No Concessions: Arrested Adolescence, or 25 Years of PG-13

In the summer of 1984 audiences weren’t ‘fraid of no ghosts and made Ghostbusters number one at the box office. But parents were up in arms over the heart-snatching antics of Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom and the monster-ridden, Christmas-set Gremlins and wanted something done about it. With the blessing of behind-the-scenes perpetrator Steven Spielberg — who as the director of Temple of Doom and the executive producer of Gremlins was clearly concerned about jeopardizing his stature as a family-friendly filmmaker — the Motion Picture Association of America quickly came up with a new rating: PG-13. That is, harder than a PG, or Parental Guidance (Suggested), but not as hard as an R, or Restricted.

And the movies have been poorer for it ever since.

Our ratings system is in its 40th year. Creating one-size-fits-all designations for a country of constituents is no easy task, and it’s satisfactory — or as satisfactory as any never-wholly-satisfactory solution can be. PG-13 was the first rating instituted since 1972, when PG replaced the allegedly more lax GP and the now-obscure GP*. PG covered a multitude of sins — I’m surprised ’70s parents didn’t complain about the likes of The Towering Inferno or Spielberg’s Jaws. I suspect my own regretted taking me to Inferno, with Susan Flannery’s horrific “fire run” and other smoldering all-star atrocities; I didn’t see Jaws on cable till after we’d seen Jaws 2 in theaters, by which time I was 13. Looking back on it, I’m proud of their sensible parenting, as they knew I loved the ocean and didn’t want to scare my preteen self out of the Atlantic, however much my playground cred suffered.

But even in the shadow of Nixon and Ford, Joy of Sex-reading parents were more indulgent of us (or some of us) as we transitioned to Carter country for a term. Unfortunately, the days of wine and peanuts came to an end in Reagan’s America: the MPAA wanted to win one for the Gipper, as conservative moms and dads got riled up about sex and violence. An early skirmish was over the Spielberg-produced Poltergeist (1982), less for its supernatural scares than its nonjudgmental, even positive, portrait of pot-smoking parents. Nixon’s silent majority had again found its voice and was scolding a free-and-easy permissiveness that dared to linger on-screen.

Two summers later we had PG-13 to handle the problem children that sprang from the id of E.T.’s father, as well as the other movies that were too suggestive for parental guides. What was this new rating all about? I’ve pulled the exact wording below from the MPAA website; “take heart” as you work your way through it.

“A PG-13 rating is a sterner warning by the Rating Board to parents to determine whether their children under age 13 should view the motion picture, as some material might not be suited for them. A PG-13 motion picture may go beyond the PG rating in theme, violence, nudity, sensuality, language, adult activities or other elements, but does not reach the restricted R category. The theme of the motion picture by itself will not result in a rating greater than PG-13, although depictions of activities related to a mature theme may result in a restricted rating for the motion picture. Any drug use will initially require at least a PG-13 rating. More than brief nudity will require at least a PG-13 rating, but such nudity in a PG-13 rated motion picture generally will not be sexually oriented. There may be depictions of violence in a PG-13 movie, but generally not both realistic and extreme or persistent violence. A motion picture’s single use of one of the harsher sexually derived words, though only as an expletive, initially requires at least a PG-13 rating. More than one such expletive requires an R rating, as must even one of those words used in a sexual context. The Rating Board nevertheless may rate such a motion picture PG-13 if, based on a special vote by a two-thirds majority, the Raters feel that most American parents would believe that a PG-13 rating is appropriate because of the context or manner in which the words are used or because the use of those words in the motion picture is inconspicuous.”

That may read better on weed. It’s by far the wordiest definition of any of the five ratings in use (the others being G, applied to 2001: A Space Odyssey at the dawn of the ratings system, now too unhip for anyone to bother changing over the decades, and the disreputable, rarely used NC-17). You might think the association was just being thorough, but really, the legalese tone of it (“The theme of the motion picture by itself will not result in a rating greater than PG-13, although depictions of activities related to a mature theme may result in a restricted rating for the motion picture”) opened a Pandora’s box of not-quite-restricted loopholes.

Let’s cut through the crap (a PG word) and look at the first PG-13 movies. The very first, Garry Marshall’s coming-of-age comedy The Flamingo Kid, was intended for summer release but held back for Christmas. It was, I think, the first film I saw advertised with the PG-13 logo.

It’s a pretty good movie, with a great early-’60s soundtrack. And the new rating solved a problem that had bedeviled PG movies since at least All the President’s Men in 1976: what to do when the harshest of those “sexually derived words” — you know, “fuck” — cropped up in a PG movie. Once was okay, at least as an expletive, but any more than that was fucking pushing it, and any talk about actual fucking was an automatic fucking R. My memory’s fuzzy, but I assume a single “fuck” — and typically leering coming-of-age-in-the-’60s humor — landed The Flamingo Kid in the PG-13 hoosegow.

And that made sense. The movie was too soft for an R, unlike, say, the first R-rated movie I saw theatrically, National Lampoon’s Animal House (1978), or summer 1984’s raunchy Bachelor Party, The Hangover of its day. But “crudity creep” was just around the corner. With its “fuck,” John Hughes’s Sixteen Candles, released in May of ‘84, made it under the PG-13 wire. Following the solidly-R-for-language The Breakfast Club in early ‘85, Hughes (R.I.P.) returned that summer with Weird Science, a movie with an R premise (boys make woman) but a teen-safe PG-13 execution. Had there been no PG-13 to fall back on there would’ve been no movie, or at least no movie with the same amount of juvenile, gross-out gags to throw the filmmaker’s career temporarily off course.

I had misremembered Cocoon (1985) as a PG, but it too was a PG-13. Why? Was it a sexually rejuvenated Don Ameche singing “I’m in the mood for love / Simply because I’ve got one”? Steve Guttenberg getting it on with anyone, human or alien? Or was the primary theme itself, of senior hanky-panky in an E.T. scenario, enough to get it the more restrictive rating? Less than a year after it was adopted you could see how PG-13 worked, as a catch basin for lowbrow humor but also a place to put more adult films with mildly eyebrow-raising subject matter. The dumbing down of the PG category had begun.

August 10, 1984, brought us the first PG-13 movie released into theaters, the Cold War flag waver Red Dawn, which was cut from the same red, white, and blue cloth as Chuck Norris’s copycat Invasion U.S.A. (1985), the laughable miniseries Amerika (1987), Iron Eagle (1986), and a big chunk of Sylvester Stallone’s mid- to late-’80s film career. The Soviet Union couldn’t fall fast enough to clear our screens of these rabble-rousers.

But here’s where PG-13 really came into its own, as movies given the rating piled up like so many wrecked cars. More movies are rated PG-13 these days than anything else, with action and fantasy pictures the biggest beneficiaries of its more-but-not-too-much-more intention. The problem is, a PG-13 today is practically indistinguishable from an R. “Violence creep” is the single biggest negative contribution the PG-13 rating has had on movies, one that’s completely retarded film culture along with the digital-effects-for-effects’-sake boom since the early ’90s.

I sort of enjoyed the recent hit Taken, with Liam Neeson making like Charles Bronson in the ’70s. (I didn’t enjoy the director, Pierre Morel, of the immigrant-friendly thriller District B13, turning xenophobic in this Paris-set actioner, but that’s what it takes to make it in the big leagues.) The DVD has the theatrical (PG-13) cut, which, like Casino Royale and the Bourne trilogy, chafes against the rating — the violence in all these films is indeed “realistic, extreme, and persistent.” There’s been so much envelope pushing in the last quarter century that I suspect the raters, a secretive bunch who are known to be craven to the big studios, don’t really know what they’re looking for, or what they’re looking at.

In a familiar hustle, the Taken disc includes an extended (by a minute), unrated cut, which amps the mayhem to a higher, nebulous level. (“Unrated” looks more dangerous on the packaging than a plain old R.) It essentially invalidates the “wimpier” PG-13 cut, which was necessary only to capture the largest possible audience in theaters before the film moved on to the even more profitable afterlife of home video, cable, etc. It’s mildly refreshing that both cuts are on the same disc rather than the unrated one appearing somewhere down the ancillary-market food chain after you’ve already bought the PG-13 one. But I still feel like I’ve been taken, with the theatrical version — the only one you could’ve seen in theaters — reduced to the status of bait.

Meanwhile, PG has gone the way of G. It’s a largely untouchable rating, so out-of-it that movies based on toys no one at or over the age of 13 would be caught dead playing with, namely Transformers and G.I. Joe, are rated PG-13. The Spielberg-produced Transformers movies are the worst of all worlds: megamachine violence combined with smutty humor. Today’s parents, whipped into submission by the high-velocity smackdowns, don’t have the energy to complain, if they (or the theater owners) even care all that much anymore.

As for the Red Dawn trailer, I’d say it’s an artifact, a reminder of a time when we were expected to take prisoner roundups at McDonald’s and internment at high school parking-lot concentration camps seriously. But, like everything else from the ’80s, Red Dawn is being recycled, with the teenage “Wolverines” pitted in the remake against hard-line Chinese and old-school Soviet marauders. The remake’s producers vow that they’re going for an R and won’t pussy out with a PG-13. But I bet the iron boot of a distributor fearful of losing an audience of John Birchers and Palinistas ages 13-17 will crush that plan.

Indiana Jones costar Kate Capshaw was kind of scary in her brief heyday, before marrying the boss and pretty much retreating to a temple of gold. But Dreamscape, the second PG-13 movie released — on August 15, 1984 — got the rating for jump-out-of-your-seat moments like the eruption of the “snake man,” in a pre-Nightmare on Elm Street scenario. For horror fans, however, PG-13 has more often than not been a bad dream.

Horror, always discriminated against as immature, is too often driven by excess — like, for example, the so-called “torture porn” genre, which typifies the MPAA’s leniency toward the major studios that are calling the slashes. PG-13 can be a good middle ground: The Sixth Sense is a perfect fit of film content and rating. Drag Me to Hell, on the other hand, had the bite marks of violence creep, however fantastic the gypsy-curse hullabaloo was. The main problem with movie horror and movie ratings, though, is the watering down that happens in order to get the movie that profitable mainstream rating.

The well-reviewed Drag Me to Hell tried to have it both ways and failed. The movie has a high ick factor, but Universal didn’t want to risk an R rating, so the intended audience missed out, burned too often by the many letdowns of PG-13 horror. Movies like The Haunting in Connecticut, The Unborn, and The Uninvited almost invite their quick disposal — from the generic titles on down, there’s nothing in them for a fan to sink his or her teeth into. And we’re savvy to the whole bait-and-switch business, figuring that an unrated cut will circulate on DVD (and knowing that the new scenes won’t help). The best horror resists being machine-tooled for a demographic, which doesn’t stop a glut of gutlessness.

Spend too much time thinking about this and you begin to imagine that we live in a PG-13 world. Our discourse on so many issues is more about pushing buttons and redefining the edge than engaging in specifics and finding mutual ground; we’re fearful of G-rated naiveté, but perpetually shy of maturity. Like a well-intentioned but clueless parent, the MPAA is no help with our coming of age as a society. Let’s meet again in 2010 to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the NC-17 rating, which the MPAA created to bring our cinema to adulthood, but bungled just as surely as it did the movies’ developing years.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

No Concessions: Summer Shorts, with Woody, Coppola, “Tony Manero,” and Zowie Bowie

Just about this time last year I devoted a column to indie or indie-ish movies hunkered down out there among the multiplex behemoths, titled “Summer Shorts.” It’s time for the sequel. The “specialty” market needs all the help it can get—this year’s biggest grosser among the littles has been Sunshine Cleaning, which washed up with a paltry $12 million in the till, or about what it costs to stage a Quidditch match. Consider this a lifeline, for them and for you, if you’re sick of super-stuff (and don’t forget the excellent The Hurt Locker, which I reviewed two weeks ago).

What I liked best about Moon, which I saw this opportune week, was its retro look. Director Duncan Jones (once known as “Zowie Bowie,” son of the formerly named David Jones) was inspired by the industrial design of Silent Running, Alien, and Outland, which production designer Tony Noble and visual effects supervisor Gavin Rothery translated with models rather than computer graphics. Every time the movie, shot in slightly distressed widescreen by Gary Shaw, ventures outside to the lunar surface I was transported to the pre-digital era. This movie has those movies in mind and also the worlds of Gerry Anderson, of TV’s Thunderbirds and Space: 1999, whose 1969 feature Journey to the Far Side of the Sun is another clear inspiration. (And maybe The Man Who Fell to Earth, but Jones is careful to distance himself from his space oddity dad.) (more…)

No Concessions: Finally, an Iraq Movie Worth a Damn

The Hurt Locker does the impossible: It single-handedly redeems the mostly misbegotten run of “sand” films, those war-on-terror features connected to Iraq and Afghanistan, a genre about as useless and debased as those feel-good romantic comedies where Kate Hudson sings into a hairbrush, makes goo-goo eyes at Gerard Butler, and throws a hunk of wedding cake at Anne Hathaway. Note I said “features”; there have been excellent documentaries about our ongoing engagements, and the filmmakers wisely take their cues from those.

Hollywood was slow to react to Vietnam. The first major films about the war, The Deer Hunter and Apocalypse Now, were mirages, with abstract themes, that came after the fighting had ended; it wasn’t until the ’80s when more concrete movies, like Platoon, appeared. The apparatus may have been too fast to react to our post-9/11 reality, flooding a trickle of audiences with well-intentioned but suffocating liberal hand-wringing — earlier this year Cinemax must have had its lowest ratings ever when it programmed, back-to-back, the flops In the Valley of Elah (forget the subject; who the hell would see a movie called In the Valley of Elah?) and Rendition. The few attempts to actually engage an audience, like The Kingdom, swapped the lectures for action movie clichés, an unsatisfying trade.

(more…)

No Concessions: “Afghan Star,” the “Idol” of a Nation, Rises

Amidst the turbulence in the world of pop culture comes good news from, of all places, Afghanistan. At the start of the new documentary Afghan Star, we see a line of men, with numbered tags on them. My reaction was predictably knee-jerk — what the hell kind of lockstep-fundamentalism thing were these guys up to? As it turned out, they were auditioning for the wildly popular TV show from which the film takes its name. In other words, putting themselves through the same sort of fame-seeking ordeal that thousands of people the world over subject themselves to on the road toward Idol-atry, complete with judges who roll their eyes and clap their hands over their disbelieving ears.

“Afghan Star” is broadcast by Tolo TV, the country’s first commercial station, which started in the wake of the collapse of the Taliban government in 2001. The show’s first season, in 2005, was a success. The documentary (which begins its New York run today, then rolls out nationwide) follows its third season, which began in October 2007. By then the show was as much an institution as American Idol — but it was also a headache for Muslim clerics, who were offended by its pop premise. And it was about to get worse. (more…)

No Concessions: The Dumbing of “Pelham 1 2 3″

New Yorkers aren’t a sentimental bunch. But there are some things we’re fiercely protective of. One of those is the 1974 crime drama The Taking of Pelham One Two Three. This was a year before the infamous New York Daily News headline that blared “Ford to City: Drop Dead,” when the president wrote off the Rotten Apple, awash as it was in debt and depravity. It was a deeply unsettled time. My dad, who worked on Wall Street, was mugged twice, and when we drove into the city it was always with the windows up and the doors locked. Left for dead the city got even worse, with the “Summer of Sam” and all that. Poor dad, as victimized as Charles Bronson in Death Wish (1974; brutal year), was stuck in the chaotic blackout while we waited with bated breath for some news back home in New Jersey. John Carpenter’s Escape from New York (1981) wasn’t just a title, but a prayer for deliverance.

Thirty-five years later, things are very different, even in the face of an asset-sucking recession. The crime has moved to the crystal meth labs on Main Street USA. We partied through our last blackout. And, like you, we enjoy our porn at home, not on Eighth Avenue. We made it through 9/11 and we’ll survive The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3, a remake for the unlettered. We dismissed a made-in-Toronto TV version in 1998 just by changing the channel. But this one, made on home turf—this one, we have to deal with.

The love for the original is easy as one, two, three. The movie took a hostage-taking scenario, outrageous even for its blighted times, and through it showed New York in all its resilient, workaday colors. It’s an appealingly plebian movie, with grumpy urban prole Walter Matthau pitted against the coolly European Robert Shaw, a pairing that struck a template most successfully exploited by the Die Hard movies. (more…)

No Concessions: Men Behaving Badly (And One, Very Well)

How funny is The Hangover? Funny enough to get the two guys in the next row off their Crackberries for minutes at a time. I used to go to the movies in the early afternoon, when no one was there. Now, I go to the last show of the evening, which is often the same, except that the few who are at last call are sleepier. So it was gratifying to sit with a full, and mostly attentive, post-10pm audience for a change.

I watched The Hangover with ’80s flashbacks in mind. Its crassness isn’t a lot different than, say, that of 1984’s Bachelor Party, a credit in the “other work” section of Tom Hanks’ resume these days. The Hangover is Bachelor Party cross-bred with Martin Scorsese’s After Hours (1985), with the Vegas section of the underrated Go (1999) thrown in. It’s a hybrid that runs on its own steam, and despite the lateness of the hour I would’ve texted “LOL!” to all my buddies if I had a device handy (no, I wouldn’t have). The only annoying thing about it is that I may have to check out the two other hit comedies written by Jon Lucas and Scott Moore, Four Christmases and Ghosts of Girlfriends Past, to see how they got here. Someday.

They specialize in stories centered on visiting and revisiting, and their idea this time was clever: Take all the standard wild-night-in-Vegas business and turn it into a comic mystery. Laid out end-to-end, the movie wouldn’t be as amusing as it is. Removing 12 hours from the story, then retracing them, was inspired. Director Todd Phillips, who made the semi-classic Old School (2003), paired the concept with actors who come to mesh as a team. Bachelor Justin Bartha, who sits out most of the movie, gets the film in gear with his disappearance but doesn’t really count. The heavy lifting is done, and done well, by a slyly misogynistic Bradley Cooper (who I figured for a big push when he co-starred with Julia Roberts and the rising Paul Rudd in the headline-grabbing Broadway revival of Three Days of Rain a couple of seasons back), Ed Helms (purposefully aggravating on The Office, more appealing here as a strait-jacketed single) and the out-to-lunch Zach Galifianakis, referred to in the movie as “Fat Jesus,” and a natural for Hagar the Horrible if he ever makes it to the big screen. (more…)

No Concessions: To “Hell” and Back with Sam Raimi

Some horror film directors unnerve us with little ripples of tension that unexpectedly crescendo into waves of terror. Sam Raimi is not one of those horror film directors. Pauline Kael once said that Mel Brooks’ grab-you-by-the-lapels comedy wasn’t necessarily funny; it was the being grabbed by the lapels that made you laugh. So it goes with Raimi: His latest film in the genre, Drag Me to Hell, doesn’t have that much in the way of innovative shocks or surprises, but it’s always head-locking you and screaming “Boo!” in deafening Dolby Digital. “This is fucking stupid,” said the guy in back of me, at a raucous midweek showing. “But it’s kind of fun.”

The Brooks comparison is apt. Young Frankenstein (1974) is one of the very best horror comedies, not that it’s a terribly long list. Raimi doesn’t really make horror comedies, but outside of his killer debut, The Evil Dead (1983), he’s not a straight-up scaremeister, either. I remember the chill of anticipation when I went to see The Evil Dead; Stephen King loved it (back when I hung onto his every word), and it was released unrated, which in itself promised something subversive. I wasn’t disappointed. The infamous “tree rape” sequence was a bit much (his subsequent films have shied away almost entirely from sex—too grownup) but everything else was a satisfyingly scary part of a whole: The funhouse colors, the cranked soundtrack (I can still hear the creepy voices on the tape), and the basic style, a kind of retro-primitive. Plus Bruce Campbell, who came as part of the package (but is not in the new film, having gone from catch-as-catch-can cult star to a steady gig on Burn Notice.) (more…)

No Concessions: The Sherman Brothers’ Spoonful of Bitterness

Here it is, not even June and with a case of blockbuster fatigue already. Pro and con, the fourth (fourth!) Terminator movie has already been dissected and dismantled around here, and the notion of being strapped to a mopey fun machine piloted by the one-dimensional Christian Bale and the non-dimensional McG had me grinding my gears. Tom Hanks can rattle the Catholic Church with his latest symbols search without me. But, living up to my obligations at this time of the year, I did see a movie featuring Ben Stiller.

Not the sequel (sequel!) to A Night at the Museum, but The Boys: The Sherman Brothers’ Story, which he co-executive produced and appears in, waxing nostalgic about the supercalifragilisticexpialidocious songwriting team behind Mary Poppins, The Jungle Book, Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, Winnie the Pooh, and so much more. Who wouldn’t? These tunesmiths have touched every kid born since they commenced their partnership in 1951. In the documentary, Poppins co-star Dick Van Dyke recalls a recent encounter with a 22-month-old who knew the lyrics of its Oscar-winning score by heart. Theirs is a gift that keeps on giving.

The Boys shows how inspiration struck. In delightful clips, we see Richard, the younger, more spontaneous brother, pulling zany lyrics out of thin air that Robert, the more self-contained one, faithfully transcribed, adding his own bits as the words tumbled out. (“A Spoonful of Sugar,” one of the Mary Poppins classics, sprang from Richard’s son’s description of receiving polio vaccine.) So many filmmaker-related documentaries founder on not having the rights to show the choicest footage, but The Boys isn’t one of them. Disney produced the film, without, thankfully, imposing on it; the Sherman Brothers’ achievement is inseparable from the studio’s, and having to work around the footage would have been impossible. (more…)

No Concessions: My Porn “Experience”

Twenty-five years ago, Brian De Palma planned to give porn star Annette Haven the lead role of “Holly Body” in his film Body Double, but backed off as controversy threatened to erupt. Today, Oscar winner Steven Soderbergh builds a whole movie, The Girlfriend Experience, around porn star Sasha Grey, and no one blinks. Why does the star of Anal Cavity Search 6 and This Ain’t Star Trek XXX land this rare crossover opportunity?

For the same reason that the 21-year-old has appeared in videos by the Smashing Pumpkins and The Roots, sat down with Tyra Banks, and been interviewed/celebrated by publications including Los Angeles magazine, Rolling Stone, and The Wall Street Journal—shaved and airbrushed, the porn industry just isn’t as dirty as it once was. I remember the filthy old days of the ’70s, when the New York Post ran titillating ads for adults-only fare like The Erotic Adventures of Pinocchio (“It’s Not Just His Nose That Grows!”) and the neighborhood cinema where I grew up in sleepy suburban New Jersey went from showing Disney double features one summer to hardcore porn in fall. When Love Muscle replaced The Love Bug, a snake had clearly crawled into the Garden State. (more…)

No Concessions: Bob and Lance Boldly Go Into “Star Trek”

Just as Kirk meets Spock under trying circumstances in the new Star Trek movie, so, too, did I meet my Popdose colleague, Lance Berry. “This is Lance. He’ll be joining you for film coverage,” said the boss.

Well, OK, fine. Far be it from me, the film editor, to question a Prime Directive from HQ. But who the heck was Lance Berry?

This was Lance Berry. True, he rubbed me the wrong way on the whole Daniel-Craig-as-007 thing. (Give it up, Lance. Craig rules.) But I immediately sensed a kindred spirit, one who could go to town on pop culture phenoms (or non-events) like Watchmen and Wolverine while I covered films so niche or obscure the directors’ mothers don’t know they made them. I of course exaggerate: We’re cross-trained in movies across the cinematic spectrum. (And I’m not forgetting our comrade Arend Anton, who works his own turf, or the other Popdosers who hang out in our expanding celluloid sandbox.)

Star Trek was a natural for Lance, who pegged it as a movie to look out for in his summer preview. I liked the look of it, too, based on very promising trailers (which grabbed me in a way trailers usually don’t) and thought I might say a few words about it. Leaping out of the Popdose space/time continuum, Lance posted a thorough review on his own site, but I snatched him back for a little Q&A, a modest start which we hope will spill over into the comments section, as everyone in the known galaxy saw it last weekend. (I expect to hear from Lance, anyway—I saw his A’s, but he hasn’t seen mine. That’s the editor’s prerogative. But he Q’ed me too, so we’re even.)

If it goes well, we’ll be back for a smackdown on Ghosts of Girlfriends Past, which Lance has seen four times. (Kidding! It was me who’s seen it multiple times. Matthew McConaughey repenting, and growing, and learning to open his heart and share tugs at me powerfully in every film he makes.)

Digression over. Stardate 51509. Captain’s log (I’ll stop with the corny references now, I promise). (more…)