Solaris..." R " Cut? (1 Viewer)

[Anthony_H]

I popped in this DVD before heading to work... got the obligatory rating screen.. it lists the rating as "PG-13 (formerly R)." Whats up with that? Why even include that distinction? IMDB.com verifies it was released theatrically as PG-13. Am I missing a different cut?

 

[Gabe Oppenheim]

Solaris was initially given an "R" by the MPAA; the scuttlebutt (ha) was that some shots of George Clooney's rear were responsible for the rating--Soderberg and Clooney appealed and the rating was changed. The more cynical among us might have thought that the whole thing was nothing more than a publicity gambit.

Such ratings changes (without cuts) happen all the time; it seems sort of strange that the rating would mention it.

 

[Matt Pelham]

That is rather odd. I remember hearing that Soderberg's case was that similar if not worse content is shown on network television, so why should his movie get an R?

Clerks was also re-rated from NC-17 down to R without any cuts.

 

[Dick]

Just hard to imagine that the showing of someone's ass (we all have one) is justification for an "R" rating when, as Roger Ebert often points out, gratuitous violence can be exploited big time and receive a PG-13. I really despise the ratings system.

 

[ThomasC]

WTF was NC-17 material in Clerks?

 

[Adam_ME]

WTF was NC-17 material in Clerks?

"I'm 37?!"

Conversations like the ones that included the above quote probably offended the MPAA.

 

[Gabe Oppenheim]

WTF was NC-17 material in Clerks?

Apparently the large number of "F's" in the movie Chasing Amy was also rated NC-17 initially because of language, as was (more recently) a Martin Lawrence concert film, Runteldat. I seem to remember The Hunt for Red October being lowered from an "R" to "PG," but I may very well be wrong about that.

 

[ChrisBEA]

WHat about Barbarella going from X to PG?
Personally I see that as an R, but at least PG-13....

 

[greg_t]

Off topic, but I just saw this title at Walmart and applaud Fox for using the new "director approved version" sticker. It also states that black bars are normal for the format. Kudo's to Fox for the new stickers

 

[Dan Rudolph]

Young Einstein had lots of asses in a PG, so the MPAA was making one of their trademark arbitrary decisions here.

 

[JonZ]

Funny,showing Clooneys butt deserves a R rating?

Yesterday I watching Ragtime which has Elizabeth McGovern standing around topless for about 3 mintues and a brief frontal shot and its a PG movie.

 

[Bryant Frazer]

What about Barbarella going from X to PG?

Hm, I don't think this was ever rated X. (Certainly the MPAA's ratings database doesn't mention it.) But there's a claim in the entry at the IMDb that the film got an M in 1968 and was converted to an R in 1969. Where it gets interesting is that the IMDb entry claims the film was edited of its sexual content for a 1977 re-release, when it earned a PG -- but the PG-rated video releases all contain the original R-rated cut of the film.

I've always seen Barbarella tagged with a PG rating, but I've never seen a version that had any significant amount of sex and/or nudity trimmed from it, and the MPAA page gives no indication that there are multiple versions. Can anyone here confirm the IMDb's accounting of this film's history?

-bf-

 

[Gordon McMurphy]

Funny, I think of many PG movies today that feature a great deal of assholes...


Gordy