PG-13 vs Rated R

Don't feel alone. There's also the problem of how much sex is involved. In a current work, there are a few euphisms about sex that my editor feels should be removed in order to make the story YA.

If your script is an R then go for whatever works best, but if it is a PG-13 story, don't go out and make it an R.

people swear and, gasp, have sex. it all depends on the character. if the writer has a personal issue with swearing, they're doing the street an unjustice by not having him be as realistic as possible in that regard. i think one of the worst things writers do to their characters is impose unrealistic sets of character traits just because the writer feels uncomfortable.

that's not writing well and that character will be crap.

on the flip-side, trying to 'thug up' a character with foul language is just as bad and bespeaks of the author's naive nature in regards to a particular character. of course, we have to speculate on a lot of characters (unless your uncle is a mob boss, who's to say exactly what type of language he uses?).

I still think both sex and language are added for the sake of being there. There are many movies I feel could be vastly improved by the removal of half if not all of those elements. I think its up to the writer to decide and it can be harder to make that character believable but that doesn't make it impossible. So I have to disagree with you there. That's just my opinion though and we will see if my way works or not. I personally could not be proud of a piece of writing if it had swearing and sex scenes and such, so it would be garbage to me anyway.
Sara

preyer said:

people swear and, gasp, have sex. it all depends on the character. if the writer has a personal issue with swearing, they're doing the street an unjustice by not having him be as realistic as possible in that regard. i think one of the worst things writers do to their characters is impose unrealistic sets of character traits just because the writer feels uncomfortable.

that's not writing well and that character will be crap.

on the flip-side, trying to 'thug up' a character with foul language is just as bad and bespeaks of the author's naive nature in regards to a particular character. of course, we have to speculate on a lot of characters (unless your uncle is a mob boss, who's to say exactly what type of language he uses?).

Click to expand...

That's why Baskin & Robbins offers 31 flavors, folks.

However, I gotta totally agree with Preyer's analysis on this one.

When working on a screenplay (the few that i've done) I don't think about the actual rating....I have a story to tell, and if there is some bad language, then so be it....At least that's how I do it...

sspunisher,

I think you should follow your instinct. If you feel that the stronger language would benefit your characters and script and create a more realistic view, I say go for it.

Personally I would go for the rated R. Making a rated R movie isn't going to stop teenagers from rushing off to see it, in fact it would probally make them want to see it more. It's the NC-17 rating you have to worry about. And even then that's not going to stop them.

As for sex in movies, I have to agree with Opti and Preyer. Too many people tend to think sex is a bad thing. Sex is natural, it's apart of who we are, it's real life. When creating characters you are basically creating real people with real situations. When people go to the movies they want to see people just like them, they want to connect with them, have something in common with them. One thing we all have in common is sex. I also believe sex is a great way to reveal character, how he or she treats the person they are with, and how they react afterwards. Sex is very hard to write, therefore when written well it can have a profound effect on the dimensions of character. Just keep in mind there is a big difference between the sex scene say in "Monster's Ball" then the sex scene in "The Notebook".

Steph

It depends on the movie. My first script was inspired by real life. Honestly I could have made the thing NC-17 that's how bad it was, but i literally had to make creative choices early on to keep the mood and everything else to Just about an R. TO make it anything less would have drained the life out of it.

My 2nd movie also certain things that I couldn't tone down to less then an R if I tried without getting rid of some major comic relief scenes(its a comedy).

Now my 3rd is a horror, so that's an R.

I tell you though, I'm almost attempted to do a christain family film because I'm polluting my own mind by my own work and just to do something different. Plus there is probably a higher market since their is less screenwriters doing G or christain type family films. I don't know but Icerose you might want to look into

GonnaBeFamous said:

I tell you though, I'm almost attempted to do a christain family film because I'm polluting my own mind by my own work and just to do something different. Plus there is probably a higher market since their is less screenwriters doing G or christain type family films. I don't know but Icerose you might want to look into

Click to expand...

I can write fantasy with battles and such, a romance with touching stuff and tragedy, and thrillers but I can't write Maid in Manhatten kind of stories. Although I do want the cleaner ratings, I have to agree there are so few movies anymore that hit those cleaner ratings, but mine will be partially because the story lends itself to be that and partly because of myself. I'm looking into anything that will help me get out there and get a sale without leaving me feeling like I am selling my soul.

P.S. You are too funny when you mentioned about your own writing corrupting yourself

icerose said:

I can write fantasy with battles and such, a romance with touching stuff and tragedy, and thrillers but I can't write Maid in Manhatten kind of stories. Although I do want the cleaner ratings, I have to agree there are so few movies anymore that hit those cleaner ratings, but mine will be partially because the story lends itself to be that and partly because of myself. I'm looking into anything that will help me get out there and get a sale without leaving me feeling like I am selling my soul.

P.S. You are too funny when you mentioned about your own writing corrupting yourself

Click to expand...

I try not to be funny it comes sort of natural which is why I do comedies. I think you should do what is natural to you like you imply.

I wouldn't write off maid and manhattan. You know romance comedies come out of nowhere. I hate romance comedies but after making one sort of unintetionally I realized I hated Hollywoods version of romance comedies. Mine put more drama and crudeness into it. I did not want to turn it into a hollywoodesque TBS primetime movie featuring Julia Roberts(Insert current unwashed up actor )

Well, I don't ever read the screenwriting forum, but the title to this thread keeps popping up and calling to me, so I'm posting this as a parent, not a screenwriter.

I have to say Thanks, IceRose, for attempting to keep some level of "cleanness" to writing for PG13. I can't tell you how many PG13 movies I've rented for my kids from the time they were 12/14 and taken them back unwatched because of foul language popping up in the first 5 to 10 minutes of the movie. (& no, I don't like them watching gore any better.)

Just because of this kind of stuff, we have not had regular tv in our home for the past 5 years or so. We've just now put it back in since the kids are a little older. We did keep a VCR/TV so they could watch movies occasionally.

I understand a writer has to stay true to your character's image, but does the average person really let their teens/preteens talk that way in their presence?

I don't mind sex done tastefully and some cursing, but why is it necessary for all the girls to play "knock him down and beat him to the ground" with every male they meet up with? Every movie you see has to use the F word or the word "bone" nine hundred times throughout.

The purpose of this post is really just to say there is a market out there for "cleaner" stuff.

Who's the intended audience?

Robert Altman deliberately includes at least three uses of the "F-bomb" in every one of his films to keep the kiddies away and make it clear that his movies are for adults.

Even "Gosford Park" got an R rating.

Actually higher ratings do increase audiences if it's a movie not geared for teens or children.

i wasn't sure how the studios still manipulated the movies to make certain ratings happen. i imagine it's the same as it's always been (at least since they started doing it ), but i can hardly pretend to be an authority on it.

i've seen some movies recently that just baffled me as to why it was made. 'd.e.b.s.', for instance. i thought it was going to be a 'cody banks' thing for mid-teens. i rented it and it was rated pg-13, which i didn't understand when all the previews i'd seen for it made it look very kid-friendly for the most part. turns out it's nothing more than how two chicks meet, one evil, one good, and fall in love in this big lesbian thing. i actually rather my niece watch '(insert time of day) of the living dead' than that, i think. at least 'dead' wasn't pretending to be anything other than what it was. what i got out of 'd.e.b.s.' was a movie supposedly suitable for 13 year old girls, which it obviously was targeted for, and you get this long message about how it's okay to be a lesbian. not that there's anything wrong with that. and, true, they say everything that's in the movie in those tiny boxes on the back, but when you've seen a hundred previews for 'racing stripes,' say, why bother looking at the rating really?

sure, it was my lapse as a viewer to not look, but all the advertising for it, even the synopsis on back, completely told a different story. okay, the trailer for it had the two young women *almost* kiss, but that was followed up by a joke to indicate that that wasn't the cruxt of the flick. the rest made it seem pretty regular fare, especially considering we don't know what evil influence the MC might have been under (though it turns out there was not one) and an indication that one of the girls slept with a young dude. this isn't an anti-gay statement, just that a pro-gay message has no business being dressed up as a kid's movie, i don't care how 'hip' hollywood tries to make it seem. suitable for 13 year olds? confusing is more like it. removing all the mildly bad language still, i think, should have gained it the same rating based on content.

that is to say, you might conceivably force a 'r' rating even if you removed all the 'bad' stuff if the content is so skewed.

GonnaBeFamous said:

Actually higher ratings do increase audiences if it's a movie not geared for teens or children.

Click to expand...

That's wrong.

PG-13 has the widest audience range with ages, sex and demographics.
PG and R (second place) and G and NC17 (third place). You can see the pattern.

If a film could go either an R or PG13, a producer will always trim down in rating to get more people to see it.

If a film could go R or NC17, the same holds true.

That's what unrated director's cut and alternate DVD releases are for.

Let's keep the threads on topic.

I started another thread for the debate to rage on.

The subject of this thread is whether or not to turn a PG13 script to an R or an R to a PG13 for marketability and is it worth it especially since it is only a few instances of cuss words.

Answer the original poster's question and concerns only.

Sorry Joe and original thread starter,

I think if your story can appeal to 13-17 year olds, I would say your goal would be to keep it open to them so you have a much broader appeal.

Sara