Personally I think that the current rating system for movies is very good. What I do think is really funny is the practice of the descriptive warnings alongside the movie rating. “May contain slight scenes of mild peril” or “May contain scenes of futuristic robot terror”, silly and can actually end up becoming quite misleading.
The story from Screen Rant has some exceedingly good comments on the subject of the new Bewitched movie. It’s a PG-13 and the warning words alongside state “Rated PG-13 for some language, including sex and drug references, and partial nudity.”.
WHAT??? You have got to be kidding me! Can someone please explain this to me? Why in the heck is it necessary to make a movie based on the classic TV show Bewitched, PG-13? Is it that difficult to create funny situations without relying on drugs, sex and nudity? Did the folks writing this not watch the show?
I think Vic just said it for me. Okay, there may be some reasons for this rating. Perhaps the makers weren’t expecting it, had written the references in as some clever plot device and decided not to edit them out after the MPAA rating. Or maybe it’s the case that the references are really light and the MPAA have gone over the top with the warning, however if that was the case they’d have either appealed or removed the references.
That is, and this is the reason I’m more inclined to believe, that they’ve deliberately spiced it up to try and gain an audience that are a bit more mature. Now I totally agree with Vic on this, why do they need to do this, why do they have to add sex, violence or drugs to a story that never had any of that and was a truly wholesome programme? Does it make it better? Is it purely for appeal to gain an audience and make money?
