Return of the Jedi rating changed over violence
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c629dw628y5o
shareYup. BBFC guidelines have changed substantially over the last half a century. They've been massively liberalised at higher certificates (15, 18) and become more stringent at the lower certificates.
Because regular public consultations over the last twenty-five years have consistently shown that's what British audiences -- and especially parents -- want from them.
Empire is also PG now (SW'77 is still U) also the OG Indiana Jones trilogy are now 12 (originally PG)
On the flip side likes of Alien, Terminator, Predator, Total Recall were all originally 18 but have been downgraded to 15 (idk how any of those could ever be a 15 the violence, gore, horror levels)
Yeah. And I think Ghostbusters went from PG to 12A too. (Sex references and smoking, I think -- the latter of which was of no concern whatsoever to audiences in 1984.) Times have changed. I get it: I think anyone watching Ghostbusters in 2024 raises an eyebrow at a PG certificate at least once during the films.
idk how any of those could ever be a 15 the violence, gore, horror levels
You say that, but I'm willing to bet you saw all of those films before you were 18, right? Most of us did. I think they're perfect for teenage audiences.
share
On the flip side likes of Alien, Terminator, Predator, Total Recall were all originally 18 but have been downgraded to 15 (idk how any of those could ever be a 15 the violence, gore, horror levels)
15 is the correct rating for 80s action films like those ones. By the age of 15 you are more than ready to watch those types of movies, especially with the things you're dealing with at that time in your life. Most people I knew had watched these types of films years before 15. It's a rite of passage as a kid to watch a movie made for grown ups.
The 15 rating is basically the equivalent of the American R-Rating, it's nothing.
The 18 rating, what should be the UK's equivalent of the NC-17, should only have been reserved for the 'video nasties' that had the UK public in a blind panic in the 90s. Stuff like Child's Play, Evil Dead, Natural Born Killers, Cannibal Holocaust. Films that are not just violent, but incredibly disturbing and can thus have an influence on weak minded viewers who might try and act them out (which is sadly what happened on a few occasions). share
Aliens is still rated 18 which is strange as Alien is the more horror yet was rerated from 18 to 15, maybe it was deemed more intense as its like Alien on steroids and verging on a 'video nasty'?
Alien 3 is also rerated as 15, but Resurrection remains 18 (very gory)
According to their websiite, Alien was last submitted for classification in 2019. On the other hand, Aliens (weirdly) has not been submitted since 1998. That'll be the reason. The moment it's resubmitted by the distributor, it'll drop to 15.
Alien mustve been resubmitted for its 40th anniversary rerelease (when was probably rereleased nationwide), maybe Aliens hadn't been rereleased on a big scale yet? . which would require it to be resubmitted to bbfc? . Maybe
shareAh, yeah, that'll be it.
I'm not entirely sure about the rules of when a film needs to be resubmitted. I thought -- for theatrical exhibition -- it was only when it was re-cut. But I'm probably wrong about that. And I'm too idle to look it up right now. But you'll be right about it being resubmitted for the 40th anniversary re-release. So presumably Aliens will become a 15 in 2026?
---
Edit: Oh hold on, I'm an idiot. The distributors will have resubmitted Alien in 2019 even though they didn't legally have to because they knew that under the 2019 guidelines, it would likely get a 15... thereby increasing the potential audience. Mystery solved...
Aliens is still rated 18 which is strange as Alien is the more horror yet was rerated from 18 to 15, maybe it was deemed more intense as its like Alien on steroids and verging on a 'video nasty'?
Alien 3 is also rerated as 15, but Resurrection remains 18 (very gory)
Kane being killed is more disturbing and gruesome than the whole of Aliens put together.
Is Rambo III still an 18? I can't believe that got an 18 while First Blood I & II were 15. The funny thing is that the BBFC gave Rambo III an 18 after cutting out three mins of violence (thanks to Michael Ryan's gun rampage in 1987 which the tabloids blamed on First Blood). What was left was pretty much a PG action movie with all the cuts and they still gave it an 18 haha. share
Rambo are still the same. First Blood I & II are 15, Rambo III is 18 (as is IV/V)
shareThat's crazy haha. No way is Rambo III more violent than II. Must be the scenes of the horses falling over.
Is the rat being drowned in The Abyss still cut?
I saw The Abyss last year at the theater for its November 2023 re-release and I think the scene was in the movie. That liquid they used is a coolant called Fluorinert. I worked at a company once that used that to test the waterproofing of optical transceivers by submerging them in it.
shareAre you in North America? The rat drowning scene has always been banned in the UK. The censors just have never been convinced that the rat wasn't suffering when it was submerged and thus it's never been featured in any theatrical or home release.
That liquid they used is a coolant called Fluorinert. I worked at a company once that used that to test the waterproofing of optical transceivers by submerging them in it.
That's interesting. I'm sure many viewers watching the Abyss thought that it was real breathing liquid being used.
share
Nightmare on Elm Street was showing over Halloween. It now has a 15 rating.
I'd love to see a list of changes.
I'd love to see a list of changes.
They only change certificates when the films are resubmitted by the distributors. Return of the Jedi, for example, was resubmitted in April, shortly after the new guidelines came into force.
A Nightmare on Elm Street was resubmitted in 2024.
So there's no big list of changes, but the information for individual submissions is available on the BBFC website under each title. share
Now that's just ridiculous! Raiders of the Lost Ark is a heck of a lot more graphically violent than Return of the Jedi! Then again they edit out the violence in our rated R American movies to make them appropriate for teenagers which I also feel is dumb.
shareThe MPAA in the U.S. also rates all Disney movies PG now. They seem to have retired the G rating (intended for all audiences) for the most part.
shareI may be wrong, but doesn't the MPA work in a similar way to the BBFC? So if Disney (or any other distributor) submits a film to them, the MPA tells them 'Well, that's a PG in its current form. If you make this cut and that cut, we could reduce it to a G.' And then Disney decides if it wants to cut the film or not.
So isn't it Disney that has given up on the G?
Or is that the MPA has just basically said 'almost nothing is a G any more, because we think parents should decide what's right for their children / don't want to take the flak from parents who disagree'?
There is an argument to be made that as the internet has given people more violence, gore and sex in abundance and easier accessibility than ever before, movies that don't include any of those elements just don't hold our interest anymore.
It's ironic that the G rating has come to elicit a public bias similar to the NC-17 (formerly X) aka 18, and movies with a G carry marketing problems similar to movies attached to the latter rating; parents don't want to take their kids to see NC-17 movies because they're too adult and they don't want to take them to see G-rated movies because there is nothing adult.