MovieChat Forums > RoboCop (2014) Discussion > The irony of the PG-13 hate

The irony of the PG-13 hate

posted 8 years ago by JohnSmythe
12 replies | jump to latest

is that it's coming from people who seem oblivious to the original's superb and subtle subtext. The violence was integral to the story and the director's stylistic approach. It served a story-telling and thematic purpose. A purpose which ironically seems to have totally evaded the overwhelming majority of 'haters' of the remake.

Too many of them seem to object to the absence of violence in that it was violence that, in their mind, made the movie what it is. This couldn't further from the truth of course, as violence without context, story and characters is like watching Hostel.

This film, for better or worse, decided to tackle a different set of issues regarding humanity. Violence was not necessary to tell its story and so adding it would have been a mistake. Given how overly sensitive censors are these days, even if they did release an R rated cut, I seriously doubt it would be that much bloodier, certainly not to the point that the original was.

I find it ironic that people who claim to love the original so much and take offence to the remake are not intelligent enough to realise what a masterpiece the original is and instead relegate it to a simple violent revenge flick.

Is it any wonder these same oblivious people hate the remake for not being violent? They seem to equate violence with being 'adult' when they couldn't be more childish in their approach to both films and their respective themes.

[–] darthsitkur 8 years ago

The reason we hate it is because we're tired of having hardcore material taken away from us and watered down for the Disney crowd who already has enough crap available to them such as the overrated fast and furious and the hunger games

[–] evolution_500_2 8 years ago

It shouldn't matter whether a movie is rated R or PG-13 - what should matter is the movie's quality, first and foremost. There are just as many bad R-rated movies just as there are really bad PG-13 movies. Just because a movie is rated PG-13 doesn't mean that it's not a good movie - that's just infantile thinking.

[–] darthsitkur 8 years ago

My point is that watering it down just to make a quick buck does the story a disservice and it's a very dark and gritty story at that

[–] evolution_500_2 8 years ago

"My point is that watering it down just to make a quick buck does the story a disservice and it's a very dark and gritty story at that"

You can still have a "very dark and gritty" story, even with a PG-13 movie. Gore and violence doesn't equate with darkness and grit.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] darthsitkur 8 years ago

Thanks Xen11, I'm trying to tell him that if you tone down a dark and gritty story just to make a quick buck, it does the story a huge disservice and removes the impact

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] evolution_500_2 8 years ago

I don't know about this film itself in terms of whether it's good or not since I haven't seen it, but the idea of a movie somehow being "bad" just because it's PG-13 is stupid. Giving a movie an R-rating is no guarantee that it will result in a "good" movie, as there's just as long a list of awful R-rated movies as there are of PG-13 movies. And the whole argument about "doing the story a huge disservice and removing the impact" is a weak argument, especially when you consider PG-13 movies or even PG movies that manage to get away with so much with so little and had an impact even without the use of full-on violence and gore. Sometimes, a film's or a scene's impact could just come from suggestion. I mean, look at the original "Blair Witch Project", or even movies such as "Jaws", "1408", "The Ring", "The Birds", "Stephen King's "It", "Insidious", etc. Hell, even "Curse of the Demon", the 1963 version of "The Haunting", the 1954 "Godzilla" and "Shin Godzilla" are terrific and terrifying films with impact and great stories. I'm not advocating that R-rated movies should be banned or saying that they're somehow worse than PG-13 movies - a rating is a rating. What should matter is the movie's quality first and foremost. If it's PG-13 (or even PG) and is a good movie, awesome! If it's R-rated and is a good movie, awesome! If it's a bad movie and is either rating, then you have every right to tear into the f#cker.

[–] jljosh-87468 8 years ago

The director wanted it to be R. The studio wanted it PG-13 so it could rake in more money.

But either way being mostly blood-less is only one of many problems with Robocop 2014.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Conan-1982 7 years ago

"Too many of them seem to object to the absence of violence in that it was violence that, in their mind, made the movie what it is."

When I was 9 years old I wasn't smart enough to get any of the subtle subtext: I saw that guy getting massacred by the ED-209 and went "this is the greatest movie ever made !". I was 9 and that's what sold the movie to me back then.

[–] Man-In-Black08 7 years ago

When I was 9 years old I wasn't smart enough to get any of the subtle subtext: I saw that guy getting massacred by the ED-209 and went "this is the greatest movie ever made !". I was 9 and that's what sold the movie to me back then.

I think that's the point the OP is trying to make, that the overwhleming majority of people who criticise the remake for its lack of violence only liked the original because it was gory and over-the-top and the true nature of the themes regrading Murphy's death, ressurection and revenge at what was stolen from him, were utterly lost on them.

I agree with the OP on this, I love the original film, it's in my top 10 favourite films of all time, but I am almost embarrased at how other fans have so childishly reacted to the remake going for something entirely different. It's actually quite annoying to think people who claim to like something I hold in such high esteem, can't grasp any of the qualities that make it so great.

Anyway, this film was flawed at the production stage, the director has come out and said his vision was altered by the execs, but I still enjoy and respect the angle they went for in having Murphy know from the start he's no longer all there and show the effect it has on his psyche and his family. It wasn't a retread of the original and I think that overall it's still a solid film.