MovieChat Forums > The Final Girls (2015) Discussion > The studio screwed this movie over.

The studio screwed this movie over.

posted 9 years ago by honeymoonavenue
8 replies | jump to latest

First of all, they told the director to tone down the violence for a PG-13 rating, which really took away a lot of the impact. This movie was spectacular but imagine how wildly crowdpleasing and amazing it would have been to add good-old-fashioned gore. I have no problem with horror films being PG-13 (despite what most people think, gore just doesn't fit in with some horror movies and audiences just want it unnecessarily forced in), but slashers should NEVER be toned down for a PG-13.

When it is blatantly obvious that a film is limiting itself and cutting away from the most exciting moments in an unnatural way just to achieve a PG-13 rating, it really hurts the film. Gore can really set the tone for a movie and impact/emphasize the entire viewing experience. Luckily, there were many other elements that helped carry out this film, but some bloody sequences would have definitely made a perfect viewing experience.

And in the end, there was absolutely ZERO point in toning down this film for a wider audience because it didn't even get a wide theatrical release. This film didn't benefit in any way from its PG-13 rating and it actually held the film back from being a 100% satisfying experience.

Even if it was released theatrically, I don't think it would have benefitted from a PG-13 rating. R-rated horror is hot right now. And I don't think younger audiences would be able to truly appreciate this film as an homage and satire of the slasher genre. And I think that younger audiences don't quite "get" horror comedies and just want a serious, generic horror movie that is "scary". Tweens and teens go to horror movies to be scared and feel rebellious, and I doubt that many would be satisfied with a movie that focused on other elements that didn't involve cheap scares.

This film deserved a wide release. Even with a PG-13 rating. The effort, skill, production values, and effects immensely exceed that of any horror film this year. After all the work and money that was put into this film (this looks like a $20-$30 million production), the studio truly screwed this one over, which is sadly happening more frequently with horror films thanks to stupid-ass VOD and such. I'm surprised, but grateful that Krampus got a wide release because these days, horror films have to fall under a certain criteria to be released theatrically. And that criteria usually is bland and generic.

[–] americanhorrorstoryfanfa 9 years ago

Can't agree more. I waited over a year for this film, to be disappointed by a VOD/limited release. PG-13, or R. It deserved a wide release.

[–] lupitag-11852 9 years ago

I think they were wise to release it on VOD. It was just painfully unfunny and 90% of the jokes fell flat. I think audiences would have felt underwhelmed if they paid theater prices for it.

[–] HellJacket 9 years ago

@ honey

First of all, they told the director to tone down the violence for a PG-13 rating, which really took away a lot of the impact. This movie was spectacular but imagine how wildly crowdpleasing and amazing it would have been to add good-old-fashioned gore.

I don't think an R-rating or gore would have adding anything to the movie. The only thing about gore is that, based on how it was advertised, I thought this would be a standard over-the-top horror comedy, where gore would make sense. However, since it was nothing like that, there's really no reason for the gore. If anything, gore would have distracted the audience from the emotional connections among the characters. For starters, the characters make you feel they are in a horror film, and not just a horror comedy. Adding over-the-top gore would probably detract from that believability.

Please Note: The above post should be read in Roger Rabbit's voice.

[–] Dan_Garten 9 years ago

This is a slasher homage. Not just gore, but also nudity and language.

Considering this was a low-budget, VOD affair, PG-13 made even less sense.

[–] HellJacket 9 years ago

@ Dan

This is a slasher homage.

Only tangentially. The movie is closer to Wizard of Oz than it is a slasher homage or parody. Really, it's a dramedy about a girl coming to terms with he scream queen mother's death.

Please Note: The above post should be read in Roger Rabbit's voice.

[–] cdjunkee-1 8 years ago

The lack of gore makes sense. Many Slasher movies of the 80's were cut to shreds by the MPAA. (Especially the "Friday the 13th" films and "My Bloody Valentine")

[–] Crow550 8 years ago

Well it was Sony that suggested the PG13 rating according to the Trivia.

Sony so enough said....

*Cough* Spider-Man 3 & the Amazing Spider-Man films. *Cough* Ghostbusters remake. *Cough*

At least the film still turned out well.

The Director had a hell of a time getting this made.

Still weird to make a homage to 80s slasher films which the fans would most likely be Adults and be rated PG13 but oh well.

Luckily it still works if you think how bad the MPAA was in the 80s / early 90s.

I mean Army Of Darkness got slapped with an NC17 rating for a few scenes then was rated R.... Army Of Darkness....

[–] cdjunkee-1 8 years ago

I was kinda hoping they would've made a joke about the violence being toned down in the Movie world . But it probably would've been cheesy.

~Keep on Trucking!~