• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Can you blame fans for snickering over TMP being rated G ?

Compared to other science fiction tv shows and movies shows of the era, the original STAR TREK was pretty cutting-edge. It may not have been the most progressive show on tv but . . ..

Just the other day I was watching THE GREEN SLIME, a 1968 scifi movie set aboard a space station. Ohmigod, even though the movie was supposedly set in the future, with flying cars and space probes and computers everywhere, it looked like an episode of MAD MEN in space. The "United Nations Space Command" seemed to be run entirely by clean-cut white guys with American accents. There wasn't a non-white face in the entire movie (even though it was filmed in Japan).

And with the exception of the leading lady, who was mostly there to be fought over by the two rugged male leads, the only women in sight were nurses and secretaries with no dialogue (but who screamed fearfully whenever the Green Slime attacked). Despite the futuristic setting, it's painfully obvious that it never even occured to anyone involved that the future wouldn't look like, say, NASA circa 1963.

And this was an MGM movie made two or three years after TOS debuted . . .

So, yeah, we have to give TOS credit for being ahead of its contemporaries at the time. Trust me, it's aged much better than THE GREEN SLIME! :)
 
Last edited:
Therin of Andor said:
Yes, ok, demographics were being looked at, but wasn't it that the advertisers started using the information to more accurately target ads at the specific groups watching the shows after TOS ended its initial run.
Click to expand...

True, but the long-held myth isn't that advertisers could have better targeted the audience watching Star Trek; this is no doubt true -- television advertising has only gotten more sophisticated since the late 1960s. The myth is that if demographics had been measured, the series never would have been cancelled. This still looks to be false to me. Yes, the series was buried in the Friday night "death slot," but the third season was by no means the beginning of the series' ratings decline.

I do admit, however, that closer analysis on this is probably warranted (the article linked to demonstrates that the competition on the other networks had equal youth appeal, but doesn't give the rest of NBC's schedule the same analysis). It would be an interesting subject of further research.

In response to Greg Cox, now all I want to do is see The Green Slime!
 
Green Slime appears to be the fifth in a series of Italian sf movies. It was apparently moved to Japan. The entire series (which includes "War of the Planets," "Wild Wild Planet" (both with Tony Russo), "The Errant Planet" and "The Snow Devils" (both with Giacomo Rossi Stuart)) was written by Ivan Reiner. They're all remarkably similar (Commander of Space station--Gamma One, usually) has to go all heroic to stop aliens from destroying Earth. "Errant Planet" even has a planet going to collide with Earth. They're all very much the same, with the exception of "Green Slime" which was done in Japan. Most of the actors, btw, are Italian, not Americans.

When you look at this SF series and compare it to its contemporaries, it comes up very much lacking. But I still sit back and DVR them when they're shown on TCM or AMC. You know why? They're mindless fun!

Green Sl-i-i-i-i-i-me!
 
If The Andromeda Strain were to be re-rated, it would definately be a PG-13.

The same could be said for Logan's Run.

Even Ice Station Zebra would be re-rated that due to some violent scenes.

Since we are on the subject of the MPAA rating system, I'm surprised that the GP rating that was used in the late Sixties and early Seventies hasn't been broached on this thread. As I recall, that rating was as close to the PG rating, back then.
 
You're wrong about Andromeda Strain, Logan's Run, or even Ice Station Zebra. The level of violence doesn't even approach PG-13.
 
Potemkin_Prod said:
You're wrong about Andromeda Strain, Logan's Run, or even Ice Station Zebra. The level of violence doesn't even approach PG-13.
Click to expand...
But the level of nudity in Logan's Run does (I haven't seen the other two). In addition to the ice cave scene, there was the sex shoppe scene, in which the context was obviously sexual.

(Also, that shot of the runner's body dissolving into goo near the beginning would be pretty gruesome if the special effects weren't so phony-looking.)
 
Again, nudity without sexual activity doesn't automatically guarantee you a PG, let alone a PG-13, ref my up-thread comments. Another PG movie that would still get a PG these days would be "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" even though there's plenty of female nudity toward the end (God, I loved Brooke Adams). Ditto for "The Giant Spider Invasion" (PG).
 
There's no way Invasion of the Body Snatchers would get anything less than an R-rating today. Frontal nudity doesn't fly in any PG-rated movie I've seen made in the past 20 years.
 
Still trying to work out why U (he UK equivelant of G) is a bad thing. Suerly that means you have the widest possible audiance.

And as others have mentioned, it all depends on the era a film is released in.

What passed as U 30 years ago might be PG today.
 
Rated PG strongly suggests not for the very young in most peoples' minds, and means therefore fewer crying babies. To me, fewer crying babies is a plus in the movie theater. It's probably a plus to a lot of movie goers too.
 
Harvey said:
There's no way Invasion of the Body Snatchers would get anything less than an R-rating today. Frontal nudity doesn't fly in any PG-rated movie I've seen made in the past 20 years.
Click to expand...

I remember Jack Valenti explaining it quite plainly. If female nudity is present in a non-sexual scene, then it does not warrant an R rating. Now, this was in the era before PG13, but I've never seen non-sexual female nudity garner an R rating, even since the PG-13.

The MPAA has gotten looser with its ratings particularly in terms of language. You can say Fuck in a PG movie these days; that used to be an automatic R rating.

What has happened, however, is that movies in the past two decades are increasingly violent, and that has resulted in even more PG-13 ratings.

My last thought on this matter is that the studios themselves try to determine their MPAA rating. They intentionally add rough language, sexual situations and violence in order to achieve a particular rating based on their marketing departments' recommendations. GREEN HORNET comes to mind as having some of the silliest usage of rough language in a film in order to get that PG-13. It's sad that G and PG ratings are no longer considered respectable.
 
"Fuck" in a PG-rated movie? I doubt that. It happens four times in The Right Stuff, but that was before PG-13. Certainly the MPAA has gotten looser in terms of language, but it seems like they've become stricter in terms of nudity based on the films I've seen and the ratings they've received.

You're definitely right about studios pushing the envelope unnecessarily in certain films in order to avoid being rated G or PG, though. They're also in the business of toning down films that should be rated R in order to reach a younger demographic. PG-13 has become the desirable rating for most films, often to their detriment.
 
Logan's Run was definately pushing the limits on violence and adult subject matter.

The director of the 1976 box-office smash hit had to edit out some footage, because if he hadn't, the film would have been branded with an R rating.

So realistically, Logan's Run would be given a PG-13 in today's cinema, if re-rated.
 
Therin of Andor said:
MacLeod said:
Still trying to work out why U (he UK equivelant of G) is a bad thing.
Click to expand...

A huge amount of film box office is still groups of teens, and teen couples going on dates. "U" and "G" became "uncool".
Click to expand...

Perhaps it's a country thing as well. After all bodies like the BBFc and MPAA will classify a film on different things.

i.e. the BBFC could be more concenred with violence whilst the MPAA could be more concerned with sexuality/nudity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top