Watership Down would be rated PG nowadays

Pawnless Endgame said:
I'll have to re-watch Bambi, but I think the spoiler bit is a little way into the film, maybe about half way through. I don't remember it being overly graphic, but it was certainly a cruel thing to add in a Disney flick!
Click to expand...

Ah - I think I may have stopped watching after the bit at the beginning when Bambi's mum got killed by the hunter (hope that's not a spoiler for anyone lol). I'm a big softie at heart :D
 
Since having our first child, we have really noticed, particularly in the older animated films, how sinister some can be.

So many of the Disney 'classics' cover subject matter such as losing a parent(s), being an orphan, kidnap, imprisonment, assault, death, violence, evil, ghosts and that's just to name a few.

I mean in all honesty when you look at a film like Cinderella it's sinister - of course as an adult it isn't so bad but now we're looking at films through the eyes of a 4 year old, it's not good really.

Whenever this type of topic comes up I'm always reminded of Jurassic Park being a PG... particularly for the time, that was unbelievably low (should have been a 12a).

Thing is to me a PG is more like 8+ years old with adult supervision - no way would I show a PG to my children that were younger than that unless I knew it was ok beforehand.
 
There are a lot of films in my opinion that should be reviewed by the BBFC.

Starting with the Indiana Jones films. They're all quite violent.

*Raiders of the lost Ark:- People getting cut up by propeller blades/spiked through the face, shot in the head and most importantly skin melting off.

*Temple of doom:- Monkey brains, hearts getting ripped out and multiple children getting savagely whipped plus Indy getting possessed.

*Last Crusade:- Multiple people getting shot, a man squished by a Tank, beheadings and a man getting aged to death.

*Crystal skull:- This film is a 12 and nothing violent happens in it compared to the first 3. Well, one dude gets ate by ants. That's it.
 
Gunni Parker said:
There are a lot of films in my opinion that should be reviewed by the BBFC.

Starting with the Indiana Jones films. They're all quite violent.

*Raiders of the lost Ark:- People getting cut up by propeller blades/spiked through the face, shot in the head and most importantly skin melting off.

*Temple of doom:- Monkey brains, hearts getting ripped out and multiple children getting savagely whipped plus Indy getting possessed.

*Last Crusade:- Multiple people getting shot, a man squished by a Tank, beheadings and a man getting aged to death.

*Crystal skull:- This film is a 12 and nothing violent happens in it compared to the first 3. Well, one dude gets ate by ants. That's it.
Click to expand...

To add to that, what about A New Hope where Obi-wan chops off a blokes arm for giving Luke a bit of lip? (and Han shooting Greedo first? - not a good lesson for kids is it? ;) )
 
Reference Indy Jones - I tend to be squeamish when it comes to 15/18 graphic violence, but I think that the first 3 Indy Jones films are fine as they are as PGs. I just turned 11 when I saw Temple of Doom... intense, but still fine for me at that age. Think PG is around 12/13 generally for parental guidance?

25-30 years on, and we're just becoming a nation of softies :p

Any views on Lilo & Stitch btw guys? It's only about 12 years old but it has already changed certs from U to PG in that time. My DVD copy (bought in 2008) was a U. The blu-ray (bought in 2013) was a PG. I would classify the Lilo & Stitch "violence" similar to Tom & Jerry (rated U). Slapstick with bombs, blackface, traps, chases, lasers (pew pew pew!), buildings burning down, mean classmates, fights, etc :-)
 
Amp34 said:
PG?!

I'd say it should be a 15 minimum. It's one of the nastiest, most horrible films I've ever seen. :p

I still don't understand how a film with animals being buried alive, having their throats ripped out, massive amounts of blood and gore and essentially torture was ever considered a U. :(
Click to expand...

Absolutely, it's traumatic.
 
Hated that film when i was young. The ghost bit at the end was freaky, the bloody and violence of the rabbits and the dog was very graphic if it was intended for children.

Should have been a 15+

If i had children i would not let them see that film if i could help it.
 
Jono said:
It should be a U and kids these days should stop being mollycoddled and be taught that stuff like that happens. Things die all the time and the world isn't always a lovely place, though it can be.
Click to expand...

So why not make all war films a U? Happens all the time? :p
 
Just seen this on IMDb

Netflix and BBC have teamed up to produce a four-hour miniseries adaptation of Richard Adams’ classic novel “Watership Down.” The all-star voice cast includes John Boyega, James McAvoy, Nicholas Hoult, Gemma Arterton and Ben Kingsley. “We jumped at the chance to get in early and work alongside the BBC and 42 to bring this classic English tale to our members around the world,” said Netflix’s VP of global television Larry Tanz in a statement. “This novel presentation of Adam’s work pairs great talent with beautiful animation and will delight existing fans and capture a whole new audience for this timeless story.
Click to expand...

So, I wonder if it will be as violent as the original? ;)
 
Pawnless Endgame said:
Any views on Lilo & Stitch btw guys? It's only about 12 years old but it has already changed certs from U to PG in that time. My DVD copy (bought in 2008) was a U. The blu-ray (bought in 2013) was a PG. I would classify the Lilo & Stitch "violence" similar to Tom & Jerry (rated U). Slapstick with bombs, blackface, traps, chases, lasers (pew pew pew!), buildings burning down, mean classmates, fights, etc :-)
Click to expand...

Special features make a difference to ratings, which may be a possibility considering bluray tends to have additional content to DVD. I don't own Lilo and Stitch so can't be specific, but they might discuss themes in depth that are dealt with quickly in the film? Particularly in the younger ratings, how much a subject is dealt with makes a difference (hence, mild peril v sustained peril).

Lower rated films may also get bumped up because of things that may now be judged as racist/sexist/homophobic.

It's worth noting that it's been adjusted from a kids film to...well, a kids film. It's hardly like it's an 18 :D
 
My wife can't watch it to this day it traumatised her so much as a kid. It was the ghost rabbit mostly that affected her, but also the general tone. I saw it later in life, but remember being struck by its dark atmosphere, and certainly not what I expected.
 
NexusK said:
You mean you've read some rumours. For all their faults i wouldn't expect the BBC to water this down and i certainly wouldn't expect Netflix to.
Click to expand...

Well yes, you're quite right, I've read rumours. I was mainly going by this direct quote from the producer of the remake, Rory Aitken... "While we won’t shy away from the darkness in the book, visually it won’t be as brutal and scarring".

My sincerest apologies to you for leaping to a conclusion from that, I will endeavour in future to make sure that whenever I refer to hearing something , that I fully investigate and provide written , and preferably video 1 to 1 evidence, to ensure that its 100% fact, rather than upset the sensibilities of any internet dicussion forum :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom