that's why Scorsese had to desaturate the finale in Taxi Driver, the MPAA was threatening an X rating; they thought the blood was "too red." I realy don't get this concept. How is the movie any less violent now that it's been desaturated? Maybe it's a few iotas less startling, but certainly not less violent.
The Tree of Life / Brad Pitt / Sean Penn / Directed by Terrence Malick / 2010

#11 of 29 OFFLINE   Dave F

Dave F

    Screenwriter

  • 2,891 posts
  • Join Date: May 15 1999

Posted April 01 2003 - 02:57 PM

Quote:
How much or what kind of violence, especially in a fantasy genre such as LOTR, could provoke an R rating?
I gave up trying to figure out the rating system a loooonng time ago. I suspect it's completely random.

-Dave
DVD List

#12 of 29 OFFLINE   Tim Glover

Tim Glover

    Lead Actor

  • 7,661 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 12 1999
  • Real Name:Tim Glover

Posted April 01 2003 - 03:18 PM

I'm glad they're keeping it a PG-13 rating too. I think if there was excessive violence it could detract from the film's already existing intensity and drama.

While the Pearl Harbor: Vista Series Director's Cut is a Fabulous dvd set; I prefer the theatrical version over it.

#13 of 29 OFFLINE   Gary->dee

Gary->dee

    Screenwriter

  • 1,923 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 14 2003

Posted April 01 2003 - 03:19 PM

I was always under the impression that heavy sexual scenes and/or saying the word "fuck" more than once in a movie gets it an R rating. That's why I can't imagine any version of an LOTR movie getting an R rating based on violent scenes alone, but correct me if I'm wrong because I haven't read the books. I think Conan the Barbarian might be an example of a fantasy movie getting an R rating based on violent content even though it does contain some nudity.

#14 of 29 OFFLINE   Daniel J

Daniel J

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 186 posts
  • Join Date: May 08 2001

Posted April 01 2003 - 05:57 PM

Quote:
That's why I can't imagine any version of an LOTR movie getting an R rating based on violent scenes alone, but correct me if I'm wrong because I haven't read the books.

The Matrix was R rated for violence.

In any case, the LOTR situation is completely different from that of, say, Pearl Harbor.
PH was a gory movie that was toned down for theatrical release; LOTR was always intended to be a PG-13 movie. That's why we don't get more gore in the EE releases- there wasn't any to begin with; and they're not going to go back and re-render all their fx shots just to satisfy the bloodlust of a few fans.

Quote:
The battle sequences have an energy that Pearl Harbor (theatrical), or any other recent PG/PG-13 offerings lack. It actually reminds me a lot of Kurosawa. Fierce action/atmosphere without graphic gore; most directors can't/don't do that.
I'm going to have to disagree with you on that point; PJ is making really cool movies so far, but his battle scenes are nothing like Kurosawa's. I'd say The Phantom Menace was better than FOTR (as far as duels go, anyway); and TTT is only exiting because of the cavalry charge and some stuff with the archers: the rest of Helm's Deep was terribly underwhelming for a battle of that intensity. And don't get me started on the "documentary-style" (re: drunken monkey helmet-cam) camera work...
Ba weep gra na weep nini bom!

#15 of 29 OFFLINE   Qui-Gon John

Qui-Gon John

    Producer

  • 3,527 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 02 2000

Posted April 01 2003 - 11:47 PM

Quote:
Didn't PJ say (in the FOTR commentary) that the orc blood didn't get an R rating because it wasn't red?


Yeah, like pink Klingon blood in ST VI!

#16 of 29 OFFLINE   Bill Buklis

Bill Buklis

    Supporting Actor

  • 516 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 09 1999
  • Real Name:Bill Buklis
  • LocationChicago, IL

Posted April 02 2003 - 12:30 AM

As I recall weren't a lot of people complaining that the violence in Pear Harbor was too clean? I imagine then that the new R rating would be an improvement. At least from that viewpoint. However, I haven't seen the movie since thatone time in the theatre, so I can't really say one way or the other.
Check out my Flickr stream. Join the HTF Flickr Pool.

#17 of 29 OFFLINE   Tommy G

Tommy G

    Screenwriter

  • 1,235 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 19 2000

Posted April 02 2003 - 12:47 AM

I was always under the impression that heavy sexual scenes and/or saying the word "f**k" more than once in a movie gets it an R rating.


No, there is essentially no rhyme or reason to the MPAA. If you watch "The Patriot", there is no swearing at all in the entire film and there is no sexual content. It just depends on the mood of the MPAA at the time. Lilo and Stitch rated PG......Papillon rated PG Posted Image case in point.
Please release The Goodies on Region 1 DVD
My DVDs

#18 of 29 OFFLINE   GlennH

GlennH

    Screenwriter

  • 2,125 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 28 1998

Posted April 02 2003 - 01:55 AM

Quote:
The Matrix was R rated for violence.


A good point. Maybe it's that in today's society violence involving guns is viewed as more threatening and deserving of an R than more primitive weapons like axes, swords, and spears, even though the latter can be more gory.

#19 of 29 OFFLINE   JustinCleveland

JustinCleveland

    Screenwriter

  • 2,059 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 23 2002
  • Real Name:Justin Cleveland
  • LocationMadison, WI

Posted April 02 2003 - 03:49 AM

I was watching Back to the Future the other day, and I was just MARVELED by the amount of profanity (F-bombs etc) dropped by MJFox... yet that was only PG. I'm with Dave... it's random.

#20 of 29 OFFLINE   MarkHastings

MarkHastings

    Executive Producer

  • 12,013 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 27 2003

Posted April 02 2003 - 04:35 AM

Quote:
As I recall weren't a lot of people complaining that the violence in Pear Harbor was too clean? I imagine then that the new R rating would be an improvement. At least from that viewpoint. However, I haven't seen the movie since thatone time in the theatre, so I can't really say one way or the other.
MUCH MORE GORE! The severed foot and heads laying around have burned their images into my brain. Icky!


Back to DVD



Forum Nav Content I Follow