Bond has always been controvercial for its sex content
its all nudge nudge wink wink stuff
girls whose names are double entendres, actors under the sheets reaching for champagne not naughty bits
its not like Y Tu Mama Tambien or something
the only "controversy" I see is how coy and immature it all is
makes me think of Eric Idle finally getting to the point and asking Terry Jones "... well, whats it like?"
No doubt the UK version (which I gather will probably be a 12 and not 12a) will have fewer cuts on the sex and skin and more on the violence as oppossed to the U.S. PG-13 cuts.
MBE
According to Odeon it will actually be a 12A. Not sure if this is accurate, of course.
As a business decision a 12A is probably what the producers would aim for, although the criteria for classification I find somewhat perplexing.
No doubt the UK version (which I gather will probably be a 12 and not 12a) will have fewer cuts on the sex and skin and more on the violence as oppossed to the U.S. PG-13 cuts.
MBE
According to Odeon it will actually be a 12A. Not sure if this is accurate, of course.
As a business decision a 12A is probably what the producers would aim for, although the criteria for classification I find somewhat perplexing.
Very perplexing. 12a is of course more desireable because you can get the under 12s in and that means more money. But considering how tough the BBFC is on classifying violence and how this is suppossed to be more violent than recent entries, when supposedly DAD just squeaked by with the new 12a (though ratings of Bond films are supposedly one of the reasons it was created -- lots of complaints by parents who couldn't take their younger kids to the 12 rated ones), GE and TND had to be cut not to get a 15, and LTK was a 15 then . Maybe their standards for violence are lowering (or is it rising?) -- if so why even bother with the distinction between 12a and 12?
At a rumored 145 minute running time -- it's now even longer than the 1967 CR.
No doubt the UK version (which I gather will probably be a 12 and not 12a) will have fewer cuts on the sex and skin and more on the violence as oppossed to the U.S. PG-13 cuts.
MBE
According to Odeon it will actually be a 12A. Not sure if this is accurate, of course.
As a business decision a 12A is probably what the producers would aim for, although the criteria for classification I find somewhat perplexing.
Very perplexing. 12a is of course more desireable because you can get the under 12s in and that means more money. But considering how tough the BBFC is on classifying violence and how this is suppossed to be more violent than recent entries, when supposedly DAD just squeaked by with the new 12a (though ratings of Bond films are supposedly one of the reasons it was created -- lots of complaints by parents who couldn't take their younger kids to the 12 rated ones), GE and TND had to be cut not to get a 15, and LTK was a 15 then . Maybe their standards for violence are lowering (or is it rising?) -- if so why even bother with the distinction between 12a and 12?
At a rumored 145 minute running time -- it's now even longer than the 1967 CR.
MBE
Here's the ideal opportunity to feature at least a few bars of "The Look of Love" somewhere in the soundtrack--perhaps an instrumental version.
I think they could make a exceptional version of CR that carries a PG rating. Goldfinger (which you claim as 'pure perfection'), and subsequent Bond films up until LTK function very well without dipping into the realm of R Ratings or garnering the rather silly PG-13 warning.
I wouldn't have been surprised however if CR were to be the first 'R' Rating for Bond.
I'm actually not too concerned about the rating. I don' think that Bond films (from the Brosnan era onwards) should carry an Australian PG rating simply because it would signal that the producers had perhaps reduced some of the violent/sexual content, which I would not want at all. GF is of course my favourite but I think today Bond films in Australia should be rated M 15+. As for CR, how can a film containing a graphic torture scene be rated PG?
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
...how can a film containing a graphic torture scene be rated PG?
I think they're dodging by not being graphic about it; there will be clear implication, but it's not as if we're actually going to see contact between the beater...and the eggs Plus, it's PG-13, which supposedly gives them a bit more lattitude....
Of interest to me was Ms Broccoli's comment about actually depicting blood in CR, which is a clear departure from where they've been lately...this will take some clever editing indeed.
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
I remember reading Mike G Wilson mentioning including blood is a definite change from the last new movies, but a necessary one for some CR scenes.
PG-13/12A is the perfect rating for a modern James Bond film. These days I think a 15 rating would rule out a huge target audience, and it's not surprising the rating CR has recieved, as the producers were probably aiming to make a film suitable for the same age audience as the Brosnan movies.
I think they're dodging by not being graphic about it; there will be clear implication, but it's not as if we're actually going to see contact between the beater...and the eggs Plus, it's PG-13, which supposedly gives them a bit more lattitude....
Please no, you're putting some rather unpleasant images in my head!
Of interest to me was Ms Broccoli's comment about actually depicting blood in CR, which is a clear departure from where they've been lately...this will take some clever editing indeed.
I'm actually really happy about this. Although I would never expect a Bond film to have the same level or intensity of violence as in my beloved Die Hard and equally beloved Terminator 2 I think it is a great idea to make CR's violence more 'adult' than that in DAD. I'm not particularly happy about the idea that CR's tone will reflect LTK, but unlike some other members, I have never had a problem with LTK's violence. So really, unless Bond starts killing his co-workers, I will have no problem with CR's level or intensity of violence.
"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine. And when they start not smiling back—that’s an earthquake. and then you get yourself a couple of spots on your hat, and you’re finished. Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." Death of a Salesman
Comments
girls whose names are double entendres, actors under the sheets reaching for champagne not naughty bits
its not like Y Tu Mama Tambien or something
the only "controversy" I see is how coy and immature it all is
makes me think of Eric Idle finally getting to the point and asking Terry Jones "... well, whats it like?"
As a business decision a 12A is probably what the producers would aim for, although the criteria for classification I find somewhat perplexing.
Very perplexing. 12a is of course more desireable because you can get the under 12s in and that means more money. But considering how tough the BBFC is on classifying violence and how this is suppossed to be more violent than recent entries, when supposedly DAD just squeaked by with the new 12a (though ratings of Bond films are supposedly one of the reasons it was created -- lots of complaints by parents who couldn't take their younger kids to the 12 rated ones), GE and TND had to be cut not to get a 15, and LTK was a 15 then
At a rumored 145 minute running time -- it's now even longer than the 1967 CR.
MBE
Here's the ideal opportunity to feature at least a few bars of "The Look of Love" somewhere in the soundtrack--perhaps an instrumental version.
I think they're dodging by not being graphic about it; there will be clear implication, but it's not as if we're actually going to see contact between the beater...and the eggs
Of interest to me was Ms Broccoli's comment about actually depicting blood in CR, which is a clear departure from where they've been lately...this will take some clever editing indeed.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
PG-13/12A is the perfect rating for a modern James Bond film. These days I think a 15 rating would rule out a huge target audience, and it's not surprising the rating CR has recieved, as the producers were probably aiming to make a film suitable for the same age audience as the Brosnan movies.
I'm actually really happy about this. Although I would never expect a Bond film to have the same level or intensity of violence as in my beloved Die Hard and equally beloved Terminator 2 I think it is a great idea to make CR's violence more 'adult' than that in DAD. I'm not particularly happy about the idea that CR's tone will reflect LTK, but unlike some other members, I have never had a problem with LTK's violence. So really, unless Bond starts killing his co-workers, I will have no problem with CR's level or intensity of violence.
http://commanderbond.net/article/3739