Ahhh... Ok. Confused me when he mentioned the Last Wolverine movie.![]()
BTW, have you watched the B&W version of Logan? (aka, the noir version)
Ahhh... Ok. Confused me when he mentioned the Last Wolverine movie.![]()
Hum, I was under the impression that up until the late sixties, any intimacy was dialed down way more than your example. Wasn't it more implied they'd slept earlier? Anyway, you are right about PG-13, though.What I've noticed about PG-13 today, is you have the equivalent of R rated movies, you are seeing significant violence, but they have been scrubbed of blood and gore, no holes cut through flesh, completely sanitized, they just fall over like it was back in the 50-60s with screen violence and sex scenes if there is a sex scene, it's in their underwear.
Now the last Wolverine was PG-13 but there was no doubt he was killing people
Check out the Honest Trailer for the original Ghostbusters.What I've noticed about PG-13 today, is you have the equivalent of R rated movies, you are seeing significant violence, but they have been scrubbed of blood and gore, no holes cut through flesh, completely sanitized, they just fall over like it was back in the 50-60s with screen violence and sex scenes if there is a sex scene, it's in their underwear.
Now the last Wolverine was PG-13 but there was no doubt he was killing people
BTW, have you watched the B&W version of Logan? (aka, the noir version)
My mistake.
Yes, you are right, somewhere in the late 60's, but when I made that statement, I was thinking of how gun fights were portrayed, not so much sex. I've recently seen those underwear clad sex scenes on tv shows.Hum, I was under the impression that up until the late sixties, any intimacy was dialed down way more than your example. Wasn't it more implied they'd slept earlier? Anyway, you are right about PG-13, though.
Oh, yep, you're right. I saw way too many westerns as a kid. Don't recall blood being a major special effects.My mistake.I will say that in X-Men 2 (PG-13), he was making the same kind of moves sinking is claws into the chests of the bad guys.
[doublepost=1505521709][/doublepost](PG-13
Yes, you are right, somewhere in the late 60's, but when I made that statement, I was thinking of how gun fights were portrayed, not so much sex. I've recently seen those underwear clad sex scenes on tv shows.
They liked or disliked it,,, the original, not the remake.Check out the Honest Trailer for the original Ghostbusters.
I am talking about the PG-13 part.They liked or disliked it,,, the original, not the remake.
PG-13 was tame compared to today?I am talking about the PG-13 part.
You could just watch the video.PG-13 was tame compared to today?
You could just watch the video.
Products assuredly of the future.I just have to see BR, but the reports of product placement put me off.
I read there's a lot of Sony in it.Products assuredly of the future.i’m probably not the best to judge, but I don’t remember any specifically so I guess I was not bothered by them.
Not to mention there are viable ways to enjoy something that feels like the movie going experience without the expense of seeing individual movies especially on dates or heaven forbid, a family of 4!Movie prices suck. Movies suck. Concession prices suck.
It all adds up
I still like the movie experience, I just don't like the movie expense, and you're right the amount of decent movies out there is minimal to say the leastNot to mention there are viable ways to enjoy something that feels like the movie going experience without the expense of seeing individual movies especially on dates or heaven forbid, a family of 4!60 and 70 “ TVs have dropped a lot in price. They say people don’t go to the movies anymore just to see any movie, but have specific titles, and frankly a large number of recently movies are just not worth seeing. I’ve had better luck with TV cable series.
I prefer the full size screens, but in many of the multiplexes, many of the screens are the smaller version.I still like the movie experience, I just don't like the movie expense, and you're right the amount of decent movies out there is minimal to say the least
I read there's a lot of Sony in it.
Yes, that critique was an exaggeration. There was product placement, but it was cool when the brand was not obvious from its current presence in the market.Giant corporate logos and prevalent advertising are part of BR's original spirit and look. This is carried over into 2049, and indeed one of the buildings has a giant Sony logo. But I don't feel that it detracted from the movie at all.