Wednesday, March 21, 2007

Storm In A Blood Spattered, Naked, Baby Eating Teacup

According to a fair sized handful of film ick readers, the MPAA have decided, in their infinitesimal wisdom, to afford Grind House an R rating. What isn't clear, of course, is how cut it has been to reach this classification. I'm trying to find an answer on the MPAA's website but, of course, it's not easy to navigate at all. The BBFC equivalent can be a bit stubborn, but this... this is shocking. This is one of the clunkiest sites I've ever bothered with. I can see that Grind was PG-13 rated in 2003 and that The Corpse Grinders was given an R in 1971... but Grind House...? Are they just really slow to update this thing? Or are all of my e-mailers getting bad information from somewhere?

I'm also very interested to read the MPAA's rating reason for Grind House. Can anybody throw me a line?


Christopher said...

don't know what it's worth, but the american trailers do now show an official mpaa 'r' rating.

Edgar said...

This is the offical reason from the MPAA. Here's hoping that those suckers didn't cut Grindhouse to pieces to get it to an R.

Rated R For strong graphic bloody violence and gore, pervasive language, some sexuality, nudity and drug use.

Anonymous said...

I just saw This Film Is Not Yet Rated and learned a lot about the shady practices of the MPAA. Based on what I found out in that documentary, I'd have to say that if a movie like what I expected Grindhouse to be got an R, then it's cut up to hell. (But Sin City got an R and it's pretty intense at times too.) But with the reputation of Tarantino and Rodrigueq, I think that if they are willing to get an R for themselves, then it'll probably be a good cut anyway. I'll wait for the unrated version to come out before I buy.