Is The G Rating Nearing Extinction In Animated Films?

[SweetShop209]

With the reveal that the My Little Pony Movie got a PG rating despite the show sporting a TV-Y rating, reception was rather divided.

There were those who know that this movie is meant to appeal not just to kids and fans, but the movie going audience in general, and that a PG rating will attract the largest crowd of kids and adults possible. We all know about the negative connotation of the G rating, and how executives seem to think of it as strictly for kids instead of just not excluding them as an audience.

On the flip side, there are people who believe the rating system is broken, that a G rating can still be pretty epic and scary at times, and that the actual show can get away with plenty of scary content with its usual rating.

This is definitely not an uncommon debate, as I've heard people talking about whether films like Tangled, Big Hero 6, and The Boxtrolls should've been G's or stayed PG. Heck, some of the lighter PG films are given the equivalent of G ratings in other countries.

What do I think? Well, theoretically speaking, if a preschool show (like say, Sofia The First) got a theatrical film rated PG despite the show's TV-Y rating , then I'd truly believe that the G rating is pretty much gone. Since something like that hasn't happened, I'd just call the G rating falling out of fashion, but still within the realm of possibility of being used regularly in the future again.

What do you think? Do you think the G rating is pretty much gone? Or do you think it can make a huge comeback? Share your thoughts below.

 

[Dr.Pepper]

I really wish there were more G rated movies. Movies like Moana, Finding Dory, Frozen, and Minions contain nothing I found inappropriate for young kids. I think it's pretty much gone other than documentaries or stuff intended very young children. Just for the record I think Tangled should be G and Box Trolls and Big Hero 6 should stay PG.

 

[ToonJay723]

I think the MPAA needs to reevaluate how they rate movies, because they way they do it now doesn't make any sense.

There are movies like Frozen, and Moana with nothing remotely objectionable in it, yet they are rated PG. Then there are films like Cars 2 with guns and characters being tortured to death that is rated G.

The PG-13 rating is the biggest mess of them all. You have family friendly PG-13 movies like Harry Potter, the new Star Wars trilogy, and the MCU, while you also have PG-13 movies that aren't aimed at a family audience like the first three DCEU films, Dunkirk, 10 Cloverfield Lane. Also, it seems like a movie that could've been rated PG-13 gets an R rating, just because they used an F-bomb twice.

Sorry, if it sounded like I went off-topic, I needed to say this to get to my point. Since it seems like there's two different types of films that can be rated PG-13 (family friendly, and actual 13+ content), and the G rating is rarely being used at all, the MPAA should just move things downward. So my ratings would be like this.

G (family friendly, with no objectionable content): Frozen, Finding Dory, Moana, Storks
PG (family friendly, with content some might find objectionable): The MCU films, The Force Awakens, Fantastic Beasts, Wonder Woman

And the upper ratings would be fine after that.

Also, I looked up how many films were rated G in 2016, and only three were. Two of which were documentaries. And only two films in 2017 were rated G. Cars 3 and another documentary. So yeah, the G rating is pretty much dead. The only thing that could help is the MAPP changing their attitudes about rating movies.

 

[Gear3dGryph0n]

The G rating is less relevant today because the film ratings system is intrinsically broken. The MPAA film ratings board has never truly represented the needs of the moviegoing public. It is a trade group representing the Big Six studios. The film ratings process is accordingly carried out behind closed doors by people who are barely known to and do not necessarily represent the audiences for whom they guide with film ratings. It also leads to such pointless and debilitating curiosities such as PG-13's one-f*** rule and graphic violence being treated with a lighter hand than language.

Likewise, film ratings being bumped up has always been used as a marketing tool. The most infamous example is the X rating having been pimped out so much that it needed to be replaced with the NC-17 designation. On the animation side, the PG trend arguably started with the edgy humor of Shrek and continued to the point where it's now so meaningless that G is virtually stigmatized as being only for kids. Also consider the fact that we have tie-in merchandise from PG-13 films targeting kids as young as elementary school age on a regular basis now.

The ratings system has also been used as a tool to exact Hollywood's dominance over the film industry and theater operators. There's been a noticed bias against independent and LGBT filmmakers in the system, and most major chains will not run NC-17 films on threat of having films by MPAA member studios pulled.

So to answer the main question, the G rating pretty much is irrelevant. All the MPAA film ratings are irrelevant. People should wake up to the lack of transparency and inherent bias of the MPAA system and make their decisions based on word of mouth and critical thinking, rather than what a board that meets behind closed doors and is on Big Media's payroll thinks.

 

[Dr.Pepper]

The PG-13 rating is the biggest mess of them all. You have family friendly PG-13 movies like Harry Potter, the new Star Wars trilogy, and the MCU, while you also have PG-13 movies that aren't aimed at a family audience like the first three DCEU films, Dunkirk, 10 Cloverfield Lane. Also, it seems like a movie that could've been rated PG-13 gets an R rating, just because they used an F-bomb twice.

It seems like you are describing soft PG-13 and hard PG-13. I still think that more often than not "soft" PG-13 movies are best only for older kids. Sure a 10-year-old is going to get that the violence in a Marvel movie is unreal, but would a five-year-old? Not really. I cannot tell you the number of times I have had the kids that I work with punch each other while playing and say something like "that's what Batman did to Superman" (which I know is DC, but that was a real life example). Also some of the Marvel movies have crude content. Call me a prude but, I have a hard time considering giving the finger or calling somebody an "a--hole" to be family friendly.

 

[Fone Bone]

The MPAA ratings are the biggest hustle in Hollywood. The big studios ask the MPAA to give them a preferred rating (say a Frozen with nothing bad in it that's rated PG, or a Lord of the Rings film rated PG-13 despite some R rated beheadings) and they always deliver. But the ratings tell parents nothing. What the hell is a "thematic element"?

Bryan Fuller, who executive produced the TV show Hannibal, had an interesting observation on how permissive TV and movies have become with graphic violence, while becoming even stricter with nudity and sex scenes. He said society is entirely messed up when showing something horrible is fine, but showing something beautiful is objectionable.

The MPAA's biggest problem is that they don't rate movies based on what would upset kids. They rate them based on what would upset parents. Which is precisely why the system is as broken as it is.

 

[ToonJay723]

It seems like you are describing soft PG-13 and hard PG-13. I still think that more often than not "soft" PG-13 movies are best only for older kids. Sure a 10-year-old is going to get that the violence in a Marvel movie is unreal, but would a five-year-old? Not really. I cannot tell you the number of times I have had the kids that I work with punch each other while playing and say something like "that's what Batman did to Superman" (which I know is DC, but that was a real life example). Also some of the Marvel movies have crude content. Call me a prude but, I have a hard time considering giving the finger or calling somebody an "a--hole" to be family friendly.

Well "objectionable content" would imply that it's not appropriate for five year olds. And there would be content descriptors along with the rating that would help parents see what kind of objectionable content is in the movie, and decide for themselves if their child is mature enough to watch it.

Speaking of content descriptors, they need to be overhauled too. Crude Humor? Rude Humor? Intense Science-Fiction Terror? Content descriptors need to be more specific about what's in the movie without using vague terminology.

 

[AdrenalineRush1996]

I think the MPAA needs to restructure their rating system because of this.

Sent from my LG-H850 using Tapatalk

 

[TnAdct1]

Definitely would agree that the lack of G rated animated films is due to how screwed up the rating system has been in recent years (with PG becoming the new G and PG-13 basically becoming a mix of films of films that would have been PG before the the 21st Century and bonafide PG-13 flicks). There's still a few films in which the rating is done right by 1980's and 1990's standards (the G rating for The Peanuts Movie, the PG rating for Hidden Figures). However, with more studios pushing for a higher rating in order to appeal to a certain audience, the ratings system does begin to feel like a big joke.

 

[SpaceCowboy]

How does the stigma of the G rating compare to similar ratings in other countries such as Canada and the UK? Has the U rating developed the same connotation in the UK, as being associated with films for small children or is still used for general audiences?

Also, are those systems more affective at properly rating films compared to the American system? Should the R be split into separate 15 and 18 ratings, like in the UK and Japan? It would be a good way to retire the NC-17, while not eliminating that category entirely.

 

[TnAdct1]

Also, are those systems more affective at properly rating films compared to the American system? Should the R be split into separate 15 and 18 ratings, like in the UK and Japan? It would be a good way to retire the NC-17, while not eliminating that category entirely.

If any rating needs to be split, it should be PG-13. The problem is how to split it: should there be a PG-13 and a PG-15, or should it follow suit like the video game ratings and be PG-10 and PG-13?

 

[SpaceCowboy]

That may end up confusing a lot of people. The PG was already split in the '80s.

 

[dothesmartthing]

Even if the board members revise the MPAA system, a lot of moviegoers still won't pay attention to it. We're living in a tough and edgy society, with kids included, so the MPAA ratings really mean little to me.

 

[Neo Ultra Mike]

I think honestly the G rating has also gotten a level of backlash and non profability in recent years that makes studios who make animated movies wary of trying to aim for it. Since yeah a lot of PG movies nowadays really have no business with that rating as even when I was a kid there were a lot harsher moments in G movies then you would get in PG films but just like how many hand drawn films seem to be a general dying art, the G rating itself is also seen as pointless to obtain. Especially in an area where parent groups and naysayers are more likely to complain and try to get something ban or editted thus things being restricted or forced into certain categories just to appease those watchgroups. Honestly the last G rated movie I remember seeing come out and advertised as a G was The Peanuts movie so at least the G movies ended on a good note but... I think we can safely say they are dead now. Seriously if My Little Pony Friendship Is Magic is getting a PG movie then there is no way for me at least as things currently are to assume there will ever be a major G rated movie ever again. Like seriously what's going to aim to be more family friendly/all age appropriate then that?

 

[Golden Geek]

How does the stigma of the G rating compare to similar ratings in other countries such as Canada and the UK? Has the U rating developed the same connotation in the UK, as being associated with films for small children or is still used for general audiences?

A good number of animated movies that were rated PG by the MPAA are G in Canada and U by the BBFC. Some recent examples that come to mind are The Boss Baby, The Emoji Movie, and the previously mentioned My Little Pony: The Movie.

 

[ZukoFan]

I've always thought MPAA ratings had problems with extremes. To see this observation in action, compare Disney films of the 1990s and 2000s. The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1996) received a G rating despite having a song called "Hellfire" and featuring a plot that dealt with topics like genocide and church corruption. Meanwhile, Frozen (2013) received a PG rating for featuring a giant monster snowman for a few seconds.

 

[ToonJay723]

With the reveal that the My Little Pony Movie got a PG rating despite the show sporting a TV-Y rating, reception was rather divided.

I saw a review for the movie and...

Spoiler

...there's apparently a gruesome death.

 

[Fone Bone]

I think honestly the G rating has also gotten a level of backlash and non profability in recent years that makes studios who make animated movies wary of trying to aim for it.

How messed up is that? Something that was designed entirely to help parents make choices for their children, can be changed at the freaking STUDIO'S behest, for a "rating" that will supposedly make them more money. The entire MPAA system is corrupt, and just the fact that studios get to practically choose their own ratings, even if the rating is wrong for the movie, shows the entire thing is rotten to the core.

 

[SweetShop209]

So I know I'm bumping up a thread from over 3 and a half years ago. However, I found this article about the Cruella movie that came out recently which talks about why the G rating has fallen out of fashion and how movies nowadays can get rated. You would need a subscription to see the article (and the free trial to see it doesn't last long), so I'll just post some pictures from the article that stood out.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-di...direct=amp#click=[URL]https://t.co/JlRVZFmIBA

[/URL]

Spoiler

 

[the_joker]

The G-rating being looked down upon is probably related to animation generally being viewed as kids' stuff. Plenty of people wouldn't want to be viewed as (too) "childish" or "immature" because they watch something made for kids, so that PG rating might be an attempt to look more impressive. I doubt the G-rating will be able to return as a result, and I personally don't care too much about MPAA ratings as a result since I'll just watch whatever interests me.