The Mummy: BIG Rating Mistake [Archive] - The ComingSoon.net Boards

rayzor09

10-31-2003, 11:26 PM

Minor Spoilers Herein, but nothing that effects the story.

I just saw The Mummy for the first time last night, though I've seen TMR last December. All I have to say is: This movie should've been rated R. The parts with the beetle were disturbing (two guys had one under their skin and Imhotep ate one). Not to mention how many limbs were squished and ripped apart.

droidguy1119

11-01-2003, 01:58 AM

What are you talking about?

PG-13 gets away with a lot, and the Mummy movies are definitely not the kinds of movies pushing the limits.

From what I used to know, a PG-13 was allowed one usage of the F-word. That was until I saw Hollywood Homicide, a PG-13 that has five of them, most of them uttered in the same sequence (the chase). It's not a trick of the ears -- they're all in the subtitles.

The Lord of the Rings movies contain beheadings and lots of violent swordfights. Some of the violence is pretty out there. In fact, the Star Wars prequels contain bodies being sliced in half, and beheadings, and they recieve PG classifcation.

While the beetles are a trademark, they're not that bad -- just sort of visually disturbing. It's a lump. Psychologically, it has an effect. Likewise (and I don't know what "limbs" you refer to), but whenever mummified Imhotep gets shot, the stuff that flies off isn't gross, it's more like shooting dried leaves or something -- dusty goes everywhere.

There are a few makeup effects that are kind of gross, but basically it's not worse than The Ring, for example.

While I haven't seen either of them in awhile (they're both sort of average, although the second is worse), I remember the second being more violent than the first. Do you have the same problem with that movie?