Is the PG-13 Rating Keeping Viewers at Home?

The year was 1984, and Hollywood was seemingly pumping out blockbuster movies every month. Ghostbusters, Gremlins, Beverly Hills Cop, The Karate Kid, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, Amadeus, Footloose, and The Terminator name only a few. Yet there are two titles in this list that would forever change the landscape of major motion pictures.

When the Temple of Doom was released May 23, 1984, millions of families flocked to see the new adventures of Dr. Indiana Jones. What they did not expect was to watch the evil Maharajah plunge is hand into a slave’s chest, extracting his still-beating heart, and showing it to the victim before dropping him into the pit of fire below. In tandem with the constant danger that “Short Round”, Indy’s young partner, is constantly exposed to, parents were left wondering if they should have kept their pre-teen children at home.

Later, in June, viewing audiences were introduced to a cute, cuddly mogwai named Gizmo and his ugly white-Mohawk-sporting, mischief-making Gremlin counterpart, Stripe. The blockbuster-hit Gremlins was the second movie in under a month that terrified unsuspecting young ones and their often agape-mouthed parents expecting a slightly edgier “E.T.: The Extra Terrestrial.”

Public outcry prompted Steven Spielberg (who produced Gremlins and directed Temple of Doom) to suggest to MPAA founder Jack Valenti a new rating that established a middle ground between the PG and R ratings. After approval from theater owners, the PG-13 rating was officially introduced to the public that July. The first movie to be released with a PG-13 rating was Red Dawn. Technically, The Flamingo Kid had received the first PG-13 rating but was shelved for five months, allowing Red Dawn to be released first. The new rating still allowed children under 13 to be admitted without a parent or guardian, but cautioned parents about potentially violent or offensive content. While a step in the right direction, the new rating confused movie-goers as to what the difference between PG and PG-13 really encompassed. Movies that borderlined the PG-13 rating often resulted in the MPAA rating them PG, again prompting parental protests and outcry against questionable material being shown to their young children.

Within a few years, the shift to PG-13 movies became more common as standards were tightened and better defined. With the exception of 1994, the number of PG-13 films has outnumbered the number of PG films since the early ’90s.

Here is where the problem begins. The 2004 Movie Attendance Study available from the MPAA Web site (www.mpaa.org) states, “The 12-39 age group makes up 30 percent of the population, yet represents nearly half of all annual theatrical admissions.” Within this group, nearly two-thirds are between the ages of 12-20. Thus, it is in the movie studios’ best interest to get their films approved for a PG-13 rating to ensure they are not neglecting half of their potential audience.

So what does this do to the quality of the films being currently released? To answer that, let us look at the ratings of the recent American remakes of Japanese horror films. Movies like: The Ring (PG-13), The Ring 2 (PG-13) and The Grudge (PG-13) were based on Japanese movies that were either originally not rated by the MPAA --- or in the case of Ju-On (of which The Grudge takes it’s origin) have an R rating.

The American versions are filmed with every intention of being rated R, yet they become, pun not intended, butchered in the editing room to fulfill the needs of the PG-13 rating. Once these films reach your local electronics store in the form of a DVD, they are available in three flavors: Original and Director’s Cut, or under the clever branding guise of Unrated. These Unrated films are actually the full strength rated-R solution to the watered-down counterpart that was released in theaters just months before.

This type of editing is not limited simply to horror films. A perfect example of softening a movie before the release would be 2004’s The Big Bounce in which it is very apparent (through woefully bad lip-syncing) the foul language has been redubbed to be less offensive.

A notable example of tampering with subject matter to meet a rating would be Alien vs. Predator, also released in 2004. This film garnering a PG-13 rating was laughable considering the previous four Alien movies and both Predator movies were all rated R. A quick jump to the Internet movie database IMDB.com provides information on every movie ever made. When you look up AVP, you will find a comment regarding an apparent special industry screening, in which the director stated that the film was always planned as an R-rated movie and shot that way. Only three weeks prior to the movie’s release, the studio changed it by cutting the film severely to ensure a lower PG-13 rating. It later was revealed that this "press-screening" never took place and was only an Internet rumor started by fans. That being said, the DVD release of AVP was available not only as the theatrical version, but also in an Unrated Director’s Cut version that includes eight minutes that expanded explanations of certain events and delivered the gore-filled content Alien and Predator fans were hoping for. In fact, it was the script and poor acting that held this movie back more than the few minutes of excessive violence and gore. But the possibility exists that it could have performed better at the box office had the fans of the two original franchises felt the material was better represented.

This subtle shift in focus has helped the PG-13 rating stray from its intended use. No longer is the PG-13 rating used as a regulatory system to help consumers decide what is appropriate for their children, but rather a device that movie studios use to gain access to a wider target audience no matter the subject matter.

Removing content to conform to a rating system can rarely be seen as a good thing. When studios remove situations and ideas to conform to an acceptable level of content deemed “potentially offensive,” they essentially are censoring the material. This often convolutes the meaning of any art form, including film, giving it significantly less impact. That, in turn, creates a lackluster response from viewers. More than anyone, consumers understand the need to protect young children from the increasing amount of shock material in major media today, but are studios really protecting them by removing the gore yet still showing the violent action? We have reached a point in today’s cinematic world that studios now compromise their films for the wrong reasons, leaving behind sub-standard material that no one can relate to.

We at Cobalt Cable feel that film is truly an art form and should not be compromised by the almighty dollar. We encourage the film industry to hold true to the original concepts that evolve from each individual film project. Diluting ideas only breeds mediocrity and creates a final product that will, more often than not, disappoint audiences. The decline of the cineplex has been looming in the distant future for some time now and is nearing rapidly. As home theaters become the chosen venue for movie viewing, it certainly could be noted that savvy audience members avoid going to movies not only due to the conveniences that their home theaters provide, but also to experience the original, unabridged content of a film, now released as an Unrated DVD. That, or maybe they are just tired of watching movies in a theater packed full of 12-year-old kids.