Comments on: Vacation Reboot Put on Hold Due to Disagreement Over Rating

By: T. Heilman

T. Heilman — Fri, 26 Apr 2013 04:42:25 +0000

This is horseshit. No film gets put on hold over a rating. They film it as written and decide later if it should be toned down to PG-13 and released on dvd Unrated later on. Something else is going on obviously. I really wish Apatow was behind this, as he is better suited and has a reverence for material like this. What about Horrible Bosses makes these writers qualified to write a reboot of a John Hughes/Harold Ramis classic?

By: Derek McFarland

Derek McFarland — Fri, 26 Apr 2013 03:02:51 +0000

Don’t have much interest in another Vacation film, especially if Chase isn’t staring in it. To me it’s almost the same as have John McClane’s son (Jack) being the main character in a Die Hard 6 movie, or Mutt Williams taking the torch in a new Indiana Jones film. On top of that….lately I haven’t seen any pg-13 comedies out there; that have been worth seeing in the theaters, so I definitely won’t be seeing this if it’s not R rated. PG-13 comedies were different back in the 80’s. Some almost felt rated R. If they do go through with a new vacation film, they should go in a “Knocked Up, Old School, Road Trip, Project X” sort of direction. PG-13 take away the realizim out of dialog; limiting the characters from saying what would truely be said (in certain situations). Can you imagine what a PG-13 version of The Hangover or 40 Year Old Virgin would have been like? I say keep it real.

By: PlanBFromOuterSpace

PlanBFromOuterSpace — Fri, 26 Apr 2013 00:28:09 +0000

Remember, Helms is also a big part of the Hangover franchise as well. So, the Horrible Bosses guys get hired based on the succes of their R-rated film, they get one of the stars of a VERY successful series of R-rated films, and New Line (who released Wedding Crashers, one of the most succesful R-Rated comedies of all time) decides that they’re nervous about making the film for an adult audience? Fuck that, and fuck them in their stupid fucking faces.

Seriously though, I saw a piece last week where someone from NATO (the National Association of Theater Owners, not the important one) pleaded with the studios to make less adult fare and more PG and PG-13 films aimed at families, even though the R-rated movies KILLED last year. Another article I read took that and then examined the movies that came out last year and how they performed. It was a pretty successful year for R-rated stuff and it’s not like there weren’t any movies aimed at families or younger audiences or anything. They just looked like shit and people either didn’t want to see them or they just underperformed compared to what came out in that slot or what came out from that studio the previous year. If someone came out and complained that there weren’t enough movies being made for adults, when there are always plenty of them out there, they’d get laughed out of the room, so I don’t know why this group pushing for more lighter films isn’t being treated just the same.

By: projectgenesis

projectgenesis — Thu, 25 Apr 2013 14:00:27 +0000

Actually, European was PG-13. Boobs didn’t mean an automatic R back then. See also: Sixteen Candles.

By: Scott-El

Scott-El — Thu, 25 Apr 2013 04:47:32 +0000

Rated F by EW.

By: Bob

Bob — Thu, 25 Apr 2013 02:13:28 +0000

PG-13. The R-rated comedy is tiresome.

By: rjdelight

rjdelight — Wed, 24 Apr 2013 22:14:44 +0000

European Vacation was R as well, but mostly because it had boobs.