Originally posted by Nephthys
But American Psycho is a horror movie, not an action comedy superhero movie. 😬
It is considered a "Crime, Drama" film. I feel like I'm being pedantic because the movie would seem like horror to a 5 year old...
Originally posted by Nephthys
The point of GotG is a superhero romp, saving the world from a Bad Guy. It wouldn't be enhanced by gore imo.
You're correct: it would require a toning down of the lame jokes and turning up the seriousness...which could partially be accomplished by not going out of it's way with unrealistic censoring while also making the "bad guy" more believable as an evil zealot. But they could accomplish my desires by making it more violent but that is only just one way that could have improved the film.
Originally posted by Nephthys
Also, I'm pretty sure the point of Ronan's character is how completely straight he plays his comic book villainy. Which clashes with subtle irony throughout the film and leads up to that hilarious bit at the end when his demeanor cracks in the face of the heroes absurdity. He was a semi-ironic "I'm a fawking badass" dude who was kind of humorous in how hard he tries to pull that off. He wasn't really supposed to be as dark as you think they should have gone. That would have been a huge whiplash for him to start doing the things you're suggesting and wouldn't fit in with the tone at all. You don't go into Captain America expecting a water torture scene.
I disagree with pretty much everything you say, here (but you tell me you would make some violent shit, later...so I do not necessarily disagree with you). They shit all over his character and we don't discover why the Kree are so difficult to change (their opinions and their minds). Had we gotten just a teeny tiny bit more characterization out of Ronan, the movie would have been much better. And that "semi-ironic" stuff? Lame. Lame as ****. Cringe-worthy lame (this is my opinion: do not take offense. I believe your opinion is every bit as valid as mine...we just disagree). It wasn't entertaining. It wasn't a nice ending. It wasn't believable. It was just plain stupid. Additionally, everything you say at the end of that section is wrong in the most direct way possible: they simply didn't have him do more evil stuff because would have blown their PG-13 rating. Think more like a movie exec and less like a customer and all that shit starts to make sense (edit - Later, you do show that you step out of the consumer mold and show me that you understand that Hollywood panders to the most common denominator, so scratch that previous point...I just left it there so you could see how my opinion of your perspective changes as I read your post).
Originally posted by Nephthys
Hey, I was watching Raiders of the Lost Ark, Return to Oz and other grim shit as a kid. Nothing in GotG approaches a dudes face getting melted off by God or 5 minutes of Return to Oz. Other than that first Ronan scene nothing in here is that bad. Also if Coraline is a kids movie, GotG can be too.
The PG rating included PG-13 stuff back in the day. And, other than the horror of it, there was nothing very violent about Return to Oz: horror does not get you an R-Rating, generally.
And you bring up a good point: many people thought the face-melting was too much for Raiders of the Lost Ark. People still talk about it, today. It is one of the best historical examples by critics of the movie rating system for why the system is not consistent. You can probably think of a million examples just like that and all of the "abolish the PG-13 rating" people would agree with you.
The system I and others are advocating for is not to regroup PG-13 back into PG movies, it is to move PG-13 into the R category and leave PG for slightly more mature family movies.
Lastly, I disagree on the violence part: GotG was far more violent than those two movies you suggested. I think killing tons and tons of sapient species and violent ways is more violent than magical melting. But I will give you that the face melting (which happens in Last Crusade, too) is pretty gross but it is not necessarily violent.
Originally posted by Nephthys
Nah, I give them credit from holding back on that front. Letting our imaginations work off of the implications was more effective. Him merely igniting his saber was shocking, dark and tasteful enough. Actually showing it would be going too far imo.
Clearly, we disagree. I'll re-write what you said, here, in the way I would state it:
"Nah, I see them holding back on that front just to stay under the R-Rating to sell more tickets. Just imagining it is just not as effective as showing Anakin chopping up children. Him merely igniting his saber was not shocking but the subsequent conversations about it were. Actually showing it would better convey the horror and evil that Anakin had become."
I do not want you to think I am just a hard-nosed opinionated prick (but I am), but there is depth to my opinion beyond the things we have discussed. The 10 minute rape scene from Irreversible? There's a reason it is considered so effective: because it ****ing lasted 10 minutes. It was shocking, real, violent, and every normal person watching the movie felt bad for the protagonist being raped. It was horrible. When the rapist got his face bashed in, you ****ing loved it. It was awesome (watch it twice to enjoy it more).
Originally posted by Nephthys
Like how in GotG all the badguys are weird aliens who don't bleed when Groot skewers 12 of them at once.
Yeah, that was one of my points...pretty lame the pandering being done to keep PG-13 ratings.
Hey, that little arrow thing, though...it would have been more effective had they shown why everyone feared it (just a tiny little torture scene would have done it...but that may have caused the film to jump to an R-Rating...). Do you agree?
Originally posted by Nephthys
Well I do agree that has merit in that its stupid to be so puritanical about sex but be perfectly fine about blood and gore. A huge ironic example of this was in Hannibal, the show. They made a scene where two peoples backs were ripped out and folded up to form wings. But the censors got pissy because you could see their naked asses. So they had to slather the butts in blood so you couldn't see them clearly, which was a-ok with the censors! 👆So dumb.
You know my feels. I edited some of my post after reading this.
Originally posted by Nephthys
Nah, SW works fine with its level of violence. The violence isn't excessive enough to scare away children, but enough to register for adults. Fun for all ages.
Not really all ages. If your child gets nightmares from violence like that or evil characters like Maul and the Emperor, you should not take your children to those movies or let them watch them (there are children like that and there were plenty of whiny mothers bitching about how scary Maul was...because they thought it was a kid's movie. So WTF does that PG rating mean to you, bitches? FFS, some parents are dumb).
But I do agree that, for the most part, the PG stuff is a nice place for Star Wars. But some of the elements of the movies are easily R (but...it didn't focus on it or emphasize it which is why I think they avoided the R). Burned bodies in A New Hope? That was grisly and dark...disgusting, really. Pretty effective. But that would probably get a movie a PG-13 rating, these days. Add in the cut-off arm in the bar, yeah, it would be PG-13, these days (PG-13 did not exist back then).
Originally posted by Nephthys
Aw man, I have thought about writing a SW story and let me tell you, **** what I just said, I would go pretty nuts on the gore. Force pushing a hole in a guys face, Sith throwing corpses at opponents to psych them out, exploding eyeballs with lightning. It would be beautiful.Of course, this is why I wouldn't ever get published. :I
You're correct...because big movie execs want to make money and rated R films are notorious for not making as much money as PG-13. This is one of the reasons they want to get rid of PG-13:
Keeps the adult stuff ALL at R and moves all the family and kid stuff to G and PG. PG would still need to exist because of stuff like kids having nightmares about Maul. But the G stuff could be for tame things like Toy Story or Turbo (or any big Disney movie for kids).
I would get a GotG that may be slightly more grisly (but still has all the humor), which would shut me up, and parents wouldn't have to worry about lap dances in PG-13 films, anymore.
Regardless, yes, I would buy the **** out of a Star Wars product like you described. That would be awesome. It would better convey why the Sith are considered "evil mother ****ers"...
Originally posted by Nephthys
Well, maybe Quill was a little more conservative than you.
Perhaps but his foul mouth in the film suggests otherwise. Dick jokes, sex jokes, using "f*ck you" sign language, etc. Meh, this is not really a point worth discussing further. I do not see it resulting in anything constructive.