No, it was Raiders of the Lost Ark that caused the MPAA to begin working on a rating between PG and R. However, it was not until shortly after Temple of Doom was released that the MPAA had finalized a new PG-13 rating.

Paramount have announced that they will be showing off the final artwork tomorrow.

http://www.facebook.com/indianajones

:D

I hate timeline so much. I don't see that update at all.


Link? I've *NEVER* heard that and I'm a lifelong fan.

Yeah it's a pain. Sorry, here is a screen grab of the post!

http://i189.photobucket.com/albums/z...25at193259.png

Same here. I don't think he's correct.

http://blog.moviefone.com/2011/06/12...h-anniversary/

There's also several other sites that agree that this scene was what sparked the MPAA to begin developing a rating between PG and R after a public outcry over it. The public outcry was even louder when Temple of Doom was released due to the , which was why it one of the last violent movies to get a PG rating instead of PG-13.

I'm not making this up guys.

I don't think you're making it up. I'm not even saying it's not true (although, like others I have heard a different story frequently over the years)

But the quote you provided merely mentions that the rating didn't exist at the time. It doesn't say anything about the scene prompting a need for a new rating. Lots of movies were rated R and then removed footage to get a PG rating.

I don't suppose it really matters since we are stuck with PG-13 indefinitely. I honestly think our rating system is flawed though as I think the UK's rating system of 12, 15, 18, etc, makes more sense.

I'm keeping my DVD box set until I'm certain ALL extras have been ported over. I'm still kicking myself for having gotten rid of the Star Wars set and later finding out that the Empire of Dreams doc wasn't carried over. Lucasfilm loves to pull off these vanishing acts whenever there's a reissue.

The article linked:
There was no outcry really for Raiders and the PG rating. It was the one-two punch of Temple (heart-plucking) & Gremlins (microwave) that created movement for the rating.

Interestingly enough, PG-13 was pretty hardcore when originally created. You could have some >thisclose< to "R" level violence and sexuality and get away with it. If you look at a lot of early PG-13 films you'd swear they'd get a "R" these days, that's how wimpy & mild the rating it is these days. PG films like The Hunt For Red October (murder of the political officer) and Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country (assassination sequence) would get a PG-13 these days.

Yeah, I see what you're saying and I agree about films made in the '90s. My major beef is that many directors will purposely shoot a film with a PG-13 mindset instead of shooting exactly liked they envisioned just so the parents will take the kiddies to see the film and bring in more profits. Case in point would be Titanic. Imagine if Cameron had released what he wanted. It would have been rated R and it wouldn't have made nearly as much money as the PG-13 version did.

The rating system exists for one reason: to keep the States from imposing their own rating systems. Remember "Banned in Boston"? The movies studios don't want to have to deal with multiple rating systems. At one point, the Feds threatened to step in if the studios didn't do something.

The rating system is flawed, but all ratings systems are flawed. There is a heavy bias against sex, especially nudity, but they're actually pretty ok with violence. One thing the ratings system does is actually cause movies to be more violent because except for kiddie films, no one wants a PG rating. And they're also obsessed with language, so one "****" and you can still get a PG-13, but three "****s" generally means an R.

There have been plenty of "fails" over the years, including rating "Woodstock" R so that kids who attended the festival couldn't go see the movie. Yet "Parenthood", being a Ron Howard movie, got a PG-13 pass even though there's a scene where there's plenty of talk about oral sex.

In the end, it doesn't mean that much as the only rating with any weight to it is an "R" (and the rarely used "X") and not too many theatres I know actually check kids who look like they might be 17, so there's probably plenty of 15 and 16 year olds going to R-rated films without their "parents or adult guardian". It's really just to placate parents of younger kids and give them general guidelines of whether they should let their kids see a movie.

Edit: I see they're censoring us here. But those **** above represent the "f" word. Ooohhhhhhh. We said the "f" word. Naughty.

Also, the amount of RED BLOOD will change a rating. Not the violence but THE BLOOD. Hence why Kill Bll had to switch to Black and White, and Casino/head-vice scene.
ALiens or monsters can bleed all over the place because they spew GREEN blood

I would make the case that just the opposite happens. Directors add more violence to get the PG-13 because they don't want a PG-rated film as older teens and twenty-somethings won't go see it.

What do you think Cameron would have added to Titanic? There wasn't going to be a big sex scene.

Where I do agree is that PG-13 films do make the most money and most director's contracts have clauses that indicate they must deliver a cut to a certain rating or the studio has the right to cut the film.

I think the biggest difference in the BBFCs ratings and the MPAA are that it's actually illegal for a person under said age to see the film.

Only exception in Cinema is the 12A rating that alous under 12s to be acompanied by an adult.

But on Home Video there's only a hard 12.

And of course you can't buy a film if you look under age. You will be ID'd at the checkout if they suspect you to be under age. Same goes for Video Games.

I don't belive it's law in the states.

It's not. They are merely suggestions.

From the indiana jones twitter page : @IndianaJones
Tomorrow, keep your eyes on our page as we will reveal the Indiana Jones Complete Adventures Blu-ray Box Set packaging!

Great news! I hope they give Indiana Jones nice cover art and plenty of special features. I wonder what the collector's edition has that the standard one doesn't.

Sweet. Hopefully they'll tell us about included extra features as well.

If it has Karen Allen's bra then I am certainly buying it.:p