Comments on: 'Terminator Salvation' MPAA Rating Bickering, New Photos and Trailer

By: Cisco P

Cisco P — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 02:44:20 +0000

I have a hunch Salvation WILL be dissapointing. Why? You cant make an end of the world apocalyptic movie where humans are being exterminated and make it PG-13. That is so stupid. They are trying to make a movie using an R rated plot and delute it using PG elements. That is like trying to do a hardcore porn movie rated R. It just doesent make sense and no one watching will be satisfied. I am tired of watching all these PG-13 mediocre movies where the action falls short because the studio doesent want to put any violence that could offend minors and hope they can fill all available seats in the theaters. I am a Terminator fan but because the studio decided to be a total wuss about MPAA rating, I will NOT go see this movie in the theater. I will wait until someone buys it on DVD and go see it at their house.

By: DP Jacobs

DP Jacobs — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 23:24:31 +0000

^^I'll try explaining this without hurting you ;D. The Kyle Reese that impregnates Sarah is NOT from her timeline. He was from the FUTURE. She bangs him, gets pregnate. John Conner is born. Along the way, Kyle Reese is born.(he does have to be born in order to go back in time) Then Judgement Day happens. Kyle Reese is a teenager and yes, John is older than him. The war ends and John sends Kyle BACK to the past to protect his mother and impregnate her so he can be born. Hard to wrap your head around but if you think about it, it does Make sense. And it's only make believe!!

Now about the article, it is true, society has become desensitized by violence. Look at some of the PG-13 movies and you notice that they just as much if not more violence than some of their R-rated counterparts. Maybe not as graphically, but if someone is getting beaten, stabbed, shot, or murdered, it's usually shown outright, not insinuated. The only difference? More time than not, the F-bomb is dropped only once, maybe twice if it's obscured. Language, frontal nudity, and sex scenes usually determine an R-rating. Critics aren't looking at how much violence is in a movie to give a rating anymore.
Don't be surprised if Salvation is PG-13, especially given how much Watchmen has dropped off in its sales what with how much it cost to make.(about $150 million) It's all about profit anymore, and if a movie has to be dumbed down to bring more people, it will be done…more times than not.

By: mihirkula

mihirkula — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 14:58:39 +0000

^^ yeah but since Kyle is already sent back by Connor, and dies…according to the new timeline Kyle shouldn't have been born again at all ainnit?

Kyle impregnated Sarah Connor in T1 and died… the child turns out to be John Connor … years later, after Kyle and Sarah and dead, John Connor leads the resistance…and daddy Kyle pops up again as a TEENAGE SOLDIER?? WTF??

By: PeterZeroOne

PeterZeroOne — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 13:45:23 +0000

@mihirkula: Uhm, well, Kyle Reese is born sometime in the 2000s, he survives judgement day, and joins the resistance. Thus he is a teenaged soldier in the resistance come 2018. In 2027, John Connor captures Skynet's time machine thingy, and sends back Kyle Reese into 1980-something. You owe me a beer.

By: mihirkula

mihirkula — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 21:54:46 +0000

Forget the rating… I've got a better question – If Kyle Reese died in T1…how the heck does he turn into a teenager soldier in t4??

Beer for anyone who would answer that

By: kylec

kylec — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 23:34:22 +0000

all of us fans want a R rating. but ether way i will see it. but i really want it too be R lets see what happens with watchmen then we go from there

By: rattler76

rattler76 — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 12:30:01 +0000

Trevor's got a good point there and it got me wondering:
Isn't this about a war? And the soldiers do not get killed in horrible way's? on camera off course. And no soldier uses profanity while being shot at or something?

Sure the level of violence needs to be pretty high before the MPAA reacts but still, this is not a simple shootout. It's a global war.

Only a nipple or two is the difference for this movie for 13 or R? I doubt it.

By: Chuck Bartowski

Chuck Bartowski — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 08:44:52 +0000

Anddddd, it would be more tasteful and sensual and of course keep the film in the realm of a PG-13.

By: Chuck Bartowski

Chuck Bartowski — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 08:43:20 +0000

@Tim: Would the original fan base REEEEALLY completely avoid the movie if it IS PG-13? And if they DO avoid it just because of that, then should they even be considered true fans? I think if they were true fans, they would still give it a fair chance.
More likely though, the original fan base probably doesn't even read the ratings anymore, and will go in and come out thinking that it was R like the others.

I agree with Brad. Nudity never usually NEEDS to be in films. No matter what, it's ALWAYS gonna feel gratuitous in some way. Read this quote from McG though:
"Sometimes, you want to say that the softness of the human flesh is one of the things we're fighting for. It's decidedly human and it's not like the machines."
Well why not just show her complete bare back then? I think that gets the point across enough.

By: Tim

Tim — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 07:57:53 +0000

FUUUUUUUUUUCK. I can't stand it when studios twist the director's arm to make what could be a faithful R rated action flick into a obviously toned down kiddie fest. Same thing happened to Die Hard. Let me say this, why would a teenagers see this when they all probably haven't even seen the others? I think this would make more money rated R, because then wouldn't it draw back the original fan base who enjoyed the originals?

By: Gene

Gene — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 06:05:04 +0000

Terminator Salvation should be R. The first 3 were R plus this looks dark. Moon's tits should not hurt it's audiance. Terminator has a strong fan base. It will stay strong with an R rating like The Matrix. Wake up Warner Bros. Keep it R!

By: ckybltz

ckybltz — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 02:50:27 +0000

I think the whole thing is a smokescreen to hide the fact that McG doesnt really give a damn about the rating, and hes looking for a scapegoat, because he knows damn well that its going to be PG-13. If he acts like hes trying to put up a fight, then he wins some fanboy brownie points.

Lets face it, the guy knows what he shot…he knows that, apparently theres not a tons of graphic violence or profanity…so if a titty shot is the only thing that puts it into an R…then yeah, this is gonna be PG-13.

By: Trevor

Trevor — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 02:41:57 +0000

I think it's been well documented in the past that you can pretty much dismember someone, piece by piece, with little issue; but let one person swear or show a breast and everyone loses their minds. I personally don't see the big deal, but studios gots to get their money so I'm sure they'll cut out whatever they need to to get 13 year olds in.

Terminator films SHOULD be R-Rated, and while the trailers and everything look good thus far I was really hoping they would go all out with this thing and not reel it in for a certain audience.

But it has been well documented as well that common sense isn't exactly prevalent in hollywood.

…That was a long-form way of saying I wouldn't mind seeing Moon Bloodgood topless, let's be honest here.