How R rated is it? - The Jerk (1979) Discussion

[–] BogleMcNeep 21 years ago

No idea. There is no nudity (apart from Steve Martins Bum), no f words, and no violence.

There is a reference to Iron Balls McGinty though.....

"We want the finest wines available to humanity, we want them here, and we want them now"!

reply

[–] Whoah10115 21 years ago

At the time the film was released, there were only two ratings: PG and R(Maybe there was G, but this obviously wouldn't be a G anyway). There was no PG-13. They probably found it to be more R than PG and went with R. But that's odd. Reds, a great film by Warren Beatty released in 1981, was PG. There were a few F words(Two or three in one scene that were used in a sexual manner), a love scene that had Diane Keaton on top(But it was dark, and you couldn't see anything). That film could be an R today, but it was PG back then. And there were films like Midnight Cowboy and Last Tango In Paris which were definite R films and still would be today, but they were rated X...Extreme...But that's where the MPAA has remained consistent...They're still very inconsistent.

reply

[–] 21 years ago

[deleted]

[–] GreenGoblinsOckVenom86 15 years ago

I've seen this movie a few times and can't understand how it got an R. The cussing in it was PG. And there was that sex scene (but you only heard it and didn't see it). That isn't an R. How did it get rated R? I don't remember anything bad enough in it to get an R rating.

Kelloway: Doyle, get in the car.
Doyle: But I ordered Onion Rings.
Kelloway: Doyle!

reply

[–] RobBase086-1 13 years ago

Let's just say it is a mystery and boggles the mind about how this film got rated R back then.

Dedicated to USA UP ALL NIGHT and the fans! http://usaupallnight.webs.com

reply

[–] ShannonTriumphant 14 years ago

Great answer! I'm shocked Reds wasn't RE-rated R, due to its sympathy for communism (a big no-no these days, and even back in '81, unlike the glory days of the 1960's!). You forgot the nude swimming scene at the Cape, with Diane (Louise) and Jack Nicholson (Eugene O'Neill) and the nude photos of (the actual) Louise Bryant. What a film, though!

She deserves her revenge, and we deserve to die.

reply

[–] RobBase086-1 13 years ago

That is why I miss the glory days of when "Politically Correctness" did not exist. To a certain degree it has helped make some things betterwalong with understanding certain views and topics, but in other ways it has destroyed on how you can say something to someone and their feelings will be hurt because you cannot say it now.

Dedicated to USA UP ALL NIGHT and the fans! http://usaupallnight.webs.com

reply

[–] RobBase086-1 13 years ago

You are correct about the rating system back then because there were 4 ratings back then you had your G rating which were pretty much like they have now, the PG rating was the next step with nudity in the films back in the day, rated R movies, and they had the XXX rated pornos. The PG-13 rating did not come to existence until 1984. That was when the MPAA created that rating. The PG rating no longer had any nudity in a film after MPAA created PG-13 for a rating. I was just 7 years old at the time when this film came out in 1979. I agree with you that the MPAA is inconsistent with their rating system.

Dedicated to USA UP ALL NIGHT and the fans! http://usaupallnight.webs.com

reply

[–] RobBase086-1 13 years ago

You have to consider that back in 1979 things were looked at a lot differently than how they are now. I mean there was violence in the film when the old detective is using the sniper riffle to try to kill Steve Martins character and then the biker chick who is threatening Steve Martin on dating another woman.

Dedicated to USA UP ALL NIGHT and the fans! http://usaupallnight.webs.com

reply

[–] bill_pummell 21 years ago

By today's standards this is barely PG-13 material.
Heck, it's not even close to "Chapelle Show" (which I love, BTW) racy.

reply

[–] DavidLynchVelvet 21 years ago

should be pg-13 for

Language, Sex Content, Drug Use

"Wakie Wakie....Eggs and Bakie"- Budd aka Sidewinder

reply

[–] schwinginbatman 20 years ago

and didn't he call his dog sh*thead or something?

reply

[–] FirsTimeFailure 20 years ago

There were also some sexual situations with Pattie. Every scene with her (or regarding her) had something to do with sex (except the brawl).

reply

[–] RobBase086-1 13 years ago

I would have to say by todays standards it would be a PG rating. It is not as strong of situations like you might think of other things. It does have the sex scene, but all you hear is the noises though in that sense though.

Dedicated to USA UP ALL NIGHT and the fans! http://usaupallnight.webs.com

reply

[–] Kirex 20 years ago

See the movie again. When Navin was working in the gas station, the car full of criminals had a guy in the back smoking a joint.

reply

[–] irishrichy 20 years ago

That's a pretty tame drug use.

Life Moves pretty Fast. If you don't stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it.

reply

[–] bondfool-1 19 years ago

If there was a ratin between PG-13 and R it would be that.

reply

[–] coolbeans45 16 years ago

its just R for the n word and some sex references. same as blazing saddles

reply

[–] kincaid67a 16 years ago

I saw the movie when I was 12 back in 1979 and I remember asking my mom why it was rated R. Even back then I didn't think it was that bad.

reply

[–] captlupin 16 years ago

Its because of the cat juggling scene even though it was faked for the film it still shows the horror of real cat juggling

reply

[–] mgm33 16 years ago

It definitely was because of the cat juggling!

;-)

reply

[–] dioro 14 years ago

Yes, they would never get away with this today - the SPCA would never let them.

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] RenMartin2412 16 years ago

Plus there was a mention of a "B low Job" in the letter that Navin sent to his folks. So that word alone might not fly in a PG-13 film.

Bullets! My only weakness. How did you know?

reply

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] jrb2111991 16 years ago

Airplane has nudity, constant use of the word S***, someone snorting coke, someone sniffing glue, someone taking amphetamines, a turd being thrown into a fan, an oral sex scene, and probably more stuff I'm forgetting, and that was rated PG. I don't get how this is rated worse than Airplane

reply

[–] Fig_Neutron 14 years ago

Yeah, I just watched Airplane with my 13-year-old nephew on On-Demand...Yikes, bare boobies! I told him if anyone asks, we watched it on regular edited TV.

I figured I'd better check up on this one first then. Agreed, sounds tamer than Airplane, so this should be a go.

And thanks everyone for the info. It's been eons since I've seen these.

reply

[–] itssosublime 14 years ago

The 70's was a long, strange trip for the people at the MPAA, apparently. Drug use was rarely depicted in films at the time, aside from marijuana, which was openly tolerated anyway. But the heavy innuendo and gratuitous female nudity (breasts were seemingly the latest craze!) was quite astonishing. I suppose they had trouble keeping track of these trends, while also keeping the pulse of the American public - and of course ogling every pair of knockers in sight! In this case, an R seems absurd, without a doubt. Even for the time this film really wasn't overtly hedonistic or offensive, in general to an overwhelming majority of the country.

Come on s*ithead(s)! =)

reply

[–] gtrz 15 years ago

I watched this movie last night for the first time in many, many years. It was also the first time I had ever seen the unedited version (I always thought Navin Johnson's dog's name was Stupid...I couldn't believe he was calling it Sh**head).
There is no way that this movie today would get an R rating.
Since there was no PG-13 in 1979, there were just too many instances of cursing as well as a few sexual references to give it a PG back then.
If it had been released a few years later, it would no doubt have been assigned a PG-13.

reply

[–] AnotherSchmoe 15 years ago

I just saw it for the first time, if it were made today it would be rated PG-13.

http://www.youtube.com/anotherschmoe

reply

[–] adfive 15 years ago

if i recall , the "N" word is used on about 3 occasions.

into the mud, scum queen !!

reply

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] gtrz 14 years ago

In 1979 spelling out (or saying) the "N" word wasn't considered as big of a deal as it is today.
If memory serves, I think it was around the mid to maybe late 90s that it was decided (by a conference of black leaders somewhere) that that word needed to be censored more thoroughly.
I remember the media giving it heavy coverage for a few days...and almost overnight...it became the "N" word.

That might have some bearing on its rating today, but if it came out 15-20 years ago, it would have received a PG-13 rating.

reply

[–] tgibbs279 14 years ago

1) Repeated use of the word "s--thead," and the s-word at least once by Bill Macy at the gas station.
2) Two uses of g.d. (Navin's dad, at the dinner table, after Navin left home, and Gailard Sartain -- the man who wanted money to fix the cracked vinyl seats on his airplane.)
3) One use of the word 'b---job.'
4) Visible marijuana use.
5) Implication of sex. (In Patty's trailer.)
6) A few uses of the n-word.

Separately, none of these things would merit an 'R' rating in 1979. Taken together, they obviously did -- at least to the MPAA at the time.
I agree with those who say today this movie would be PG-13 or maybe even PG.

reply

[–] mattiasflgrtll6 11 years ago

Saying *beep* in a movie today still doesn't give it an R-rating. "White Chicks" used the word a few times and it was still rated PG-13. It's not THAT controversial.

reply

[–] SepiaLife 14 years ago

It shows how desensitized we've become in such a short period of time. The Jerk is considered very tame by today's standards, but at its release I presume it was considered pretty provocative.

Optimism: Waiting for a ship to come in when you haven't sent one out.

reply

[–] soneil12 14 years ago

I can never understand the ratings system in the US. Seem to be a lot of movies that are rated R there but not rated R in other places. I've let my kid watch it and didn't have a problem with them seeing it. I'd never let them watch an R or even MA movie normally. There's a few jokes in there that make sexual references that younger kids wouldn't even understand and that's it (such as a reference to a blow job and outside shots of a rocking van). If anything it should probably be borderline PG.

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] funnyguyla 14 years ago

Another thing that hasn't been mention is Patty calling the Bernadette Peter's character a "gash", which is another term for the C-word. I think if it weren't for the Patty character, it probably would have gotten a PG.

reply

[–] hustlegrustle94 10 years ago

Richard Pryor, used the word "p***y" (in sexual context), in Silver Streak and that was rated PG! Of course it was the mid 70's though.

reply

[–] ellisdtripp 13 years ago

In the 1970s marijuana use was accepted, if not glorified in some circles, these days people have gotten decades in prison for simple possession. This would have never happened in the 1970s.

John Sinclair got 10 years for 2 joints. And Tim Leary got 30 years for a roach in his car's ashtray...

reply

[–] omoxus 13 years ago

Today's standards, it'd be PG-13 (if a rating existed just aboe that)for language. Several usages of the dog's name, made it rated R.

Im the Alpha and the Omoxus. The Omoxus and the Omega

reply