47 replies to this topic

[Nicolas Suszczyk]

I read this in the new US synopsis available at sonypicturespublicity.com

"This film has been rated PG-13 by the MPAA for INTENSE VIOLENT SEQUENCES THROUGHOUT, SOME SEXUALITY, LANGUAGE AND SMOKING. Credits not final"

[Chief of SIS]

My long desired R rated Bond film will have to wait for another day.

[Vauxhall]

To be expected, but exciting as it's yet another step in the process of realising the fact that another Bond film is successfully in the can and ready for distribution.

[x007AceOfSpades]

My long desired R rated Bond film will have to wait for another day.

I feel you.

[Secret007]

We are all adults. I feel it is time for a James Bond movie to be rated "R". We have gone through an "M" rating, "GP" rating and for 14 years a "PG" rating. From 1989 to 2012, it is a "PG-13" rating.
They say the reason why they edit and tone it down to PG-13 is because they believe more people will go see the movie under a "PG-13" rating.
I disagree with this. I think more adults will go see a movie if it is rated "R" because they know what to expect. We like our movies to be more mature and have adult content. Having a James Bond movie with rated "R material would be perfect and better for the stories and action a James Bond movie presents.
I guess the producers are thinking of the age 13 to 17 crowd and I guess they believe some families will take their 13 to 17 year olds to see a James Bond film.
I didn't get to see my first fully unedited James Bond movie until I was over 18.

An "R" rating did not hurt The Godfather (1972), The Godfather, Part II (1974), Godfather, Part III (1990). The first two movies were highly successful with a "R" rating.

[TheSilhouette]

I've never really felt that an R rating would be appropriate for a Bond movie. I don't think ramping up the sex, violence, or language would really improve the films.

[AgenttiNollaNollaSeitsemän]

Here in Finland Bond films were up until Brosnan era K16-films, meaning no one under the age of 16 were allowed to see them, and some like Thunderball and Diamonds Are Forever were cut in theatres and on home video until mid-90's. Nowadays the whole franchise is rated either K13 or K15.
Bond has always been "sadism for the whole family", and there hardly is any bad language (which seems to be the biggest issue with MPAA) in Flemings novels.

Edited by AgenttiNollaNollaSeitsemän, 23 September 2012 - 08:21 AM.

[thecasinoroyale]

I think PG-13, or 12a here in the UK, is perfectly fine. We're not going to get an 'R' rated James Bond film as Cubby and Harry wanted a film that had sex, violence and adventure that was suitable for all the family to enjoy in their own right, for young boys to get swept away in the excitement of seeing a secret agent save the world and the adults to enjoy an escapist adventure with familiar cast and stories.

It pushed the boundaries with 'Licence To Kill' and maybe this was a reason it didn't work so much to global audiences - it was too real, too violent and too non-Bond for them than what they are used to.

I for one don't need to see more violence, gratuitous language or sexual implications for Bond to work better for me as that just isn't what James Bond is all about. Get Quentin Tarantino to direct a 007 film and you'll get your 'R' rating, but for EON, this doesn't need to happen.

We've had touches of language without it being over-the-top. Daniel Craig uttering "...the bitch is dead." worked perfectly and a fitting mark to the novel. We don't need anything else, and the violence can stay just at the level it is.

[Shrublands]

To be expected, but exciting as it's yet another step in the process of realising the fact that another Bond film is successfully in the can and ready for distribution.

Not quite I'm afraid, this is not a final certificate - this is the preliminary certificate based on the picture edit only. They get this to show they are on the right track before locking the fine cut and moving on to the master mix of the sound.
They have to submit the finished film with the final sound mix, exactly as intended for distribution, to get the actual certificate - that won't happen for a few weeks yet.

[PPK_19]

As to be expected.

No Bond film will ever be a '15', apart from LTK. They have to get all the kiddies in the cinema so 12A for the foreseeable!
You can get away with quite a lot with a 12A too, more than you'd think. There are a couple of racy bits in the trailer which show Bond in a couple of trysts. Sexy.

[Vauxhall]

To be expected, but exciting as it's yet another step in the process of realising the fact that another Bond film is successfully in the can and ready for distribution.

Not quite I'm afraid, this is not a final certificate - this is the preliminary certificate based on the picture edit only. They get this to show they are on the right track before locking the fine cut and moving on to the master mix of the sound.
They have to submit the finished film with the final sound mix, exactly as intended for distribution, to get the actual certificate - that won't happen for a few weeks yet.

Didn't know that. Thanks!

[SecretAgentFan]

We are all adults. I feel it is time for a James Bond movie to be rated "R". We have gone through an "M" rating, "GP" rating and for 14 years a "PG" rating. From 1989 to 2012, it is a "PG-13" rating.
They say the reason why they edit and tone it down to PG-13 is because they believe more people will go see the movie under a "PG-13" rating.
I disagree with this. I think more adults will go see a movie if it is rated "R" because they know what to expect. We like our movies to be more mature and have adult content. Having a James Bond movie with rated "R material would be perfect and better for the stories and action a James Bond movie presents.
I guess the producers are thinking of the age 13 to 17 crowd and I guess they believe some families will take their 13 to 17 year olds to see a James Bond film.
I didn't get to see my first fully unedited James Bond movie until I was over 18.

An "R" rating did not hurt The Godfather (1972), The Godfather, Part II (1974), Godfather, Part III (1990). The first two movies were highly successful with a "R" rating.

Why "R"? To have a more violent Bond film? Bond is not about violence. It is about mass entertainment, delivering a fantasy which is rooted in reality... but not too much. PG-13 is and should always be enough.

[Satorious]

To be honest - I'm fine with the 12A/PG-13 thing. Cinematic Bond is different to literary Bond. There is no way in hell EON would want to isolate such a large chunk of the audience demographic. I think you can still make an intense Bond story within these boundaries. I find with sex and violence on film, less is generally more - imply things and leave them to the imagination. Far more effective.

[QOS4EVER]

I am Perfectly ok with a PG 13 movie, A James Bond movie is one which many watch with their family , That Experience will be ruined if it reaches an R Just to satisfy a few of us.

[Shrublands]

To be expected, but exciting as it's yet another step in the process of realising the fact that another Bond film is successfully in the can and ready for distribution.

Not quite I'm afraid, this is not a final certificate - this is the preliminary certificate based on the picture edit only. They get this to show they are on the right track before locking the fine cut and moving on to the master mix of the sound.
They have to submit the finished film with the final sound mix, exactly as intended for distribution, to get the actual certificate - that won't happen for a few weeks yet.

Didn't know that. Thanks!

No problem.

This is how the cinema chains have got the run time and probable certificate. The MPAA and the BBFC will have seen the fine-cut picture edit with temporary sound and said that biased on that, they are likely to award a PG-13 cert without cuts.

The distributor will pass on this information to the cinemas, so they can start drawing up screening programs and selling tickets.

[Nicolas Suszczyk]

I've never really felt that an R rating would be appropriate for a Bond movie. I don't think ramping up the sex, violence, or language would really improve the films.

Agreed.

[marktmurphy]

We are all adults.

No we're not!

[Pussfeller]

There's something puerile about yearning for an R rating. It's a schoolboy's conception of maturity.

[AgenttiNollaNollaSeitsemän]

There's something puerile about yearning for an R rating. It's a schoolboy's conception of maturity.

Not if the previous entries in the franchise has been R-rated. Die Hard, RoboCop and Terminator are the most obvious examples of watering down a franchise. Bond on the other hand has always been PG and in my opinion an R-rated Bond film is unnecessary. F-bombs and brutal gory violence do not belong to Bonds.

[MattofSteel]

There's something puerile about yearning for an R rating. It's a schoolboy's conception of maturity.

This.

[Nicolas Suszczyk]

Why "R"? To have a more violent Bond film? Bond is not about violence. It is about mass entertainment, delivering a fantasy which is rooted in reality... but not too much. PG-13 is and should always be enough.

I agree, we don't need someone being slaughtered onscreen with lots of blood and flesh here and there or seeing a pørn sex-scene. Bond's appealing in another way.

[Messervy]

I read this in the new US synopsis available at sonypicturespublicity.com

"This film has been rated PG-13 by the MPAA for INTENSE VIOLENT SEQUENCES THROUGHOUT, SOME SEXUALITY, LANGUAGE AND SMOKING. Credits not final"

"SMOKING"?!!
Gosh! We have to close the "Bond smoking" thread down, it clearly gives the producers too many ideas...

[Satorious]

According to the back of Live Magazine (which is a supplement of The Mail on Sunday today with around 20 pages of SkyFall goodness today - well worth buying even if it IS The Mail ) - the film is rated 12A in the UK for "Moderate scenes of action/violence and one use of strong language. If this is the first Bond film to actually drop the F Bomb properly (LALD - I won't count you for now) then I am going to confess my disappointment at that decision. It will be the first Bond film I will watch in the cinema and feel slightly uncomfortable about watching with my whole family - which is a bit of a shame. Maybe that's just me!

[Single-O-Seven]

According to the back of Live Magazine (which is a supplement of The Mail on Sunday today with around 20 pages of SkyFall goodness today - well worth buying even if it IS The Mail ) - the film is rated 12A in the UK for "Moderate scenes of action/violence and one use of strong language. If this is the first Bond film to actually drop the F Bomb properly (LALD - I won't count you for now) then I am going to confess my disappointment at that decision. It will be the first Bond film I will watch in the cinema and feel slightly uncomfortable about watching with my whole family - which is a bit of a shame. Maybe that's just me!

It's not just you. I've admired the action and violence Bond films have betrayed without going too far. They are certainly the more classy for it. Even the use of one F bomb would tarnish that appeal, and this is from a guy who has no problem with strong language in the right movies and in life when the time calls for it! I doubt they will go so far and I'm sure one strong word we will hear will be a little S bomb (probably issued by Dench again!).

[Binyamin]

Casino Royale was PG-13 and is "edgy" enough. He's being tortured naked by having his balls beaten, after killing a man in the bathroom, and sleeping with another man's wife. You can do a lot within the limits of PG-13 and still have it remain an "adult"-level film.

[Hockey Mask]

We are all adults. I feel it is time for a James Bond movie to be rated "R".

WE are adults but the audience is very much made up of young ones.

They say the reason why they edit and tone it down to PG-13 is because they believe more people will go see the movie under a "PG-13" rating.

If it is accessable to more, than more can see it. I don't believe people are passing on Bond because it isn't R.

Having a James Bond movie with rated "R material would be perfect and better for the stories and action a James Bond movie presents.

How so?

I think more adults will go see a movie if it is rated "R" because they know what to expect.

If they don't know what to expect from a Bond film by now they never will.

I guess the producers are thinking of the age 13 to 17 crowd and I guess they believe some families will take their 13 to 17 year olds to see a James Bond film.

My 12 year old will be seeing his first theater Bond this year. He wouldn't if it were rated R.

An "R" rating did not hurt The Godfather (1972), The Godfather, Part II (1974), Godfather, Part III (1990). The first two movies were highly successful with a "R" rating.

I'm not even sure how to respond to this. Godfather was successful at R. Finding Nemo was successful at G. Bond is successful at PG and PG-13. They're different beasts.

[TheSilhouette]

I just don't see anything positive that could come out of an R rated bond movie. Right now, the violence, language, and sexual content are just about right where they should be. Anything more just isn't appropriate for a Bond movie.

[AgenttiNollaNollaSeitsemän]

I just don't see anything positive that could come out of an R rated bond movie. Right now, the violence, language, and sexual content are just about right where they should be. Anything more just isn't appropriate for a Bond movie.

Agreed wholeheartedly.

[S K Y F A L L]

Whats the use in changing the ratings to Bond films now, I wouldn't understand it. I wouldn't mind seeing a R rated series like Bond though.

[Pussfeller]

For economic reasons, I agree that the theatrical version should be PG-13. But by the same token, a DVD-only "unrated version" would make an excellent marketing gimmick.