MovieChat Forums > Run All Night (2015) Discussion > Very soft R but fairly entertaining

Very soft R but fairly entertaining


In case you were wondering 95% of the gunplay is bloodless; not even a sprinkle of poor quality CGI never mind squibs and there is no shaky cam but a bit of slo-mo. The use of a .357 is odd, Neeson's revolver never recoils (was he shooting .38's?, unlikely) and at least once in the pub scene it fires 7 times not 6. Rest of the film is serviceable, typical mix of thriller/action. I have a suspicion this would have been a lot better if they just copied Crank. A few frames nipped and tucked and dialogue adjustments and its PG-13. This was definitely shot with an R-rating in mind though - there are no quickcuts. Bottom line, OK.

reply

Hmm, Why?     

If there's hardly any blood, they might as well made it PG-13. Too bad.

reply

The themes and the way it is shot. Its not just dark and gritty its plain dark. And shots are point blank, even lacking squibs.

reply

I give it an R rating due to thr "revolting" hip hop rubbish that is played behind the promo!
Hollyweird must think that the Irish and Italians do not have beautiful,distinct cultures.
The "brainwash is so heavy.....my Lord!
During one of Steely Dan's many fine studio recordings......it goes something like this{Babylon Sisters} "turn that jungle music down....least until we're out of town."
Is anyone with me on this....Irish Music from all ages PLAY IT!

reply

What the *beep* are you talking about

reply

Also the language makes it an R rating.

reply

I think the violence while not incredibly bloody, was brutal enough to warrant an R rating.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

I remember several times where people were shot in the head and you can see chunks fly out or in the end of the movie a fairly large splatter shoots out. The movie definitely wasn't a hard R but some of the stuff in there definitely warranted it.

www.last.fm/user/Muinaiset

reply

I thought it was extremely violent. If that wasn't a hard R than I don't know what is.

Dini

reply

felt like an R movie to me. constant profanity throughout and gunshots to the head with blood spurting out will do that





And whenever they catch you, they will kill you. But first, they must catch you...

reply

I thought the material warranted an R rating. We're not talking The Raid 2 levels of violence here, but it was brutal enough. I thought Collet-Sera and Neeson's first collaboration, Unknown, would have benefited from an R rating. Non-Stop (my favorite of their films together) worked just fine as a PG-13 action/mystery thriller.

reply

Agree with much of the other comments. Definitely not a soft R at all. It was very dark and violent. I have seen NC-17 films which were lighter in tone and no more violent, such as "Back in Action (1993)".

reply

A moronic film, better to see one of the films which it ripped off, particularly The Raid.

reply

Nope. And The Raid was just idiotic, in my opinion but if you liked The Raid, I can see why you wouldn't like this.

I don't love her.. She kicked me in the face!!

reply

Dude, this movie is a HARD R all the way

reply

I'm so *beep* glad it didn't become a victim of the PG-13 plague

reply

This is very far from being a "soft" R. Not sure what movie you watched.

reply

Apparently if a movie doesn't show explicit torture and have people explode like water balloons when injured it's "soft". Realistic violence doesn't look nearly as bloody as how most movies portray it. This one errs on the side of realism, at the other end of the spectrum you have ridiculous bloodbaths like Ninja Assassin or Django Unchained.

reply