web
counter
 

The 10 Films with the Hardest PG-13 Rating

By Dustin Rowles | Posted Under Box Office Round-Ups | Comments (45)



taken-movie.jpg

Rise of the Planet of the Apes managed to hold on to the top spot at the weekend’s box office, dropping 50 percent and tallying an estimated $27.5 million. Typically, a 50 percent drop is not something that folks boast about, but given Apes’ surprising debut last week with about $55 million, that $27 million is seen as a success. More impressive is the fact that the $93 million budgeted film is already in the black after 10 days ($104 million). Before the summer is out, Rise will almost certainly break the yearly top 10 and surpass some of those more highly anticipated films of the summer, like Captain America, The Green Lantern, X-Men: First Class and maybe even Thor.

One factor that’s likely helping the film’s box-office success so far is its PG-13 rating, a rating I was surprised to learn it had after screening it. It’s not that the film is particularly bloody, but it is intense and thematically more mature than most PG-13 movies in the marketplace. I even saw in our comments a few complaints from parents who walked out with their children over the level of violence.

It’s interesting how the MPAA determines its PG-13 rating. It’s almost as though there’s a formula: You get one f-bomb, a brief boob flash, and a certain amount of blood before the film crosses the line, but intensity of action and adult themes don’t seem to be taken into account as much. Here, for instance, are a few films I was surprised to see were PG-13: An Education, Die Another Day, Philadelphia, Red Sonja, Terminator Salvation, Valkyrie, The Haunting in Connecticut, Lars and the Real Girl, Insidious and Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon.

As a technical matter, I understand why all the above were PG-13, but on the other hand, they do seem targeted at more mature audiences. The above, however, were not the most shocking PG-13 ratings. These, at least in my estimation, are the 10 Hardest PG-13 Rated films.

10. Anchorman

9. Drag Me to Hell

8. Hanna

7. Casino Royale

6. Live Free or Die Hard

5. Beowulf

4. Rise of the Planet of the Apes

3. Sucker Punch

2. Taken

1. The Dark Knight

Meanwhile, elsewhere at the box-office, in at number two, The Help pulled in a very solid $25.5 million. Since it opened on Wednesday, it has put up a solid $35 million. Given reviews and mostly positive word of mouth, I expect The Help, like another female ensemble earlier this summer, Bridesmaids, will have legs that will keep it in the top 5 through August. (Three months after its release, Bridesmaids is still in the top 20, while the movie it opened against, Priest has long since left theaters.

There were three other debuts this weekend, and all opened with varying degrees of disappointment. Final Destination 5 shat out a crappy $18.5 million, down considerably from the $27 million of the last movie, despite the fact that 5 was much better (there are some who have even suggested that FD5 is the best 3D horror movie to date; I’d put it at number two, behind My Bloody Valentine).

Meanwhile, 30 Minutes or Less opened at number five, below even The Smurfs in its third week, earning only $13 million. I was most surprised by that opening, given the decent reviews, Jesse Eisenberg coming off of The Social Network, and Aziz Ansari’s Parks and Rec popularity. Then I remembered that “Parks and Recreation” fetches only 4 million viewers a week and that I live in an Internet microcosm where my interests don’t always align with the masses. If, instead of Ansari, the film had starred The Situation, I’m sure it would’ve fared better.

Or maybe not, because the Glee 3D concert film actually landed outside the top ten, with only $5.7 million. How to explain that, I don’t know, given the 12 million or so viewers the show has and the meager 500,000 who bought tickets to see the film.









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance



The Dance Of The Dead, It's All In My Head: Footloose Trailer #2 | Juliet by Anne Fortier









Comments

re: Glee - they'd have doubled their numbers if they'd promised at least one exclusive song. Instead they wanted 3D ticket prices for nothing new.

Posted by: Leroy Grey at August 14, 2011 10:21 PM

Hanna... a 15-year-old girl who's trained to kill. PG-13.

Posted by: Chris S. at August 14, 2011 10:31 PM

Finally coming out of lurkdom to say that Amistad received an R rating upon its theatrical release.

I'm with you on Sucker Punch, though. But mostly because of the exploitation factor, rather than the violence.

(Thank you, MidnightTea. Noted and corrected, and as per Chris S.'s suggestion, it's been replaced with Hanna, which I'd completely forgotten was PG-13. That was a way brutal movie for PG-13. - DR)

Posted by: MidnightTea at August 14, 2011 10:39 PM

oh snap. i'd forgotten that Taken was pg-13.

damn.

Posted by: gp at August 14, 2011 10:41 PM

I'm also baffled as to why Colombiana received a PG-13. I mean, I know why, but at the same time, is the film not just an extension of Léon: The Professional, picking up where that film ostensibly left off and swapping the main American character for a Colombian one? Sometimes I also wonder if Léon had been released 10 years later, and had solely been distributed by a major studio as opposed to an international one, would it even have received an R.

The MPAA...she is a tricky, inconsistent bitch.

Posted by: MidnightTea at August 14, 2011 10:57 PM

*Major American studio. Gaumont is pretty well-known in France, methinks.

Posted by: MidnightTea at August 14, 2011 11:01 PM

Do.. Do you mean just The Dark Knight?

'Cos I am thinking Returns isn't gonna be out for a while. Neither is Rises.

I'm sure they'll be hardcore for PG13 too, though.

Posted by: The Only New Zealander at August 14, 2011 11:05 PM

Red Sonja? Really? Was that just thrown in there to see whether or not we were paying attention?

It's from 1985. The rating system in 1985 is far different than it was in 1995, much less today.

Posted by: Some Guy at August 14, 2011 11:12 PM

How about Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom? That was one hard PG-13 right there, what with the heart-ripping and the monkey-brain-eating. Yikes.

Posted by: elguapo at August 15, 2011 12:08 AM

How about Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom? That was one hard PG-13 right there, what with the heart-ripping and the monkey-brain-eating. Yikes.

Posted by: elguapo at August 15, 2011 12:08 AM

Temple of Doom was PG.

Posted by: Devil Child at August 15, 2011 12:16 AM

Finally coming out of lurkdom to say that Amistad received an R rating upon its theatrical release.
---
Do.. Do you mean just The Dark Knight?

'Cos I am thinking Returns isn't gonna be out for a while. Neither is Rises.
---
As long as we're picking nits:

"Live Free OR Die Hard," right?

Sloppy Sunday, DR?

Posted by: , at August 15, 2011 12:33 AM

Yup, wasn't Temple of Doom one of the reasons PG-13 got invented? My sister and I asked to be removed from that movie after the heart ripping. We were 6 & 4 at the time. Of course, after that it's pretty much fine.

Posted by: CL at August 15, 2011 12:36 AM

Anchorman WAS originally an R but it was edited and re-rated to get a PG-13 for theatrical release. The version people have seen multiple times was most likely the unrated DVD version, and not the theatrical.

Posted by: Mark P. at August 15, 2011 12:40 AM

I'm a little confused about something.

It has long been my understanding that for a film to break even, it must earn twice its budget, because the exhibitors take 50% of gross box office (otherwise, where's the incentive for anyone to screen the movies?). So for Rise to be in the black at this point, wouldn't the film have to stand at $186 million to be in the black?

Posted by: Jerry at August 15, 2011 1:54 AM

Okay, I'm stupid. I forgot that every element of film distribution is a point of negotiation. Still, even if the first two weeks of release are negotiated at a 75/25 split (for example), the distributor's take is still only $78 million...

Posted by: Jerry at August 15, 2011 2:00 AM

Another rule of thumb is that international will equal domestic BO. Apes is close to $180m world wide. Take half for the distributors, half for the filmmakers, and everything from here on is profit.

Posted by: Mister D at August 15, 2011 2:42 AM

Personally, I think the only thing that helped Rise get where it is has more to do with the crappy selection of summer movies this year.

Posted by: Protoguy at August 15, 2011 3:43 AM

Taken is PG-13? Dear Godtopus, what's wrong with these people?

Posted by: FabMax at August 15, 2011 7:18 AM

Aren't there two versions of Taken? I'm pretty sure there was a full movie and an edited version, each with a different rating, here in the UK.

Posted by: Ballymena Bob at August 15, 2011 7:48 AM

The most important factor in getting a PG-13 rating. Having a major studio willing to lobby for it on your behalf. The ratings system is fucked.

(This comment received an NC-17 rating for foul language and criticism of the MPAA.)

Posted by: Socrates_Johnson at August 15, 2011 7:51 AM

Best 3D horror film to date? What about Creature from the Black Lagoon? That was originally a 3D film. Just imagine those gorgeous natural locations going on for miles and the creature lumbering up towards the audience. Just imagine a horror film with a plot and characters and style done up in 3D.

Posted by: Robert at August 15, 2011 8:43 AM

"Meanwhile, 30 Minutes or Less opened at number five, below even The Smurfs in its third week, earning only $13 million. I was most surprised by that opening, given the decent reviews"

44% on RT with 34% by top critics and 48 on metacritic. It might have gotten decent reviews, but it got more bad ones.

Posted by: Matt at August 15, 2011 8:44 AM

Knowing that ROTPOTA is so intense, I was surprised that a local drive-in had it as part of a double feature with Monte Carlo. And Monte Carlo was the second movie. Now, I wouldn't think there'd be a lot of overlap as far as respective audiences go, but let's say you're a parent and you're taking your kid. Wouldn't it make more sense for them to show Monte Carlo first, considering most kids would probably fall asleep during the second movie and thus be spared the violence of ROTPOTA?

Posted by: MelBivDevoe at August 15, 2011 8:47 AM

Mel, NOOONE is spared the ROTPOTA!

Mostly 'cause it's so fun to say.

ROTPOTA! ROTPOTA! ROTPOTA!! ROTPOTA!

Posted by: Green Lantern at August 15, 2011 9:40 AM

I didn't even realize Taken was as well. Also, both War of the Worlds and Inception are both PG-13.

The following movie contains brutal beatings, multiple homicides, and people being crushed into bloody paste, but GODTOPUS HELP YOU if it has any boobs or bad words in it!

Posted by: branded at August 15, 2011 10:15 AM

"Best 3D horror film to date? What about Creature from the Black Lagoon? That was originally a 3D film. Just imagine those gorgeous natural locations going on for miles and the creature lumbering up towards the audience. Just imagine a horror film with a plot and characters and style done up in 3D."

I'm imagining all that gorgeous scenery being gnawed to splinters because actors in 1954 recited dialogue like they were trying to project past the cheap seats.

Posted by: Craig at August 15, 2011 11:14 AM

My daughter went to see Glee with her tween friends yesterday. "Gee, no one told me it was a lame concert film".

RE Indiana Jones and the old PG/R rating system: I let my daughter watch Sixteen Candles because it was "PG". Big mistake. She loved it of course, but I cringed at all the sex, language and mature themes. It might get re-rated as an R if it were to go before the ratings board again. It would deserve a PG-13 at least.

Posted by: ed newman at August 15, 2011 11:45 AM

The Green Hornet.

Posted by: Beardo at August 15, 2011 11:55 AM

Finally saw Sucker Punch and apparently the moral of the story was "she was asking for it." Nice

Posted by: Uncle Mikey at August 15, 2011 12:01 PM

How about the Coens' True Grit? That movie had graphic, point-blank headshots, chopped off fingers, and a man's head being split open on a rock. There isn't much violence, but what little there is is incredibly bloody for a PG-13.

Posted by: The Dead Burger at August 15, 2011 12:01 PM

Insidious was pretty heavy for a Pg-13. My kids are pretty jaded and we were all freaking out pretty heavily at times on that one. Fun movie though it goes totally overboard at the end.

Posted by: TylerDFC at August 15, 2011 12:30 PM

Sucker Punch = PG13.

Blue Valentine = NC17.

The MPAA = Retards.

Posted by: superasente at August 15, 2011 1:11 PM

The ratings are fucking retarded, but people who take their kids to see movies without some idea of the content (ie, a movie about apes that make war on humankind, violent? Unpossible!) are even more retarded.

They have these things called movie reviews, they still print them in the newspaper and everything. They give you a basic outline of the plot and usually contain some hints about whether it contains sex, violence, swears, etc.

Basically, PG-13 is what a movie gets when it doesn't want to get an R (because that rating is problematic for movies that want a "youth" audience), but really should have one. Doesn't everybody know this? I have no idea how the producers get PG-13 ratings, I assume some sort of oral sex and/or monetary bribes are involved.

"PG-13" doesn't mean "Bring the kids, because this is a kids movie! They'll love it!" It means "We cut out the bare tits and the F-bombs, but this movie is still violent as shit! Your kids will love it!"

Posted by: Slash at August 15, 2011 1:32 PM

Also, the "13" in PG-13 indicates that the movie is deemed inappropriate for kids under the age of 13. In that sense, the rating seems pretty reasonable and self-explanatory.

Every movie on that list of 10 should have been an R, except possibly for the Batman movie. I've seen most of them and they're R movies, regardless of what the rating actually was.

Posted by: Slash at August 15, 2011 1:38 PM

Yeah, I'm flabbergasted that Taken is PG-13.

And, yeah, Temple Of Doom was PG. It was the most public example that spurred the creation of the PG-13 rating.

In my opinion, though, the MPAA sucks so mightily that it doesn't even deserve our quibbling over its "finer" points. If you've never gotten around to seeing This Film Is Not Yet Rated, go watch it. The whole system is a hypocritical racket.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at August 15, 2011 1:45 PM

And in my opinion, the PG-13 rating for Terminator Salvation shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. What a blatant abomination and complete betrayal of the "terminating" spirit that populated the first three movies.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at August 15, 2011 1:47 PM

RE: Glee:3D

Same old answer -- they can see it on TV for free. Why would they pay for it in a theatre -- especially just for the 3D effects, when everyone knows 3D is a big rip-off?

Posted by: Maryscott O'Connor at August 15, 2011 1:50 PM

Ditto The Film is Not Yet Rated -- also Fuck, the documentary.

The MPAA is a fucking sham.

Posted by: Maryscott O'Connor at August 15, 2011 1:53 PM

I personally feel like we should do away with the current rating system and adopt the UK/Irish one. For instance, the UK's 12, 15, and 18 (replaced by the 12A, 15A, 16 and 18 in Ireland) create a very clear map when it comes to rating films, with most falling under the 15(A) category. This seems like a fair enough assessment; not to generalize, but I think most 15 year-olds and up have been subjected to enough real-life truths to deal with filmic depictions of these same truths. Also, language doesn't seem to be a contentious issue like it is here; most films can get away with an abundance of uses of the word "fuck" and still get a 15(A). In the case of The King's Speech, you can even get a 12(A) (given due to the film's historical importance, but still!).

The best part about this rating system, though, is that the 18 doesn't carry the same stigma as the NC-17 (its equivalent), since these films usually aren't equated with porn and the rating is only given when the film contains graphic depictions of violence, rape, sex, or deals with really, truly mature content. (For the record, Blue Valentine was given a 15 in the UK—no need for Harvey Weinstein to lobby/throw a fit.)

This Film is Not Yet Rated touches on the absurd, puritanical, and political nature pervasive in the MPAA, and gives every good reason why we need to remodel the rating system and stop letting big business Hollywood control which films make it into theaters nationwide vs. which don't. No one should have to resort to illegally downloading a film simply because their local theater refuses to show an NC-17 rated film, and for that matter, no mature teenager should have to resort to sneaking into a film just because it contains some utterances of "fuck" and was given a wholly subjective (and undeserved) R.

Posted by: MidnightTea at August 15, 2011 4:36 PM

Anaconda is a hard PG-13. It's gory as shit. Fuckin Voight with one eye getting regurgitated or his jaw snapping when the anaconda is wrapped around him. That's gotta get on the list!!!

Posted by: Ryan at August 15, 2011 5:05 PM

PG-13 is the new R and R is the new NC-17.

The way films are rated is largely political and the panel that judges the films is totally anonymous and can't be held to any accountability as to why they assigned a certain rating over another. And judging by the total disparity of the ratings handed out the panel isn't set, but either fluid like a jury pool or it's on a rotating schedule of some sort.

Posted by: Mr. stitch at August 16, 2011 10:24 PM

Wait, people think that Royale, Die Hard 4, Apes, and Taken deserved R's? :-/ Maybe I need to re-watch Taken, but I definitely don't think the first three deserved R-ratings. I DID walk out of The Dark Knight wondering how it got a PG-13 though. That was some dark stuff.

Posted by: TK at August 17, 2011 1:18 AM

Taken is has an 18 certificate in old blighty. Just saying.

Posted by: Christopher at August 20, 2011 7:16 AM

The MPAA is just as sick as the rest of the US. ;) One fuck, as long as it is not in a sexual manner. 5-6-7 shit's, no nudity, and a million people can get shot in the head, as long as we don't actually see blood coming out. After the wound is there, a small amount of blood can be acceptable. In a horromovie I saw, dont remember the name, it was PG-13, and at one point you could see a bag of severed limbs, but it was okay, because you couldn't actually see where they had been cut off. The just stuck out of this bag. That's just silly. And why is nudity the worst? The most natural thing in the world. Sucks that the MPAA is a bunch of christian nutjobs.

Posted by: Såndre at October 5, 2011 7:31 AM

Hi there! I simply want to give a huge thumbs up for the good data you might have here on this post. I will be coming again to your blog for more soon.

Posted by: VigRX Plus at October 7, 2011 10:28 PM