Slashdot Mirror
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.
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.
"Only two there are," says Yoda, "a master and an apprentice. Killed, Palpatine's apprentice, Vader did he!"
Along with Jar Jar, in the abyss, floats the souls of Saddam Hussein, Oprah, Geraldo Rivera, Dick Clark and New Kids on the Block. Jar Jar shall be reborn in another realm. In a galaxy far far away from the one he was in, way in the future.
That backwards asshat dinosaur is scheduled to come back, Jesus style. Only next time, it'll be rated R. Be afraid... be very afraid...
Now that is why this Star Wars is PG-13. Sleep tight kiddies...
/^[A-Z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}$/i
I hope it's not a rating for only violence inte film, but because of nude scenes with Natalie Portman!
This is just guesswork since I haven't seen the movie (duh)... but...
What I can't help but imagine is if the whole swing towards the religious right and indecency plays a part within this. After the whole Janet Jackson thing, it's quiet possible that Ani's relationship with Padme that helps contribute towards this rating along with the violence.
After all, it seems somehow "okay" to expose kids to violence in the states. Sex is a whole other thing...
/^[A-Z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}$/i
I'm not talking "Hot Grits on Natalie Portman" kinda "R", but something with a bit more of an edge too it will definately be welcome. Something dark and serious for a change. Maybe have Tim Burton direct it......
Mmmmmm Hot Griiiitssss.
I couldn't fail to disagree with you any less.
This time the rating's meaning is a bit different than usual. No one over the age of 13 should attend.
The wookies are naked, does that make it PG-13?
just zip down to the Grauman's Chinese Theater and tell these folks?
Lucas needs to hand over the reins to someone with a clue.
What, for the next episode?
well, in the US anyway, but how quickly their population forgets the rest of us....
and decided collectively that only if you're old enough you are allowed to be stupid enough to pay.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
This announcement does corroborate with the rumours that Ep. III consists entirely of Lucas squatting out an angry, sweaty dump on in front of a blue screen while screaming insults at the fans.
I'm still going to pay to see it.
Unfortunately, I am not Wil Wheaton
"Do or do not, there is no fucking try."
"Shit, it's a trap!"
"The ability to speak does not make you intelligent. Now get the hell out of here!"
Remember, gratuitous violence is okay as long as there are no naughty words.
I dont think the FCC has jurisdiction over film ratings.. although im sure they'd love to!
You can't have prejudice against violence - that would mean being anti-gun and you can't have that! sex on the other hand serves no purpose other than brushing with someone elses toothbrush or something, condoms have holes in them and homosexuality is the devils work.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
1. The Sith. We don't mind when they cut Jedi in half, but in "Revenge" they sure do curse a lot.
2. Midichlorians. These imply evolution, which is only a hypothesis and not suitable for young minds.
3. Rampant drug use in Mos Eisley scenes. What exactly are they smoking?
4. Adult theme. Taxes, embargoes, and senate politics are totally inappropriate for children. And for space movies.
5. Jar-Jar dies a horrible death, yeaaasay-ee-sir. Finally listened to your fans, yes?
6. Amidala wears even less than Leia's metal bikini. May the Force be with you!
Yours Truly, The Ratings Board
i dont really get it. is pg-13 supposed to be bad or something? maybe it's my contempt for the mpaa or possibly im just a terrible person, but i usually hope a movie will be rated R
if i'm not immortal, what's the point of living?
...te?
Gives a whole new meaning to ``don't think, feel''.
_O_
.|< The named which can be named is not the true named
I'm surprised this film's PG-13,
Strangest thing I've ever seen,
Because other than the toddlers,
Or those with Alzheimers,
It's junk for everyone else in between.
Judging by the posts I've seen, everybody is either joking about or speculating why it got a PG-13 rating...the Episode III book IS out, and most of it has been posted to newsgroups online. It's received a PG-13 rating for all the violence (there are at least 5 bad ass lightsabers fights I can think of, 4 of which involve someone dying, off the top of my head) and the scenes involving Anakin's skin getting melted off.
--trb
C'mon! We've all seen the trailers. There are hoards and hoards of Wookies in battle.
Considering that Ripping Arms out of sockets wouldn't be PG-13, that must mean the Wookies win, 'cos everyone knows Droids don't Rip peoples arms out of their sockets when they loose. Wookies are known to do that...
Everyone will be watching the leaked pirate a week before its in the cinema anyway...
"Sweet llamas of the Bahamas !"
Ok, first off, I'm an Aussie. To me "PG-13" sounds really really lame. When I read that I thought it had been brought -down- to PG-13. I'm a bit confused, here in Australia we have:
:(.
G - Suitable for all
PG - Parental guidance recommended for kids under 15
M - Mature, recommended for people over 15. (not a legal restriction)
MA - Mature Accompanied, illegal for people under 15 aren't to see it unless accompanied by a parent or guardian.
R - Legally restricted to adults
X - Generally sexually explicit, technically illegal in all AU states except capital territory, but authorities turn a blind eye.
E - No rating, like, educational shows.
RC - Refused Classification, banned.
And each of those ratings is normally accompanied by a few words saying what sort of stuff gives it that rating. Eg, 'contains strong violence and coarse language' 'contains nudity' 'contains sex scenes' 'contains goatse' etc. Although for TV shows they often say 'contains material that may be offensive to some viewers', without saying what it is, and suddenly naked men are on the screen
Anyway, could someone who knows explain quickly what this 'PG-13' is equivalent of. It sounds like our PG, but other star wars seemed more M to me. (I found jar-jar really offensive)
printf("Goodbye cruel world!\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b");
I remember when I was growing up during the run of 'meatball' and the like movies, PG-13 meant that there was at least one boobie shot in the picture, guaranteed.
Princess Amidala... I'm looking at you.
Maybe Lucas set out to create a film that was PG13 to win back his adult audience - it sends a strong message that this is not a kids film as Episode I definitely was.
It certainly seems to have got the writer of the article to be more positive about it.
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.
Well, that's good - now we know exactly what rating "scenes of dropping someone in a flaming pit of lava" gets you.
"Stupid! Stupid stupid stupid stupid! I touched the hot wire right there - I'm an idiot!"
I've heard that its rated PG-13 because they will show the full birthing scene of luke and leia from the viewpoint of the ob-gyn.
Once the fanboys see a full-on birth, that will make them just that much more scared of girls and sex.
I'm still going to pay to see it
Of course you will. He'll be wiping his ass with the money you paid for the ticket.
...who haven't a clue what "PG-13" means, here are some useful links:-
Overview of MPAA ratings
G and PG in detail
PG-13 upwards in detail
Basically, PG-13 means you *can* get in if you are under 13; as far as I can tell, no accompaniment is required. It differs from the US PG rating in that it is a stronger warning that the material *may* be unsuitable for under 13s.
This makes it somewhere between the UK (and US's) PG rating and the UK's 12A (which requires accompaniment by an adult if you are under 12).
It shouldn't be assumed that the film will be a 12A in the UK though; if the rating was as a result of sex or language, then the BBFC might judge it differently.
Well thanks a ton, now I've got a stupid mental image of Ani going, "I'm Bat...errr...Darth Vader."
Hmm, maybe "Darth and the Giant Peach-Shaped Death Star" will be next?
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
Why on earth are you calling it a "Space Opera". Call the movie a motion picture if you must, but not a "Space Opera" . It's got nothing to do with the musical art of opera and making a false association won't help the chances of this movie being a success.
Well, if you want to be a pedant like that, it doesn't feature George Lucas taking a dump either, so they can't call it a "motion" picture, can they?
the original trilogy never had enough Jedi action to satisfy me. That alone makes the new trilogy worthwhile.
Your point is valid. Episode I wasn't great but not as horrible as people make it out to be. II was good, but not incredible. Very fun.
I think part of the problem is that this trilogy doesn't have the "hero's journey" story line which people just naturally love. It must be in our DNA or something.
And there is no way getting around dealing with Palpatine's rise as well.
I can't think of a better Episode I or II plot outline, so I'll just enjoy them. Episode III looks great, but even if it isn't...there will be plenty of Jedi action.
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
Return of the Jedi (1983)
Action/Adventure and Science Fiction/Fantasy 2 hrs. 13 min. In the epic conclusion of the Star Wars saga, the Empire prepares to crush the Rebellion with a more powerful Death Star while the Rebel fleet mounts a massive attack on the space station. Luke Skywalker confronts his father Darth Vader in a final climactic duel before the evil Emperor. Release Date: May 25, 1983 Nationwide; March 14, 1997 Re-release. MPAA Rating: PG for sci-fi action violence. Distributor: Twentieth Century Fox
http://movies.yahoo.com/shop?d=hv&cf=info&id=18001 11258
it's got a higher rating because of all the swearing a cursing the audience will be shouting out in disgust as they watch the movie.
What about Soap Operas? Not much singing in them either. I think it more refers to the drama aspect.
Today's troll education moment brought to you by the letter "L" for Loser. Remember kids, only losers troll.
Here, I will use YOUR source.
Space Opera
Any Questions?
-Jason
After all, it seems somehow "okay" to expose kids to violence in the states. Sex is a whole other thing...
/., but this one continues to baffle me (Although my working theory is that folks want to think of Americans as war-mongering, self-righteous Puritans, and this idea plays nicely into that stereotype). Do I need to find a /. story or two about parent groups trying to ban or restrict violent video games to convince you that this is far from being universally accepted in real life, particularly among the same types of people who complained the most about the nipple?
I understand the origin of a few of the popular myths on
actually, i think this is very interesting. while SW is traditionally PG, things like the ewoks of ROTJ & jar-jar binks have opened lucas to charges of pandering to kids. while i think that's unavoidable, given the marketing power of the star wars brand, i also think that this is an effort to help shield lucas from that particular charge.
that said, it's almost certainly going to be the darkest of the movies, what w/ the fall of anakin to the dark side & all.
ed
Pure and simple, the PG-13 rating is meant to garner more attention and speculation. Otherwise, Revenge of the Sith's opening would be the worst ever for a Star Wars movie.
Kinda clever if you ask me.
SEO Copywriter. Just Say ON
In my experience, kids are generally just grossed out by sex.
Oh crap that sounds REALLY bad. Let me rephrase.
Kids in the playground will play cowboys and indians (or the politically correct modern equivalent of a battle scene) until the cows come home. Put them in front of a film with a sex scene, however, and they'll generally feel uncomfortable at best or start making retching noises at worst.
I'm sure as everyone reading this as a kid knows, the opposite sex was a difficult subject best ignored. Girls tend to think of boys as 'yucky' and boys generally only get on well with 'tomboys'. with exceptions of course.
hell, I've landed a hot potato here, haven't I?
Anyway, parent poster:
I'd rather my kids watch violence than sex..
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.
When young, the distinction takes care of itself. when they hit puberty though, you've had 12-15 years of experince with them to get an idea how to deal with it. One thing though, once they hit the point of interest, that's no time to carry on relying on the kids' own 'yuck' reflex. At that point, they need proper, practical information which they can rely on and believe in, otherwise there's a whole new can of worms about to spill all over the family floor.
don't forget, as with all things, this post deals in generalities. specific instances require specific action - hence attentive parenting.
Screw you all! I'm off to the pub
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
You can rip out a persons spine so-long as
...You alien bast*rd ,Ill see you in Hell aghhhh" ..ugh i am dying .. possible universal question of what is next agh"
1: They do not swear when your doing it
2: You dont see any skin associated with the lower back / chest/crotch
3: They do not say "Save me *deity or scientific theory*"
4: The person does not make any racial or gender related comments
so basicaly when you have the guys spine ripped out the script should be changed from
" aghhhh sh*t
to a much more demographicaly freindly
"Oh fiddle-dee-dee , I am upset with you species of unkown origion
The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
OK I could have phrased that better. The original Star Wars films were kids films an adult could enjoy, the new ones are kids films ONLY a child can enjoy.
Roses are red
violets are blue
toddlers doesn't exactly rhyme with alzheimers
but who says good poetry has to rhyme?
have you ever been hated or discriminated against?
I have I've been hunted and wanted in the exterminated sense.
Seismic mines for my jedi mind. Look at the times. Sick is the mind of the sentator that's behind
all this conflict destructive. enough is too much as planets explodin'. Tempers flaring with Windu.
Just blow him off and keep goin' not taking nothin from no-one.
Giving help long after not breathin'.
keep kickin ass in the morning, an' taking names in the evening
leavingm with a taste as sour as Dagobah in their mouth.
See they can trigger me but they can never figure me out look at me now, I betya probably sick of me now.
Aint you Yoda? Ima make you look so ridiculous now
I'm sorry Yoda.
I never meant to hurt you. I never meant to make you cry but tonight I'm training Skywalker.
I'm sorry Yoda.
I never meant to hurt you. I never meant to make you cry but tonight I'm training Skywalker.
Verse 2
you got a skeleton in a cave I don't know if anyone knows it.
But before they throw my robes out of an airlock and close it
I'ma expose it.
I'll take you back a hundred years or three before I ever had an Artoo-Dee
Too. met this slave boy, must have been a few cycles old.
Owned by Watto who didn't want him sold.
He's the shit. I mean that boy could really fly.
I guess that's because he's the livin' breathin force that's why.
I look at Anni and I couldn't picture leaving his side.
Even if he was full of fear, I'd grit my teeth and I'd try
to make it work with him at least for Qui-gon's sake.
Maybe I made some mistakes, but I'm only human. And I'm jedi enough to try to will them away.
What I did was reckless, no doubt that it was dumb.
But the smartest shit I ever did was learn to chop off arms. cuz he'd a killed us.
Shit, he would have shot Luke an me both. It's my life, far far away, a long long time ago.
I'm sorry Yoda.
I never meant to hurt you. I never meant to make you cry but tonight I'm training Skywalker.
I'm sorry Yoda.
I never meant to hurt you. I never meant to make you cry but tonight I'm training Skywalker.
Verse 3
now I would never diss my own master
just to get some recognition, maybe Qui-gon might,
because he wouldn't listen and he was always dissin'.
But put yourself in my position.
Just try to envision witnessin' yo master struggle
with simple levitation, bitchin' that "against us the force is"
and our archives have somethin' missin'.
Goin' through all the star systems, victim of force-unbalanced syndrome.
My whole life I was made to believe that I was strong when I wasn't. Until I grew up,
now I blew up.
It makes you sick to your stomach.
Doesn't it?
wasn't that the reason you made that knighthood for me, Da?
So you could try to justify the way you treated me, Da? Utinni!
You're gettin older and it's cold when you're squattin'.
An Luke's gettin up so quick, he's gonna go,
you can't hold him. And Anni's getting so big now,
you should see him, he's a sith lord.
But you never see him. He won't even be at your funeral.
See what hurts me the most is you won't admit you was wrong. Go disappear. Keep telling yourself that you was master here.
But how dare you try to blame me for what you helped to set up. E chu ta!
I hope you get eaten by the Sarlac for that. Remember when Darth Maul died and you sorta wished it was me?
Well, guess what, I AM dead - more powerful than you could forsee!
I'm sorry Yoda.
I never meant to hurt you. I never meant to make you cry but tonight I'm training Skywalker.
I'm sorry Yoda.
I never meant to hurt you. I never meant to make you cry but tonight I'm training Skywalker.
I said, I'm sorry Yoda.
I never meant to hurt you. I never meant to make you cry but tonight I'm training Skywalker.
I'm sorry Yoda.
I never meant to hurt you. I never meant to make you cry but tonight I'm training Skywalker.
from amiright com.
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.
"I have never won a debate with an ignorant person." -Ali ibn Abi Talib
Like in "Eraserhead".
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
Kids in the playground will play cowboys and indians (or the politically correct modern equivalent of a battle scene) until the cows come home. Put them in front of a film with a sex scene, however, and they'll generally feel uncomfortable at best or start making retching noises at worst.
You are oversimplifying. Adult sexuality will confuse kids yes, but a lot of kids do play "sex" games with each other long before puberty. I know I did. Most kids are curious about things like that, or at least their own bodies. Tell me you haven't heard of the game "you show me yours, and I'll show you mine"?
Talking about kids and sex is a hot potato though, I agree... lest anyone think I am defending paedophilia, that is horribly and utterly wrong, and it is not what I'm talking about.
But they love violence at any age, mostly.
Kids love action and running around, they have a lot of energy. Saying that this means they like violence is wrong. Put them in front of a film showing real voilence I think you will find they won't like it.
With regards to the general discussion, my belief is that any culture that accepts violence and looks down on love and sex is utterly sick.
Being bitter is drinking poison and hoping someone else will die
a lot of kids do play "sex" games with each other long before puberty
Doctors and Nurses, right?
yeah, sure. it's furtive but innocent. Kids at that age have no damn clue though, and luckily for parents there seems to be a window between the 'kid' games and the later genuine interest phase, which is what parents need to spot (and will spot), and take as a cue to actually start talking to their kids about responsible sex.
Now how to actually go about that, hell, in our current society it's difficult to see quite how to deal with it. I'm for openness with my kids, when they make it to that point. I can't expect my kids to make correct choices without information. But of course we're going hellishly off-topic. maybe this is one for Plastic?
Screw you all! I'm off to the pub
Better than the PG70 rating that the Uptown in DC has listed for Sin City...
I'll turn into a supernova and burn up everything. Well I'll turn into a black little hole and you'll turn into string.
'After all, it seems somehow "okay" to expose kids to violence in the states. Sex is a whole other thing...'
/., but this one continues to baffle me"
"I understand the origin of a few of the popular myths on
I would have to say you are easily baffled.
Take a look at international movie ratings on IMDB. Pick some movies with a some sexual content. You will find that in the US, these movies are consistently rated more restrictively than in European countries.
A good example would be Malena, an Italian coming-of-age movie set in WW-II Italy. From IMDB: Finland:15, Germany:12, Netherlands:16 / Norway:15, Portugal:16, Spain:13, Sweden:11, Switzerland:14, UK:15 / USA:R (Under 17 not admitted without parent). Also note that the R-rated version seen in the US was specifically cut/censored for America.
Puritanical doesn't begin to describe it.
A.
(who didn't even mention the wardrobe malfunction)
...bringing you cynical quips since 1998
Some of the originals would have probably been rated PG-13 if it existed back then. PG-13 wasn't created until 1984. The chopping off of limbs and stuff with blood in the original movies would have probably made them pg-13.
she did film nude scenes for Closer, just upon the final cut was it edited out
Sigh. I only heard about this after the fact. I would have gladly founded an online bounty fund payable to any film editor's assistant or second-best boy willing to smuggle a copy out to the public. But it's all under strict lock and key in Mike Nichols' bedroom closet now.
We're talking full frontal Portman pole dancing. Beats the hell out of Paris Hilton or Pamela Lee any day.
Lancelot: We were in the nick of time, you were in great peril.
Galahad: I don't think I was.
Lancelot: Yes you were, you were in terrible peril.
Galahad: Look, let me go back in there and face the peril.
Lancelot: No, it's too perilous.
You have two hands and one brain, so always code twice as much as you think!
double-replying may be bad form, but I just picked up on this:
Put them in front of a film showing real voilence I think you will find they won't like it.
Real violence, sure. Chicks getting slammed on meathooks in the Texas Chainsaw Massacre is worlds away from, say, John Wayne shooting a bad guy bloodlessly, but you'll agree they're both violent, right?
Which one is morally more correct? the one that shows violent death as a nasty, gory, bloody event that no-one would want to be anywhere near, or the one that depicts death as a clean, simple act with no consequences?
The depictions are poles apart, but I'm torn between real violence (Mr. Orange bleeding to death, Saving Private Ryan) which are realistic and difficult to watch even as an adult, and the relatively bloodless yet easily dismissed violence you see in many so-called non-violent movies which rate lower certs.
Does the kid see the real violence and therefore realise how fucking awful it is, or see the sanitised violence and think it's not so bad? or is it the other way round? Does all the blood and guts desensitize a perons, or does it make them sit there and think "holy shit'?
Ethical problems exist in such a study, of course, but I think maybe studying this from a nuanced point of view may be a good idea.
This is pretty important to me, as I'm not really sure whether my kids should see one or the other. Given that I'd be bringing them up in part, I'd hope they'd get my point of view on the issues, and if I showed them, say, Reservoir Dogs, they'd figure violence is just scary.
With regards to the general discussion, my belief is that any culture that accepts violence and looks down on love and sex is utterly sick.
agreed, but I don't think you can ignore violence. It happens, and so has to be put in context, just as everything else in life does. Ignoring an issue is arguably worse than denying it. Arguably. You need to know about concepts to put them into context, or even to reject them. As an illustration, take creationism. Most creationists don't actually know anything relevant about biology, and those who do generally pick and choose the bits they like and throw away the rest. draw an analogy.
Screw you all! I'm off to the pub
shall I take the bait?
yes..
no...
yes...
Doctors and Nurses and other inter-gener child games in my childhood had no subtext. the subtext in cowboys/indians or brits/germans or whatever had an implication that the other guys were first of all the 'evil, bad ones' and secondly they were dead when you shouted "bang!"
OK, maybe I'm reading into it too much, but dead. Dead.
Screw you all! I'm off to the pub
Save me, Obi-Wan Kenobi, you're my only hope!
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
I just checked out Greydanus' reviews, and you're quite correct: his analysis is a pleasure to read, and he's able to call the matrix 2 and 3 as the junk they are while being polite and explaining his reasons quite well.
:)
Thanks for the tip
Need Geek Rock? Try The Franchise!
Lucasfilm employees are reportedly under a NDA not to discuss any possible filming of episodes VII-IX; also, Peter Mayhew's contract in episode III has been reliably stated to include an option clause for him reprising his role in 7 and 8.
Lucas may be growing senile, but he still knows to cover his bases.
//Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
I like how you try to answer your own question, there, with a straw man. Quaint. Except I live in the US, and I'm trying to be a conscientious parent, and unfortunately this criticism basically holds true when I'm trying to figure out what to take my kids to.
With respect to the movies, the MPAA and Hollywood censors in general have had lots to do with the Catholic church, at least since 1930 or so. If you've never taken a walk through the history of "the Hays code" -- actually eventually enforced, when it was, by ultra-Catholic politico Joseph Breen -- you might want to do so before you express any more mystification.
That's a strange history, but it obviously does show the bias you're claiming is so hard to understand. For example, Breen was only able to really enforce "the code" after a long nude swimming scene in "Tarzan and His Mate" caused a congressional outcry. Think the movie Tarzan ever killed anyone before the truly upsetting scene in which his wife was sorta, kinda naked?
If you honestly think the violence in "The 6th Day" (PG-13) would be less disturbing to a 13-year-old than the profanity in "Billy Elliott" (R for language and almost certainly for an implied gay friend), you've truly got that MPAA sensibility going on. Kill half the known world: PG-13. Say a few F-words: R. Or let's compare two movies that both got a PG-13, both of which I took my kids to:
Yeah, I think those were equivalent movies. Whale Rider was a wonderful family story. Daredevil should have been an R for any one of about eight different scenes.
Do we even want to start talking about video games? Give me one video game that's as sexual as Mortal Combat or Doom is violent. If there was such an animal, it'd have to be sold in a brown wrapper at the magazine stand that has the special "adult" room.
Or TV: Was Janet Jackson's "wardrobe malfunction" as drastic as any episode of CSI you'd like to watch? Not in a million years.
"Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.
A couple of data points.
When I was younger - like about Grade 6 or 7 younger - I had a life-sized plastic replica M16 rifle (you don't see stuff like _that_ anymore) that I picked up at a yard sale. At one time it had some internals that presumably made noise when you pulled the trigger, but those were long gone by the time I got it. It was just a hollow shell.
It was, however, *awesome* for playing "guns" with my friends - a game that was essentially line-of-sight "tag". If you got "shot", a "medic" would have to drag you to a "medic station" (usually a tree) and you would have to count to some pre-established number (out loud) before you were considered "revived" and able to fight again.
This, along with "kick the can" was one of our favourite games. There was a lot of honour involved. If you knew that you had been shot dead to rights, you were expected to die with no arguing. There were the occasional "mutuals" with the inevitable "I shot you first!" arguments, but these were usually solved by both parties agreeing to die.
For all the simulated violence, this was actually a very structured and honourable game. It was on your honour to play along and die gloriously when called upon to do so.
A few years later, I went to high school, and joined my school shooting team. Now I had my hands on a real firearm, and the rules changed. It became TOTALLY unaceptable to ever point a rifle at another human being; unacceptable to even let the line of the muzzle cross another human. This was enforced by actual physical violence - point a gun at somebody, even by accident, and an adult would clock you HARD in the head.
The message sank home VERY quickly. This was no game; this was for keeps, and the seriousness of the situation was such that the normal rules of who could hit you and how hard were superceded. You learned respect for the rifle and its potential very, very quickly.
A few years later on, I joined the Army, and it took me a VERY long time to overcome my aversion to pointing a rifle at another human (even in training, where we had blanks, and plugs in the muzzles to prevent any actual discharge of projectiles) And firing? Forget about it!
I remember very distinctly, during basic training, I was guarding a "prisoner encampment" (full of instructors playing at enemy) when one of them lept the wire and took off. I yelled at him to stop, raised my FN, sighted in perfectly centre of mass on his retreating back... and held that sight picture as he ran off into the distance. Just couldn't do it - even though I KNEW that I had blanks loaded, that nobody was in any danger, and I was going to be in a world of hurt for letting a "prisoner" escape. (Which I was, lemme tell you)
It took a couple of *years* of near constant practice to overcome that.
So I'm of the opinion that "pretend violence" is not a particularly big deal, so long as the distinction is made between pretend and real. Kids can and do learn the difference.
I'm also of the opinion that kids need to be exposed to firearms safety courses VERY early in life (even though I'm not particularly pro-gun) I think being exposed to firearms early removes some of the mystery and curiosity that encourages kids to go hunting for any guns that might be in the house, I think it teaches familiarity such that accidents are reduced if a gun DOES (heaven forbid) land in a child's unsupervised hands, and I KNOW it teaches enormous respect for what a gun is capable of doing to another human being.
DG
Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book
Save me, evolution?
Oh wait..
O great Natural Selection!! Select SOMEONE ELSE!!
:P