Cookies on DVDActive
DVDActive uses cookies to remember your actions, such as your answer in the poll. Cookies are also used by third-parties for statistics, social media and advertising. By using this website, it is assumed that you agree to this.
 
Leaderboard Extra
MR. AND MRS. SMITHE (2005) OFFICIAL MPAA RATING AND DIRECTOR'S CUT.

Forums - Discs & Movies - MR. AND MRS. SMITHE (2005) OFFICIAL MPAA RATING AND DIRECTOR'S CUT. 

14th May 2005 0:31  #1

E. Costigan Senior Member Join Date: January 2005 Location: Canada Posts: 1,026
MR. AND MRS. SMITH (2005) OFFICIAL MPAA RATING AND DIRECTOR'S CUT.
Disappointly enough, the offical MPAA rating is here for the film. Fresh from the official MPAA website, Mr. and Mrs. Smith is rated:

Rated PG-13 for sequences of violence, intense action, sexual content and brief strong language.

Was it any surprise? We knew after the rumor of nude scenes cut that this would no doubt get a PG-13. Now, we must all group up and beat the living s hit out of Fox.

None-the-less, this is still my 2nd most aniticipated film of summer 2005 (right behind War of the Worlds), so now all what we can do is the following:

a) Enjoy the hell out of this one and
b) Demand a 2-Disc Director's Cut, courtesy of Doug Liman. It better come or every Fox exectcutive out there is on my hit list.

I ask all you DVD professionals out there. What is your opinion on this? Will this simply be a terrific film with or without a PG-13, and will be even more fantastic with a Director's Cut, or will this go the King Arthur route and have a crappy theatrical version but a great DC?

Is there any talks of a DC for Mr. and Mrs. Smith. I'd appriciate any info or opinions the admins or others here have and as soon as the infomation comes in, please inform us.

14th May 2005 4:43  #2

- - Senior Member Join Date: March 2005 Location: Canada Posts: 594
When I buy a DVD, I like the long uncut unrated version.  What I don't like, is when they release another DVD version months later and there's nothing new.  I don't want to be screwed over false marketing.

14th May 2005 15:44  #3

Jonny "Me You" Senior Member Join Date: March 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 2,863
well..

I was looking forward to the movie because it looked like a fun adult action/comedy movie. Knowing it's PG-13 now just kinda took all the air out of it for me.

Unfortunately, in my experience if it was possible to simply remove a key scene involving nudity to get a PG-13 cut then the movie wasnt likely designed to be cutting edge or R rated anyhow. If anything is re-integrated for a later DVD release, chances are it won't be anything mind-boggling that would change how the movie is perceived. Thus, leaving it nothing more then a typically sappy PG-13 flick that would have a scene of nudity.

I wouldnt hold my breath for anything official for sometime though. The movie isnt even out yet.

14th May 2005 16:37  #4

Mark Lim Member Join Date: March 2004 Location: Australia Posts: 1,211
perhaps the pg-13 rating is there to widen the market, so more people would be able to see it.

14th May 2005 18:13  #5

Jonny "Me You" Senior Member Join Date: March 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 2,863
Quote: Originally posted by Mark Lim
perhaps the pg-13 rating is there to widen the market, so more people would be able to see it.


Definately, but usually that means the movie itself is lame.

15th May 2005 10:03  #6

Worst Nightmare Senior Member Join Date: July 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 6,706 Send a message via AIM to Worst Nightmare Send a message via ICQ to Worst Nightmare Send a message via MSN to Worst Nightmare Send a message via Yahoo to Worst Nightmare Send a message via Google to Worst Nightmare
Quite simple - get the unrated version.

16th May 2005 19:22  #7

Gabe Powers Editor Join Date: September 2004 Location: United States Posts: 4,457 Send a message via ICQ to Gabe Powers
I hope major studios grow out of this phase soon. The Matrix sequels made money, Saw made money, Sin City made money, as long as you have a large spectical or a good film made on a smallish budget there is no reason to avoid the 'R' rating. I also wish NC-17 would become more mainstreem, but I'm guessing it won't happen.

16th May 2005 21:14  #8

Je Ff Member Join Date: February 2005 Location: United States Posts: 438
I doubt NC-17 will become more mainstream, because people hear that and they think graphic nudity and gratuitous sex.  You know how people are nowadays, they love violence but Janet's boob falls out and the world stops turning.  And also, a movie would have to be very low budget or exceptionally good for it to be successful with and NC-17 rating.  The good thing would be that the MPAA would be afraid to use it on a major studio film (If Orgazmo was released by Universal today it wouldn't be NC-17).

16th May 2005 23:02  #9

john 5 Member Join Date: August 2003 Location: United States Posts: 234
Knowing Fox they'll probably release a PG-13 version of it on dvd first with barely any features then a couple months later release the unrated one.

31st May 2005 20:42  #10

E. Costigan Senior Member Join Date: January 2005 Location: Canada Posts: 1,026
Well with King Arthur, a summer action epic from last summer, they cut a lot to get a PG-13. They had quick cut-away during battles and less blood spatting all over the place. Now the unrrated version is much better, worthy of an R. This is how I rank them:

King Arthur - Theatrical Version - 6/10
King Arthur - Director's Cut - 8/10

Mr. and Mrs. Smith could be like that, perhaps cutting out violence because they wouldn't have that long rating description for nothing. I hope the director's cut not only has R-rated sex but also R-rated everything, i.e R-rated Language and R-rated action.

Either way, I'll be seeing Mr. and Mrs. Smith, first day.

4th June 2005 17:29  #11

floyd dylan Banned Join Date: April 2004 Location: United Kingdom Posts: 913
Would Jolie's tits would be back to normal as God intended?

8th June 2005 2:11  #12

E. Costigan Senior Member Join Date: January 2005 Location: Canada Posts: 1,026
I actually don't know if her boobs are real or not? Does anyone know for 100% sure?

8th June 2005 2:30  #13

Tom Pen Member Join Date: June 2004 Location: United States Posts: 142
yeah, their real. I've touched them myself

8th June 2005 3:17  #14

- - Senior Member Join Date: March 2005 Location: Canada Posts: 594
Doesn't matter, she's HOT!

8th June 2005 3:29  #15

Jonny "Me You" Senior Member Join Date: March 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 2,863
Most of what's on her is real. Amazing, but she really is that hot. I've seen a giant untouched blowup of her face too, she barely has a mark on her.

10th June 2005 0:41  #16

E. Costigan Senior Member Join Date: January 2005 Location: Canada Posts: 1,026
Her lips are kinda screwed up on close-ups though.

SMITH OPENS TOMORROW, BABY!

10th June 2005 1:40  #17

Gabe Powers Editor Join Date: September 2004 Location: United States Posts: 4,457 Send a message via ICQ to Gabe Powers
considering the size of her nude chest in Hackers and the size it is these days, I'm pretty sure they're fake. She wasn't THAT young whe she made Hackers. Not that I'm getting involved in this conversation or anything.

10th June 2005 14:51  #18

Worst Nightmare Senior Member Join Date: July 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 6,706 Send a message via AIM to Worst Nightmare Send a message via ICQ to Worst Nightmare Send a message via MSN to Worst Nightmare Send a message via Yahoo to Worst Nightmare Send a message via Google to Worst Nightmare
I wouldn't complain - I'd have her......then my wife would kill me!

12th June 2005 4:08  #19

Jonathan Bennett Member Join Date: March 2005 Location: United States Posts: 600 Send a message via AIM to Jonathan Bennett Send a message via MSN to Jonathan Bennett Send a message via Yahoo to Jonathan Bennett Send a message via Google to Jonathan Bennett
I'm probably seeing this tomorrow.

12th June 2005 15:14  #20

Jonny "Me You" Senior Member Join Date: March 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 2,863
Quote: Originally posted by Worst Nightmare
I wouldn't complain - I'd have her......then my wife would kill me!


It would be worth it Very Happy

13th June 2005 5:14  #21

Jonathan Bennett Member Join Date: March 2005 Location: United States Posts: 600 Send a message via AIM to Jonathan Bennett Send a message via MSN to Jonathan Bennett Send a message via Yahoo to Jonathan Bennett Send a message via Google to Jonathan Bennett
I was gonna see this tonight but I didn't because I was tired.

13th June 2005 8:33  #22

Worst Nightmare Senior Member Join Date: July 2002 Location: Australia Posts: 6,706 Send a message via AIM to Worst Nightmare Send a message via ICQ to Worst Nightmare Send a message via MSN to Worst Nightmare Send a message via Yahoo to Worst Nightmare Send a message via Google to Worst Nightmare
Ahh Jonny, you have brought a tear to mi' eye Wink

13th June 2005 19:18  #23

Jonny "Me You" Senior Member Join Date: March 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 2,863
This movie did well the first weekend. $51 million. Next week look for Batman to destroy everything else.

lol...my pleasure Nightmare Very Happy

13th June 2005 19:45  #24

- - Senior Member Join Date: March 2005 Location: Canada Posts: 594
I believe this Batman movie will target more of the older audience than the younger crowds.  I'm predicting it will do well.  Good story and great supporting actors.  I got my stomach ready for the popcorn!

13th June 2005 20:21  #25

rob murray Member Join Date: November 2004 Location: United States Posts: 477
I saw it last night, not too bad. It got really ridiculous at times but it was still a fun movie

16th June 2005 3:12  #26

E. Costigan Senior Member Join Date: January 2005 Location: Canada Posts: 1,026
I saw Mr. and Mrs. Smith of course on opening day and it's a 9.5/10 from me. Best film of 2005 in my opinion. It's at $60 Mil right now but it's going to be cut big time by Batman.

And yeah, an 150 minute director's cut would rock with all the deleted scenes (there are at least 3-4 by my count), snappy dialogue, more violent action, and the huge sex scene that was cut. Heh, heh.

26th June 2005 20:10  #27

Keith Member Join Date: June 2005 Location: United States Posts: 221
Quote: Originally posted by Eliason A.
I actually don't know if her boobs are real or not? Does anyone know for 100% sure?


She had them done, and her lips too.

27th June 2005 15:53  #28

Jonathan Bennett Member Join Date: March 2005 Location: United States Posts: 600 Send a message via AIM to Jonathan Bennett Send a message via MSN to Jonathan Bennett Send a message via Yahoo to Jonathan Bennett Send a message via Google to Jonathan Bennett
I just saw it last night.
Thought it was a lot of fun.

27th June 2005 15:58  #29

Jonathan Bennett Member Join Date: March 2005 Location: United States Posts: 600 Send a message via AIM to Jonathan Bennett Send a message via MSN to Jonathan Bennett Send a message via Yahoo to Jonathan Bennett Send a message via Google to Jonathan Bennett
Quote: Originally posted by Eliason A.
I saw Mr. and Mrs. Smith of course on opening day and it's a 9.5/10 from me. Best film of 2005 in my opinion. It's at $60 Mil right now but it's going to be cut big time by Batman.

And yeah, an 150 minute director's cut would rock with all the deleted scenes (there are at least 3-4 by my count), snappy dialogue, more violent action, and the huge sex scene that was cut. Heh, heh.

I liked the film but Enron: The Smartest Guys In The Room, Sin City, Crash, Kung Fu Hustle and Batman Begins are still my Top 5 of 2005.
I've seen about 15 2005 movies.
Mr. and Mrs. Smith would be at #8.

1st July 2005 6:41  #30

E. Costigan Senior Member Join Date: January 2005 Location: Canada Posts: 1,026
Well of course it's my #2, right behind the one and only War of the Worlds.
Page Number: [1] 2

Quick Reply 

Message Enter the message here then press submit. The username, password and message are required. Please make the message constructive, you are fully responsible for the legality of anything you contribute. Terms & conditions apply.
Not Registered?
Forgotten Details?