Our Sponsor Sideshow Collectibles Send us News
Lord of the Rings Tolkien
Search Tolkien
Lord of The RingsTheOneRing.net - Forged By And For Fans Of JRR Tolkien
Lord of The Rings Serving Middle-Earth Since The First Age

Lord of the Rings Movie News - J.R.R. Tolkien
Do you enjoy the 100% volunteer, not for profit services of TheOneRing.net?
Consider a donation!

  Main Index   Search Posts   Who's Online   Log in
The One Ring Forums: Tolkien Topics: Movie Discussion: The Hobbit:
The level and style of violence in The Hobbit trilogy
First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All

Fardragon
Rohan

Oct 8 2012, 9:38pm

Post #26 of 42 (360 views)
Shortcut
The censors won't give a film a higher clasifcation [In reply to] Can't Post

because it includes ugly little freaks with buck teeth and excessive ear hair (otherwise Tom Cruse films would never be shown in the UK).

They will give a film a higher classification if it includes beheading though.

It actually make sense to go for a lower classification on film 1 than films 2 and 3, since children who enjoyed the first film will be a year older by the time the next one comes out.

A Far Dragon is the best kind...


DanielLB
Immortal


Oct 8 2012, 9:53pm

Post #27 of 42 (339 views)
Shortcut
Does that really make a difference? [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
It actually make sense to go for a lower classification on film 1 than films 2 and 3, since children who enjoyed the first film will be a year older by the time the next one comes out.


The classifications are 12, 15 and 18. They couldn't increase TABA to 15 after 1.5 years.

Want Hobbit Movie News? Hobbit Headlines of the Week!



Carne
Tol Eressea

Oct 8 2012, 10:15pm

Post #28 of 42 (341 views)
Shortcut
Really depends on what is beheaded [In reply to] Can't Post

LOTR got away with a PG-13 rating because orcs don't count as human, and whenever there's blood coming from a creature it's usually black, so it doesn't count as blood.

I remember Empire doing an interview with PJ and Del Toro where they both said they were aiming at a hard PG-13 (ala LOTR). I don't think that has changed so I think we can expect more flying heads and limbs.

In Norway it's rated 11 which is about the same as a PG-13.


(This post was edited by Carne on Oct 8 2012, 10:18pm)


Túrin_Turambar
The Shire


Oct 8 2012, 10:44pm

Post #29 of 42 (332 views)
Shortcut
There was that scene in ROTK when the orcs catapulted the human heads into Gondor [In reply to] Can't Post

I thought that was one of the "gorier" scenes of the trilogy, but perhaps this doesn't strictly count as "beheading" as we don't actually witness the decapitation process.


Carne
Tol Eressea

Oct 8 2012, 10:48pm

Post #30 of 42 (287 views)
Shortcut
Correct [In reply to] Can't Post

And we only see dried blood.


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Oct 9 2012, 2:41am

Post #31 of 42 (275 views)
Shortcut
Some of that was pretty graphic. There were moments when I wondered if [In reply to] Can't Post

the studios had paid off the board to get that rating, considering the Lurtz scene. Then I remembered where I live, and how only harmless nudity is wicked, while gruesome violence is welcomed with open arms. Crazy Lots of orc heads, and not a shot of Arwen's lovely bum. Lol. Oh well.

I really don't see that a flying head is any better than flying guts. And orcs are certainly humanoid, even if they are not human. I hope the violence is reasonably visceral in effect, but not blatantly gruesome. And what happened to Lurtz was kinda gruesome. The Battle of The Last Alliance, I thought, was presented in a way that would be pitch perfect for The Hobbit, especially for the first film. Gritty, hard hitting, but not gory/ filled with dismemberment.

In Reply To
LOTR got away with a PG-13 rating because orcs don't count as human, and whenever there's blood coming from a creature it's usually black, so it doesn't count as blood.

I remember Empire doing an interview with PJ and Del Toro where they both said they were aiming at a hard PG-13 (ala LOTR). I don't think that has changed so I think we can expect more flying heads and limbs.

In Norway it's rated 11 which is about the same as a PG-13.


"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."


DanielLB
Immortal


Oct 9 2012, 7:06am

Post #32 of 42 (235 views)
Shortcut
Is this really true? [In reply to] Can't Post

If it's black, it doesn't count as blood? Unimpressed

Want Hobbit Movie News? Hobbit Headlines of the Week!



Silverlode
Forum Admin / Moderator


Oct 9 2012, 8:25am

Post #33 of 42 (236 views)
Shortcut
Yes, at least... [In reply to] Can't Post

it doesn't count as "real" blood, just fantasy blood, so it doesn't spike the gore meter as much.

A rating generally comes with a short listing of reasons which indicates what sort of issues merited the rating. For instance, ROTK was rated PG-13 for "intense epic battle scenes and frightening images", while other types of movies might get the same rating for swearing, "adult themes", drug/alcohol references, etc. It also depends on quantity: The King's Speech got its R rating purely on the repetition of swear words. It's an odd system in many ways.

Silverlode






Fardragon
Rohan

Oct 9 2012, 8:40am

Post #34 of 42 (234 views)
Shortcut
The King's Speech is a 12 in the UK [In reply to] Can't Post

 

A Far Dragon is the best kind...


DanielLB
Immortal


Oct 9 2012, 9:27am

Post #35 of 42 (224 views)
Shortcut
That just seems very odd to me. [In reply to] Can't Post

Surely blood is blood, whether it's red, black or blue? Silly classification system!

Want Hobbit Movie News? Hobbit Headlines of the Week!



Tim
Tol Eressea


Oct 9 2012, 2:23pm

Post #36 of 42 (198 views)
Shortcut
Eh, I can see the logic [In reply to] Can't Post

There's less realism in black blood. Heck, there's less realism in obviously fake red blood - less realism means less immersion. The kids can tell its fake, it doesn't hit the "ick" meter nearly as hard.

King Arthur: Who are you who can summon fire without flint or tinder?

Tim: There are some who call me... Tim?

King Arthur: You know much that is hidden oh Tim.

Tim: Quite.


DanielLB
Immortal


Oct 9 2012, 3:37pm

Post #37 of 42 (175 views)
Shortcut
This is true ... [In reply to] Can't Post

Suppose it makes some kind of sense. Would the Saw films have been a PG then if the blood had been green. WinkWink

Want Hobbit Movie News? Hobbit Headlines of the Week!



Silverlode
Forum Admin / Moderator


Oct 9 2012, 11:44pm

Post #38 of 42 (130 views)
Shortcut
Nah. [In reply to] Can't Post

They'd still have the "violence, frightening images and scary situations" categories to throw at it.

It's not a terribly good system for actually telling you what age people should be to watch a movie, but it can give you a little advance notice of what sort of objectionable material might be encountered, which is helpful if, for instance, you don't mind bad language or nudity but don't want to watch gore and violence, or vice versa. Of course, that's what complicates it - not everyone finds the same things objectionable, so the ratings board just objects to everything and then lets the audience sort itself out. Wink

Silverlode






AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Oct 10 2012, 12:14am

Post #39 of 42 (159 views)
Shortcut
Its a butt backwards dumb system, in many ways. [In reply to] Can't Post

Ohh, so many silly, Victorian ways. lol

In Reply To
it doesn't count as "real" blood, just fantasy blood, so it doesn't spike the gore meter as much.

A rating generally comes with a short listing of reasons which indicates what sort of issues merited the rating. For instance, ROTK was rated PG-13 for "intense epic battle scenes and frightening images", while other types of movies might get the same rating for swearing, "adult themes", drug/alcohol references, etc. It also depends on quantity: The King's Speech got its R rating purely on the repetition of swear words. It's an odd system in many ways.


"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Oct 10 2012, 12:17am

Post #40 of 42 (145 views)
Shortcut
Because in the UK there is more common sense weighting about [In reply to] Can't Post

what is corruptive and traumatic and what is not. There, beheadings = very bad, swears are taken in stride and buttocks are understood to be things that everyone has and knows the look of.

Where I live, sady, beheadings are cheer fodder, swears are heavily scrutinized (at least by the ratings boards) and buttocks can evidently make you go blind from their high sin content. lol

In Reply To


"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."

(This post was edited by AinurOlorin on Oct 10 2012, 12:18am)


Fardragon
Rohan

Oct 10 2012, 6:36am

Post #41 of 42 (132 views)
Shortcut
Oh, there can be a lack of common sense in the UK too. [In reply to] Can't Post

The BBFC is very literal. If you actually show beheadings and blood you get a high rating, but implied violence, which can be argued to be more disturbing, since the images are formed in your head, is passed without comment.

A Far Dragon is the best kind...


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Oct 11 2012, 9:15pm

Post #42 of 42 (250 views)
Shortcut
I hear you, but that makes so much more sense, even with its flaws, than [In reply to] Can't Post

the way things are handled here in my, dear, U.S.A.

"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All
 
 

Search for (options) Powered by Gossamer Forum v.1.2.3

home | advertising | contact us | back to top | search news | join list | Content Rating

This site is maintained and updated by fans of The Lord of the Rings, and is in no way affiliated with Tolkien Enterprises or the Tolkien Estate. We in no way claim the artwork displayed to be our own. Copyrights and trademarks for the books, films, articles, and other promotional materials are held by their respective owners and their use is allowed under the fair use clause of the Copyright Law. Design and original photography however are copyright © 1999-2012 TheOneRing.net. Binary hosting provided by Nexcess.net

Do not follow this link, or your host will be blocked from this site. This is a spider trap.