What if TMP had been R-rated ?

[Lord Garth]

1. Well, me for one.
2. I don't go to superhero movies because I don't like seeing human beings smash and punch each other. I wonder why we went the direction of violence, good; nudity, bad for younger people. Now the school shooters are basically acting out a script they have seen dramatized onscreen a million times, of body-armored guy with badass assault rifle mowin' people down. Oh, well. You get what you get, world.

Yup. Mutilate someone, and kill lots of people with blood splashing everywhere, and it's Rated R. Show the wrong body part and "Oh no!" It's NC-17.

Then take the Rated R movie, take out most of the blood and all of the guts, but don't change anything else and now it's PG-13 but instead of being better it's worse because now the consequences aren't as bad and the violence isn't as ugly. It's glorifying the violence instead of showing its brutality.

The MPAA and its values seriously need to be re-evaluated. This is something I've been saying for years.

 

[Pauln6]

Yeah nudity in the shower and a bit of swearing is probably about it .

In the script for In Thy Image, Chapel got a line where she asked Kirk for a full report on everything he and the probe got up to. Some additional innuendo might have been nice but hardly r rated .

 

[FormerLurker]

Roger Ebert said for years that the NC-17 rating needed to be dropped and replaced with an 'A' rating, for adult subject matter. He was half right. Keep the NC-17, but only use it for movies with lots of nudity and sexual themes, while forcing the porn community to use the 'X' rating they stole in the beginning and not the NC-17, and add the 'A' rating for violence, gore, and/or adult themes and discussions such as divorce, rape, mass murder, etc. that are inappropriate for younger audiences.

 

[Armus]

Yup. Mutilate someone, and kill lots of people with blood splashing everywhere, and it's Rated R. Show the wrong body part and "Oh no!" It's NC-17.

Then take the Rated R movie, take out most of the blood and all of the guts, but don't change anything else and now it's PG-13 but instead of being better it's worse because now the consequences aren't as bad and the violence isn't as ugly. It's glorifying the violence instead of showing its brutality.

The MPAA and its values seriously need to be re-evaluated. This is something I've been saying for years.

I never understood the PG-13 rating. I think it was Steven Spielberg who asked the ratings board to come up with a rating that wouldn't preclude teenagers from seeing one of his Indiana Jones movies.

I've seen some PG-13 movies that had one or two scenes that made it a more disturbing movie than some R rated films.

 

[Kor]

I never understood the PG-13 rating. I think it was Steven Spielberg who asked the ratings board to come up with a rating that wouldn't preclude teenagers from seeing one of his Indiana Jones movies.

It was more of a follow-up to parental reactions to "Temple of Doom," which received a PG, but which many parents felt was a little too gruesome for their kids who normally went to see PG movies, while it wasn't quite bloody and violent enough for the R rating.

Kor

 

[TrickyDickie]

...and add the 'A' rating for violence, gore, and/or adult themes and discussions such as divorce, rape, mass murder, etc. that are inappropriate for younger audiences.

Divorce....I would have that depend upon how it was handled/ what all was involved and depicted onscreen. A sensible/ sensitive way of handling it could actually be beneficial for kids who are actually in the middle of that. But they don't need to see depictions of infidelity, domestic violence, etc.

 

[Kor]

"The Honeymooners" TV show should be rated R for Ralph's constant threats of violence toward Alice.

Kor

 

[TrickyDickie]

It was more of a follow-up to parental reactions to "Temple of Doom," which received a PG, but which many parents felt was a little too gruesome for their kids who normally went to see PG movies, while it wasn't quite bloody and violent enough for the R rating.

Kor

Now there is an example of a film that possibly should have had an R-rating. When you are depicting someone's heart being ripped right out of their chest and having it burst into flame, that's a bit much. This blurry screen grab illustrates the point well enough:

I think Temple of Doom was the weakest entry in the series. There were so many other stories that could have been told instead. It went down a path of lurid crap that left archaeology way off to the side.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

Yes, PG movies of the decade such as Logan's Run and The Omega Man got away with nudity to varying degrees. It was the Swinging '70s, after all.

It's interesting, and somewhat confusing, that things got more uptight and puritan in this regard in later years, with everybody getting worked up in a knee-jerk frenzy over the briefest depiction of human anatomy, while nobody bats an eye at greater quantities of brutal, bone-crushing violence being depicted in the movies.

Well, I think the AIDS crisis hitting in the mid 80s had a lot to do with us seeing less explicit sexuality in movies, too.

So....seems like if TMP had some contextual nudity, such as when the Ilia probe arrives, but not necessarily a love scene, then it might have bypassed an R-rating and arguably not have been significantly different than it was?

The Spy Who Loved Me, released in 1977, features a brief shot of Barbara Bach in the shower and glimpses of Playboy centerfolds hanging on the walls of a submarine. It was rated PG.

I think Temple of Doom was the weakest entry in the series.

It was... for 24 years.

 

[Gavin70]

I don't think an R rated Star Trek would have worked in 1979. Weren't R rated movies much more niche market back then, while Star Trek was more aimed at the general audience. A good R rated movie needs to be built that way from the beginning. Just adding in nudity and gore usually doesn't add to the movie unless it actually serves the story.

 

[DanGovier]

With all of the speculation about a future R-rated Trek movie, I thought this might be an interesting idea to discuss.

My problem with that kind of thing is that I want to get my kids into Star Trek. It has always been family friendly viewing, and by dropping the F bomb like they do in Discovery you are suddenly restricting the potential audience. It would have been nice to sit down with my 8 and 10 year old kids and watch Discovery, but because of it's more R rated themes I can't. I don't want my 8yr old daughter exclaiming "That's f*cking cool!" like Tilly does :P

I'm not a prude by any means, I just feel an R rating doesn't fit with what Star Trek is all about. That said, I think an R rated Klingon movie directed by Quentin Tarantino would be f*cking amazing

 

[Roundabout]

From what I have read, Roddenberry had a dirty mind. If he had his way, there would have been skinny dippy and trashy sex talk between some of the crew especially with Ilia, among other things.

After watching the movie, I didn't think, gee, the movie would have been better and would be more popular if we had gotten to see full frontal Ilia or Kirk unit or a steamy Deltan loving making session or Kirk dropping F bombs, "stop f%&*ing competing with me Decker".

Like DanGovier, I am not a prude. But being edgy for the sake of being edgy with gratuitous sex and language was not what Star Trek was about, at least not with the TOS crew.

 

[Greg Cox]

It was more of a follow-up to parental reactions to "Temple of Doom," which received a PG, but which many parents felt was a little too gruesome for their kids who normally went to see PG movies, while it wasn't quite bloody and violent enough for the R rating.

Kor

Yep.

As I recall, it was the double whammy of "Temple of Doom" AND "Gremlins" that caused people to think that there needed to be something between PG and R.

 

[FormerLurker]

Well, I think the AIDS crisis hitting in the mid 80s had a lot to do with us seeing less explicit sexuality in movies, too.

More, I think, the puritanical reaction to it by TPTB. They were able to set the stage for several decades worth of condemnation of any and all sexuality that isn't exclusively for procreation, something we're still wallowing in today.

The Spy Who Loved Me, released in 1977, features a brief shot of Barbara Bach in the shower and glimpses of Playboy centerfolds hanging on the walls of a submarine. It was rated PG.

Even Barbara Bach in the shower isn't the most graphic nudity in a Bond film, and yet the one time there's an actual visible nipple, most people don't remember it. It was in "The Living Daylights", by the way. General Pushkin's wife, played by the beautiful Virginia Hey.

Yep.

As I recall, it was the double whammy of "Temple of Doom" AND "Gremlins" that caused people to think that there needed to be something between PG and R.

That's my recollection as well.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

More, I think, the puritanical reaction to it by TPTB. They were able to set the stage for several decades worth of condemnation of any and all sexuality that isn't exclusively for procreation, something we're still wallowing in today.

Well, that's more or less what I meant.

 

[FormerLurker]

I figured. But there are those of us that demand things be spelled out, and those of us that are compelled to do so. I am, all too often, one of the latter.

 

[Lord Garth]

Yep.

As I recall, it was the double whammy of "Temple of Doom" AND "Gremlins" that caused people to think that there needed to be something between PG and R.

And as they say, "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions."

 

[Maurice]

I don't think an R rated Star Trek would have worked in 1979. Weren't R rated movies much more niche market back then, while Star Trek was more aimed at the general audience....

Paramount's own Saturday Night Fever opened as an R rated film as was recut to a PG to when re-released in 1979 to rake in the cash. If you've only ever seen the PG cut you might be in for a rude awakening in the R version.

 

[TrickyDickie]

Paramount's own Saturday Night Fever opened as an R rated film as was recut to a PG to when re-released in 1979 to rake in the cash. If you've only ever seen the PG cut you might be in for a rude awakening in the R version.

That makes for very interesting reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturday_Night_Fever

So many different cuts that it will make your head spin.

 

[The Realist]

Even Barbara Bach in the shower isn't the most graphic nudity in a Bond film, and yet the one time there's an actual visible nipple, most people don't remember it. It was in "The Living Daylights", by the way. General Pushkin's wife, played by the beautiful Virginia Hey.

There are also blink-and-you-miss-them nipples in Diamonds Are Forever and OHMSS. (I never caught the glimpse in the latter movie until a recent rewatch on blu-ray.)

For me, the poster child of seventies ratings permissiveness will always be Logan's Run. A ton of revealing costumes, suggestiveness, and sensuality, with Jenny Agutter just getting flat-out naked in one scene. All rated PG.