Is it really bloody?
is it?
shareNo, not really. There's some fighting, but no gore or blood really.
shareActually there is. When they`re searching for the 'rebel' group of natives, and come across their hiding places with the rotting bodies covered in flies.
And during the war scene, Colombus speared a guy coming at him, with the result that the guy spewed bloody foam and made disgusting, gutteral noises.
Really over the top, and definitely the moment you quit eating your popcorn or hotdog! Bleah!
~Bow-Twang!
To tell you the truth, I'm a little surprised the aforementioned scene didn't help get "1492" an 'R' rating. I remember sitting there in the theater thinking there was quite a bit of blood-letting in the movie.
I'm reminded of the "PG" rated version of "Excalibur". How did that "toned-down" version squeak by with a "PG"?
Of course, the MPAA was okay with the dipiction of female nudity in "1492" on the contextual grounds of the Native-American state-of-dress. Thus, "PG-13" . . .
Cheers,
~ MC2
"The reservist formerly known as JO2"
I agree MC2-Bjornson. I found this film more violent than many R rated films I have seen. The strangling/burning of people was enough for an R in my opinion, and to mention the bloody battles of slow-motion blood sprays, particularly when the one soldier is shot repeatedly in the head.
shareIs there anyone who actually cares about the mpaa rating system? That commission is the most obsolete thing ever. The witch burning was much too intense for a PG-13.
shareLet's see...
Strangled people burned at the stake
An indian gets his hand chopped off
Someone gets shot in the face by an arrow
There's a pile of decapitated rotten heads
A village has cannibalized torsos hanging from ceilings
Columbus stabs an indian over and over and gets covered in blood
A soldier gets shot in the head twice with blood and brains flying out
Killed miners hang from ropes, one has a chopped off leg
Someone jumps off a cliff and breaks his leg, you see the bone sticking out
I probably missed some. There are also shots of topless women...yeah I don't know how this movie wasn't rated R.
I went back and watched a bunch of Ridley Scott's films this past week. I was SHOCKED how violent this movie is. Theres no way this shouldnt be rated R. Im all for allowing violence in PG-13 movies, and I think the MPAA tends to rate things higher than they should be....this is not one of those. Ive seen much less graphic violence in R rated movies before...
Heres the headshot others have mentioned...
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v477/ckybltz/1492.jpg
They're filmin' something. They're filmin' midgets!!
[deleted]