Avatar of Vilageidiotx
  • Last Seen: 3 yrs ago
  • Joined: 12 yrs ago
  • Posts: 4839 (1.07 / day)
  • VMs: 2
  • Username history
    1. Vilageidiotx 12 yrs ago
  • Latest 10 profile visitors:

Status

Recent Statuses

8 yrs ago
Current I RP for the ladies
4 likes
8 yrs ago
#Diapergate #Hugs2018
2 likes
9 yrs ago
I fucking love catfishing
2 likes
9 yrs ago
Every time I insult a certain coworker, i'll take money from their jar. Saving for beer would never be easier!
4 likes
9 yrs ago
The Jungle Book is good.
3 likes

Bio







Most Recent Posts

<Snipped quote by Vilageidiotx>

And this is why I need more than 30 minutes of sleep! >.<


It's a hard lesson in Trumpian politics. If Trump gets elected, we'll all only have thirty minutes to sleep between shifts in real-estate sweatshops.
Wait, where did anyone say this was a safe place? I'm so confused! o3o


title bruv
What is the calorie count on your average cup of coffee? I don't think I've ever seen that talked about.
Ah, the video is where I was coming from. You should watch the video, but to paraphrase in the extreme, PG used to mean anything with content that parents might not want kids to see, and R was what R is, things rated for those above 17. This meant PG movies were included violence, language, and the occasional nudity (the seventies being what they were). In the eighties they created PG-13. Whereas the old system used to be "G is kid-friendly, PG is questionable, and R is just for adults". It became "G is for toddlers, PG is for kids, PG-13 is appropriate for teenagers, and R appropriate for adults". R began to cover things that PG used to cover, since we replaced the vague idea of "guidance needed" with specific age demographics (and because the eighties were what they were). As a result, movies began to cut things in order to fit PG-13. By being too specific, the rating system ceased being open to interpretation and became a thing that producers had to negotiate.
Changing a tire isn't as unrealistic as overhauling an entire aspect of a multi-billion dollar industry.

How dare you make me type out something so obvious.

Everything prior was arguable, but now you're just being stupid.


Woah, slow down guy. We're literally just talking about movie ratings. Take a deep breath.

Yes, it would be a compromise for R in many cases, but a better compromise than PG-13. It doesn't "add another layer" to the problem in any bad way. I can see how you might think that adding anything to a flawed system is pointless, but it's not. You can add small things to flawed systems to improve them.

And nothing is being split. The demographics bleed into each other.


What I'm saying is that, looking at how this sort of thing played out with PG-13, we have something of a model on what to expect. There isn't any reason to think it would function any differently this time around. The arbitrary nature of picking 15, combined with how very close those ages are, doesn't show this as a fix. It's a broken system. Broken systems gonna broke.
It cuts the teen demographic in half. I suspect it would turn into a compromise for R's, with PG-13 still being the coveted goal for box-office smashes and R being the coveted roll for serious films. I could see it becoming a "We left in some more cussing" spot, but anything else is expecting much. It doesn't fix the problem, it just ads another layer to it. Sort of like saying, when your tire goes flat, that changing the tire is too unrealistic and it's better just to tape over the hole and see what happens.
If they don't want to take the time to read why something has achieved a certain letter grade, then that's their fault as parents. As it stands now non-descriptive letter grades allow censors to play games; the system becomes either a sales ploy, or a way for censors to unnecessarily influence a movie's ability to perform in whatever demographic it was made for. Descriptive ratings change the psychology of the thing.

Drastic and unrealistic would be re-adapting children to be more receptive to movie markets. Changing the way movies are rated is hardly drastic. PG-13 was created for the exact reason you are suggesting PG-15, and... this happened.
Let's scrap the rating system all together. It's the 21st century, you don't need a board telling you what content is in a movie when you have google. Hell, even just scrap the lettering system and use the list of things that are already tacked onto ratings.
true passion...


Origami kittens.

We'll mediate and go with Ted Bundy. The values of Ted Cruz, and the working class retro vibe of Al Bundy.
© 2007-2026
BBCode Cheatsheet