Ridley is pissed at MPAA over Prometheus Rating

"leave just enough gore in there to make it be taken seriously" By whom? The aforementioned adolescents? To me, gore does not a serious film make... and adolescents are a terrible judge of what constitutes a good film. ;) "by the time we all saw that film in the theater it was HALF the film he intended us to see" Is that was Paul Verhoeven says or what you say? The director's cut is only about a minute longer than the theatrical cut and none of the story/character development was lost. They're nearly identical, minus a few seconds of gore here and there. You walk away with the same exact story and themes no matter which version you see. Gore isn't what Robocop is about (even if it leans on it pretty heavily) nor is it what Prometheus seems to be about. I really don't see how you're strengthening your case, this seems more like an example of cutting something to receive a more favorable rating turning out to be the right move for a film's success and longevity. If Ridley cuts some gore to secure his preferred rating (or the studio's preferred rating, as it's still ambiguous who's really driving this situation) I'm going on record as saying I'm fine with that. What he seems to be doing now is making a big stink about it to put some heat on the MPAA rather than himself so maybe they'll change their rating without him having to make even those little, seconds long cuts. I guess it's working, judging by the amount of vitriol people are heaping on anyone and everyone who isn't Sir Riddles the blameless.

the gore and the language are the things the suits remove on each of those submissions, they always have and always will, it's their TARGET, anything they think my offend anyone. also...I was just using That film as a quick example of what the studios do, take a chill pill man.

and by the way I am NOT fine with anything Ridley does to suit "the suits" or anyone else other than himself and his own original artistic vision, I want his INTENDED Version of this film and nothing less will do thank you very much and sadly there is no way that is likely until the DVD. And this is just the cold hard reality of the situation in today's film world.

I feel perfectly chilled. Why must I take this pill? And what suits, what pressure? Ridley hasn't mentioned any suits coming down on him or being pressured to do a thing. He's just said the MPAA needs to get their house in order... a perfectly ambiguous statement that you can (and do) read anything you want into.

ok Juston, no worries, whatever you say.

Food for thought... ALIEN (1979) originally rated R in Canada/US back then is.... Now in the 2003 "Directors Cut" re-release currently classified as 14A, 18A and EVEN PG!! depending on what province in Canada you are in !! So is ALIEN no longer worthy of being seen according to some of you???

Just to put things in perspective. These are the top twenty highest grossing films of all time in the U.S., adjusted for inflation (all numbers are in U.S. dollars. Ratings are by the MPAA). (Rank, Title, Studio, Adjusted gross, Unadjusted gross, Year of release) 1 Gone with the Wind -MGM $1,582,009,400 $198,676,459 1939^ 2 Star Wars -Fox $1,394,676,400 $460,998,007 1977^ 3 The Sound of Music -Fox $1,115,112,400 $158,671,368 1965 4 E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial -Uni. $1,110,719,400 $435,110,554 1982^ 5 Titanic -Par. $1,034,652,200 $630,492,151 1997^ 6 The Ten Commandments -Par. $1,025,730,000 $65,500,000 1956 7 Jaws -Uni. $1,002,857,100 $260,000,000 1975 8 Doctor Zhivago -MGM $971,980,600 $111,721,910 1965 9 The Exorcist -WB $865,991,500 $232,906,145 1973^ 10 Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs -Dis. $853,470,000 $184,925,486 1937^ 11 101 Dalmatians -Dis. $782,352,100 $144,880,014 1961^ 12 The Empire Strikes Back -Fox $768,754,400 $290,475,067 1980^ 13 Ben-Hur -MGM $767,340,000 $74,000,000 1959 14 Avatar -Fox $761,508,800 $760,507,625 2009^ 15 Return of the Jedi -Fox $736,485,200 $309,306,177 1983^ 16 Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace -Fox $707,517,800 $474,420,048 1999^ 17 The Sting -Uni. $697,988,600 $156,000,000 1973 18 The Lion King -BV $697,661,300 $422,783,777 1994^ 19 Raiders of the Lost Ark -Par. $690,150,700 $242,374,454 1981^ 20 Jurassic Park -Uni. $674,991,700 $357,067,947 1993^ Only one movie on the entire list - 'The Exorcist" - was rated R. "Jaws" would have probably gotten a PG-13, but that rating did not exist at the time of its release. And several of the films on this list were actually rated "G." These are numbers that studios, theater owners, and merchandisers remember, when it comes time to calculate investments vs. expected returns. And I might add, this is NOTHING new... it's been this way for a long, long time. As far as trailers - red blood being colored black, and so forth - movie trailers are subject to a different standard and generally need to be approved for "All Audiences" (unless it's a 'red-band' trailer). So I wouldn't pay too much attention to that. At his best, Ridley Scott makes movies that succeed artistically regardless of their rating. At his worst, he turns out mediocre fare (*cough*Legend*cough*) that no amount of violence, nudity, gore or profanity would save, even if it were added. Given Ridley Scott HIMSELF saying he wants "Prometheus" to get the rating that ensures the highest box-office returns, I don't think he'll object that much to making the cuts necessary for a PG-13 if it lifts "Prometheus" into the ranks of highest-earners. I also don't think the movie will suffer from the necessary cuts one way or the other. If it's a great movie, it shouldn't matter either way. I see nothing to worry about.

I put no stock or faith in RATINGS what so ever. I do put a lot {all} of my faith in Ridley. People whom appreciate his films will go no matter what it is rated.

Yes, but we're not the people spending one hundred and fifty million dollars to make a movie.

"R" rating please.

I dont think ppl are saying that if its PG-13 it will be a bad movie. I think ppl have been awaiting a film like this for quite some time (i fit in this category as well). This is sci-fi horror, the genre Ridley Scott has birthed. Batman for example works at PG-13 cus its themes and imagery is well suited for a more global demographic. I think the themes in the film are gonna be quite horrifying and to cut the scenes in order to fit a PG-13 rating would be the same as diluting the horror. Lessening the intensity of the impact to suit a greater audience. I just dont want to be visibly aware once im sitting in the theater that certain scenes have been "tampered" with. Shout out to all the Montrealers in this group! :P

I don't understand the stigma of the "R" rating. Not even 20 years ago, the "X" and "Unrated" were the dangerous ratings... now it's "R"? I suppose for a new, sfx heavy, EXPENSIVE movie an "R" could be a deal breaker, but the Alien universe is well received and unless the parents of 14-17 year olds interested in seeing this film (as they most likely have seen the previous ones) are authoritarian jerks, why wouldn't they take their kid? Hollywood can't compare kids/family movies to movies of all other genres. Sure, family movies make the most, but why would you take your under 13 kid to see this movie anyway?!

My dad took me to see "Alien" when I was 10. "Jaws" when I was six. Yeah, my folks were like that :/

Well we all have the quadrillogy, and the anthology, and these films have a history of studio tampering so its hardly surprising to us that some trepidation of studio interference and cuts have become a concern for us as fans who long to see the intended directors vision, and that vision would be nice to view on the big screen instead of waiting months for the blue ray release.

I get a strong impression that Ridley aimed for a "strong PG-13" rating. he submitted a cut he feels is PG-13, and it got a R. And ridley goes "what the #$()_#$(, movies X, Y, and Z where worse then my cut and they got PG-13, but my gets a R, if i was making A #$)($##) R rated movie, you would know it."

If that the case zedwardson then i for one will be a happy bunny cos i feel this genre and franchise in particular needs that rating to give it an edge .

I don’t see the point in going to the cinema now for a watered down 15 rating. It would cost me a good £50.00 for the day, that can be spent on my home. Sorry Ridley you should have battled for a R and 18. This is not ALIEN Prometheus this like those other spin offs made for kiddies. Alien vs. Predator sigh and Aliens vs Predator – Requiem (double sigh).

@Andy's Cat, Please Don't give up on this thing man you will be wrong to do that...that's just "stinking thinking", we are in fact getting an unedited version of the film according to Scott and FOX !

@Spartacus I won't give up but, I can wait. Well I'm going to sit in the hyper space freezer for 6 months now, until it comes out on bluray at least I can spend less £18.00? And watch the opening titles 20 times which would cost me a bomb at the cinema then watch the film. Bluray or DVD often have duel versions.

lol, i understand, if anyone can understand it;s me, spent years building up my own home theater. There really is Nothing like it ! Sound make such a Massive difference and I am so surprised how many people still don't get that! & There are so many reasons why it is an essential part of film making and watching !