Movie buffs tend to equate an R-rating with realness — if a movie is too violent or sexed-up for kids, then that proves the film-makers are keeping it real. A “hard R” equals a real edge. But sometimes, focusing on all the splatter and nudity can just get in the way of the story. Which movie would be better if it was PG, or PG-13?

Please include a picture, poster, clip, piece of artwork, or other visual representation of the movie in question. And please mention the name of the movie, and why it might have been better if it spent less time trying to earn an “R” rating. Thanks!

Advertisement

Top image: Riddick. Apart from one really nice decapitation, most of the stuff that got this movie its “R” rating was just clutter, or stuff that actively made us dislike the main character. (Like his weird peeping-tom bullshit towards Starbuck.) This movie could have spent more time developing its plot and its supporting characters, if it wasn’t too busy focusing on sexytimes.


Contact the author at charliejane@io9.com.