Okay, so I recently rented "The Ring" after hearing a great deal of hoopla about it from my local library at no charge. After a couple of days of resting on my desk I decided to pop the dvd into my xbox and was surprised to see that it was rated PG-13. Despite making fun of one of my friends for seeing "Darkness Falls" I do have a love for older horror movies that would be far from an "R" by todays standards so I gave it a chance. Roughly two hours later I was kind of sorry I did, I mean the film did have somewhat of an interesting plot despite its lack of originality, but I could not help, but cringe at every time a phrase like "God Damn" was used instead of an f-bomb being droped or the obvious amount of blood that was NOT present in the film. Not that I'm kind of sick saddest that like nothing, but fowl language or blood and gore, but I am aware of incidents that require these elements to either emphasize emotion (swearing) or give insight/ entertainment value (gore in someways). Has anyone else experianced anything similar with PG-13 horror?
the ring is an exception since its an american remake(original is from japan).
It just shows that you dont need swearing to make a movie good.
Other than the Ring and supernatural horror films of it's type I tend to avoid pg-13 horror films like chlamedia for their weakness.
For me it depends on how serious the movie is....I don't like horror movies of any kind where it's obvious that the main characters aren't really in danger, no matter what the rating is.
I generally don't like horror films where the target audience are kids, but that wasn't the case with THE RING remake, or at least I didn't think so.
you dont need foul language or gore to make a movie scary, the ring proved that.
I really wasn't scared by the Ring at all, I was just kind of board with it.
In my experience, more movie characters swear than real-life people (at least those I know). Therefore, I'm more likely to be pulled out of a film by hearing the f-word than not, with the Blair Witch Project being an almost comical example. Admittedly, it depends on the sort of character you're talking about, but the main ones in The Ring don't seem like the type who'd reflexively be using profanity all that much.
As for explicitness of violence, it has nothing to do with how scary a movie is. Halloween, as one example of many, spills nary a drop of blood during the entire proceedings, and it's generally held to be much scarier than most of its gorier ilk.
Since when does violence/gore + foul language = scary? Violent gory movies can be very "entertaining" but not "scary." I think a true horror movie needs elements like suspense, dramatic setting, and good acting. Or at the very least, some subtle camera work with screeching music (Psycho, anybody?). None of those elements necessitate an R rating. Personally, I thought The Ring was freaky as hell. The image of the dead schoolgirl's face popping up on the screen outta nowhere (when the mother is talking about finding her body in the closet) not only made me jump, but the image stuck with me for a while. The premise of the movie was disturbing and creepy, which is not the sort of scary that many other people go for, I guess.
My 9 year-old brother plays violent video games that are rated M for mature. But would I let him see The Ring, rated PG-13? Never.
Don't get me wrong, I also like movies like Texas Chainsaw Massacre and I thought that one was fairly scary and well done overall, although I haven't seen the original.
But, since it's the middle of the night and I'm all alone, I'm gonna stop talking about horror films and just go to bed.
I don't think that the equation "blood + swearing + rated R = good horror" is accurate.
A movie doesn't need to be rated R to be scary.
One of the scariest movies I have ever seen is INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS. The original version was not rated because it was released in the 1950s. The Donald Sutherland version was rated PG and was very scary. BODY SNATCHERS was rated R, and it is the least scary of these 3 versions.