*is confused as to whether you guys are saying PG movies in the old days used to be darker/ more violent than those now or whether they used to be lighter/ less violent than those now*

Honestly I thing the MPAA is lowering it's standards... Some movies that are PG today would undoubtably have been Rated PG-13 15-20 yrs ago given the ones I've watched... Some Rated PG-13 today would have been R 15-20 years ago...

So honestly if the trend continues...it wouldn't suprise me if LB escapes with a PG rating with plot intact...not saying I'm expecting it, but it wouldn't suprise me...

I think that the standards are just going up and down as time pass's

*is confused as to whether you guys are saying PG movies in the old days used to be darker/ more violent than those now or whether they used to be lighter/ less violent than those now*

Honestly I thing the MPAA is lowering it's standards... Some movies that are PG today would undoubtably have been Rated PG-13 15-20 yrs ago given the ones I've watched... Some Rated PG-13 today would have been R 15-20 years ago...

So honestly if the trend continues...it wouldn't suprise me if LB escapes with a PG rating with plot intact...not saying I'm expecting it, but it wouldn't suprise me...

Hm. I think it really goes both ways. PG films used to be more serious, until popular R-rated films came around in the late 60's, whereupon serious-movie directors shifted their seriousness to an R-level treatment. Everything else fell into PG or G. So, in hindsight Lawrence of Arabia and Becket, while they were Very Serious Films when they came out, seem tame in content by the time you've got The Godfather, Blue Velvet, and Chinatown.

And, not only that, but because of R-rated films, PG films became increasingly violent because they had not yet reached the level of R-level content, which is why Gremlins, which is fairly violent and frightening, is merely PG.

Taken, which is a VERY violent movie in many ways got a PG-13 rating because it does not contain much blood. The producers edited the movie very carefully to avoid an R-rating in the United States. The uncut version is a lot more graphic.

If The Last Battle, if it's ever made, and if the filmmakers theoretically don't flinch from the content, is going to get a PG-13 rating because of the tone more than the battles. I'm not worried about Tirian, Jewel, and Eustace's killing of Calormenes being an obstacle. In LWW and PC we see plenty of actions that kill without seeing the victim actually being killed, esp. in all those charges that Peter performs.

Hm. I think it really goes both ways. PG films used to be more serious, until popular R-rated films came around in the late 60's, whereupon serious-movie directors shifted their seriousness to an R-level treatment. Everything else fell into PG or G..

Mmm, yes I guess that makes sence... most of the movies I've seen were between the 70's and today...so I'm afraid I don't have much knowledge before that...

*takes note to do a full research project in movie ratings at some point*

Actually Josh the Temple of Doom is what got the PG-13 rating made.

I know it's what got the rating made, but my point was is that PG films, because of the PG-13 rating, have become more restricitve. Everyone was saying PG films allow more content nowadays, when the majority of 80s PG movies had more content then today's PG movies.

Even classic films like Back to the Future, the Karate Kid, and ET (all PG) contain much more profanity then you would hear in today's PG movies. And they also tended to show some more blood.

Josh, can you say what in particular in LB you think warrants a PG-13 rating.

Maybe because ALL of the Narnians die in the final battle. And this isnt a "cool" "epic" battle like the battles in LWW and PC. Its personal, brutal, and tragic. Personally I don't see how some blood (even if not over the top) won't be shown. This isnt like PC where they can just imply that people died behind a castle gate, because this battle is out in the open. Trinian pretty much battles until most of his friends and allies are killed off or thrown into the stable.

The enitre tone of the first two thirds of the book is cheerless. And any comic relief added in the movie would ruin the message of the novel. The scenery is also dark (which really can make the film seem much more sinister). The final battle takes place at night.

Jill gets dragged by her hair and thrown into the stable (that just seems a bit too abusive for PG).

Tash is suppossed to be the most frightening thing in a Narnia movie. Tash EATs Shift.

All the main characters, save Susan, get killed in the train accident. If they show any of what happend it would be PG-13. Even if they didnt show the effects of the train wreck, showing Susan's side of the story would push the film into a much more serious direction.

Themes such as the afterlife and the end of the world are by nature elements that may bother people. Half of the Narnians don't go into Aslans country and most people will assume they went to hell. After all we do see dragons and other monsters destroy Narnia before Aslan shuts the door.

Also there will be controversy about the Calormen's being portrayed as the evil ones again. As well as the critics of the fate of Susan.

Basically in the end I would rate the Last Battle PG-13 "For battle violence, thematic elements, and some frightening images"

Maybe because ALL of the Narnians die in the final battle. And this isnt a "cool" "epic" battle like the battles in LWW and PC.

half the Narnians are locked in Miraz's castle and massacred with arrows, that is a very emotional heartbreaking fight and it's anything but epic. And besides Tirian leaves the battle before it is finished so we don't see everyone die.

The enitre tone of the first two thirds of the book is cheerless. And any comic relief added in the movie would ruin the message of the novel. The scenery is also dark (which really can make the film seem much more sinister). The final battle takes place at night.

The castle attack in PC was at night, and a few funny moments would not ruin the tone of the book, The Return of the King is extremely dark and foreboding at times a few jokes here and there didn't ruin it.

Jill gets dragged by her hair and thrown into the stable (that just seems a bit too abusive for PG).

We see a minotaur get peppered with arrows and finally has a gate come crashing on him after he falls in PC. Besides they could just carry her out or pull her by her dress, we don't "have" to have her hair pulled.

Tash is suppossed to be the most frightening thing in a Narnia movie. Tash EATs Shift.

There were a whole lot of very scary creatures at the stone table in LWW, and the werewolf is vere frightening in PC. And Lord Farquad is eaten by a dragon in Shrek with us watching the whole thing.

All the main characters, save Susan, get killed in the train accident. If they show any of what happend it would be PG-13. Even if they didnt show the effects of the train wreck, showing Susan's side of the story would push the film into a much more serious direction.

The train accident isn't shown in the book and doesn't need to be shown in the movie, and neither is Susan's side of the story, showing either would be a departure from the book.

Themes such as the afterlife and the end of the world are by nature elements that may bother people. Half of the Narnians don't go into Aslans country and most people will assume they went to hell. After all we do see dragons and other monsters destroy Narnia before Aslan shuts the door.
Also there will be controversy about the Calormen's being portrayed as the evil ones again. As well as the critics of the fate of Susan.

neither of these warrant a PG-13

Will they be "dark enough"?

Silver Chair will definitely be dark enough, seeing as lots of their adventures happen in the dark. On the other hand, Last Battle had a cheerful bonfire in its night scene's and will probably not be quite as dark -- we will at least be able to see something.

Alright, enough with stupid jokes. SC and LB have definitely the most serious feel to them when compared with the rest of the Chronicles.

I can see where they could get away with a PG rating for SC simply for the fact that it doesn't have any fighting in it, except for when LotGK dies. Because it happens so fast, they could cleverly work it so that not much blood shows.

On the other hand SC has to be rated PG-13 -- no "ands", "ifs", or "buts". I say this because the story is about the end of a world. I don't know about you, but, to me, when a world ends, the tragedy alone is worth PG-13, never mind any blood and gore. But, that is just my opinion.

Signed,
The unknown

he train accident isn't shown in the book and doesn't need to be shown in the movie, and neither is Susan's side of the story, showing either would be a departure from the book.

So showing something that was implied is a departure from the book but cutting out Jill being dragged by her hair and having her get merely carried is it?

I had this idea of how its fine to make changes to the novel as a long as it makes if family friendly. Really, if there is something violent or dark in the book it shouldnt be removed. Why is it okay to lighten up the novels and not okay to darken them?

The Lord of the Rings movies are, arguably, darker than the books and part of it is because they showed a lot of things that were only implied in the novel (Gandalf vs. Saruman, the battle at the end of the Fellowship, the Trees Attacking Isengard, etc). In my opinion showing a lot of scenes, rather then just implying them, made the movies a lot better. I feel the same here.

I had this idea of how its fine to make changes to the novel as a long as it makes if family friendly. Really, if there is something violent or dark in the book it shouldnt be removed. Why is it okay to lighten up the novels and not okay to darken them?

All the reasons you stated above can be overcome without changes just by skillful editing and minimal graphic shots. Why cut out a substantial part of the audience just so you can have some unnecessarily graphic parts in the movie when you can make it totally true to the book without it.

Making a PG-13 Last Battle won't alienate any of the fanbase.

If a person was five when LWW came out, they would be 18 by the time the Last Batte Came out and by that time they would definitly be allowed to see PG-13 movies.

Also most parents let their kids see PG-13 ratings, whether its good for the kids or not. But seeing that the Last Battle won't even come out till at least 2018 (and it will probably be longer) all kid fans of the series now will be old enough to watch it by the time it comes out.

Its sort of like Star Wars. 5 of the 6 were PG, but the 6th was PG-13 because it was the darkest and it needed to have that rating. It did great at boxoffice.

And the Last Battle should be the one exception. If its the last film it doesnt even matter if it flops due to angry parents because its the last film and we wont have to worry about the series being canceled. But since the Last Battle is so far away I believe for a lot of fans to even be interested it would need to be PG-13 since they will be so much more grown up by that point.

And honestly i don't care if little kids can't watch it. I want the movies to be made in the best way possible. Call me selfish, but I prefer integrity to the source material over dumbing things down for the little ones.

*Spoiler warning*

This TV spot is making me feel a lot better:

... r_embedded

However I'm still concerned... This is only one out of ten, not to mention all the other clips that mentioned "Magic" and I also like the points made earlier, the LB is not like any of the other battles, it is much darker...

wolfloversk, I linked to your post in the forum thread I made about 'TV Spot 8' because that's the one I saw the other day but couldn't link to.

It does seem to me that merely the tone in which LB is set would make it PG-13 if portrayed like the book, not darker or lighter than the book. As I stated earlier, I feel differently about SC. But it's hard to tell whether LB will be PG or PG-13 for sure because they might be able to edit it so it gets the PG rating. They're probably going to have to do that in order to keep the movies family films, and because of the agreement they made to keep them PG. However, I am not against PG-13 if it helps keep true to the book.

I don't think PC problem was that it was dark but that it wasn't magical enough. That is how it is in the book as well (well I think the book is slightly more magical.)

That's why I wish they'd left the dance of the trees scene in the movie. It might have added about 5min to it, but it would have been so beautiful and really if done right, captured some of that magic. Really, that's the biggest regret I have about that movie.

I do think SC should be darker, and LB definately darker as well. My dream pick for a director for both of those (and maybe HHB too) is Peter Jackson, though I don't he would do SC because he'll be tied up with The Hobbit over the next year or two. Really, I think they ought to throw any concern about PG rating out the window for LB, SC will probably be fine as a PG film, but I don't believe they could stay true to the book with LB and not make it PG-13.