Revenge of the Sith Officially Rated PG-13

Bobert@flixnjoystix.com writes "On May 19th, fans of all ages will see the final installment of the Star Wars saga with Revenge of the Sith. However, for the first time ever a Star Wars film will be officially rated PG-13. Over the weekend the Daily Herald newspaper confirmed that George Lucas' conclusion to his nearly 30 year epic Space Opera received a PG-13 rating from the Motion Picture Association of America. The MPAA is expected to release an official statement or press release sometime this week." This confirms the rumor we reported on back in March.

Comments

Re:I'm a dark little poet tonight...

[Scoria]

Of course the film is going to be PG-13... because only people above the age of 13 will be able to truly appreciate Jar Jar's evisceration.

I can imagine it now. Darth Vader ripping that demon Jamaican dinosaur Wino from limb to limb. With each limb being severed, hearing the beast shouting out, "Meesa in Pain! Meesa in Pain!" Vader points his finger, and throws the battered, lifeless carcass against the wall.

Half of the Star Wars demographic is probably composed of six-year-olds who are still amused by sadistically removing the legs from an insect. They'll appreciate that scene even more than you will. ;-)

Bashing

[Rydia]

You know what'll be awesome? A few years down the road, when maybe The Cool Kids have moved on and bashing Star Wars isn't so in vogue.

It's amazing all the amazing twists people will contort into... and quite amusing. "Well, episodes 1 and 2 sucked. ALL BECAUSE OF JAR JAR. I am so terribly aghast at his screentime that it ruins everything for me! Look at me! mememe!"

or, perhaps "these two suck because Lucas wrote them himself, unlike ESB. I'm going to ignore ANH. Because it doesn't fit my point."

or even "the romantic scenes suck! Because, ya know, the ones in the first trilogy were so wonderfully done!" They were pretty bad. Funny how immediacy seems to be much more relevant. Or perhaps its the construction of the first trilogy that people have created for themselves that put everything about it above reproach.

In education, there is an "ideal draft" theory, that states, essentially, that when an instructor has an ideal essay on a particular subject in mind when reading/grading an assignment, both the instructor and student lose. We see the same sort of thing going on with star wars, by a lot of people that really should know better... when an "idea copy" of star wars has been created in one's mind, even if it is murky and nonspecific, nothing will ever hope to live up to it, and the experience is ruined, ie, fans whining and Lucas getting a lot of criticism.

The real problem with actions along this theory, however, is that the more "disappointing" the movie is, the more disproportionally "bad" it ends up being in the reviewer's mind. Ergo, we have an annoying character becoming the most hated fictional character of all time, and a bunch of people talking about their childhood being ruined.

Sure, I was disappointed, too. But this is a bit silly.

Re:Bashing

[R.Caley]

The original movie was great because it took advantage of new effects technology to bring space opera to a generation which had not seen it before, and because Lucas was bright enough to pinch his story ideas from Campbell and Kurosawa and lots of old serials.

ESB was good because Lucas had so little to do with it, and hired a real director.

Jedi was crap because Lucas tried to make a movie, something he has no talent at.

The prequels are just Lucas masturbating in public. Aparently he has no talent at thet either.

Re:I hope it's not for violence

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't be silly, nipples aren't suitable for children. It's probably PG-13 because somebody gets torn limb from limb. Think of the children!

Quite frankly, I'm surprised at this. Over the past ten years or so, there's been a trend to label, say, a movie suitable for 13+ as suitable for all ages, and then stick a bunch of disclaimers on the trailer. Such as "PG-13 (may-contain-strong-language-nudity-and-the- occassional-beheading-but-it's-just-a-film-so-it's -okay-for-kids)". It makes it easier to sell merchandise to kids through happy meals etc that way.

Re:I hope it's not for violence

[halivar]

That's why the Transformers movie was so awesome. My favorite scene is where Spike yells, "Oh, Shit!" as a planet full of people gets destroyed. This in a G-rated kids movie.

And I turned out normal? See?

Oh, wait...

Re:Maybe it's pg-13 for sexuality? Maybe...

[stlhawkeye]

They'd prefer it too. Guaranteed. They won't get intrigued by sex until until their hormones go insane, at which time you should be doing some parenting rather than just dragging them to movies and hoping they pick up the basics. But they love violence at any age, mostly.

Violence is a part of basic survival instincts, and play involving the miming of violence and conflict is not only normal and prevelent in thousands of species, it's probably a healthy outlet. You have to remember that we're not really that far removed from young boys learning to hunt things down with spears basically as soon as they are old enough to know to keep quiet. We're not talking millions of years here, we're talking thousands of years ago. As little as a few hundred years ago, most boys learned how to shoot a rifle. Why? Same reason we all know how to operate a motor vehicle - you need to know how to do it to get by.

The instinct to mime violence can be witnesses on Animal Planet during any number of specials on nearly any mammal. Put two dogs together, what's the first thing they do? Run around and try to bite each other. They're playing, but they're also mimicking basic pack/hunting mentality. They're establishing the alpha dog through mimed violence.

Sex, however, doesn't become interesting until later in life.

I still blame American's ridiculous shame in its own sexuality on coaching from the religious right and the Puritan foundations of the country, but it's not like there's NO GOOD REASON why kids absorb violence more easily than sexuality. Seeing an exposed nipple during the Super Bowl isn't going to damage any of their precious little mental circuits. Nudity doesn't have to equate to sexuality. America hasn't figured that out yet.