The "R" Rating: Why So Serious?

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: The "R" Rating: Why So Serious?

    Originally posted by Arroway View Post
    as soon as you start writing what you think will sell or what you think is popular rather than what you have a natural, honest, affinity for...it's all down hill from there. you've crossed a threshold that's hard to crawl back from.
    But how can you write for such a commercial medium without considering the market? I don't think you should chase the market, but I do think you should choose the most commercial idea you have, or be willing to change an idea to make it more commercial, especially if you're trying to break in to the industry.
    "Witticism"
    -Some Guy

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: The "R" Rating: Why So Serious?

      I think suggesting that a conscious awareness of the market makes you a hack is just silly.

      I am not suggesting you go and make all your R-rated scripts PG-13, I'm just saying that we need to be conscious of the fact that studios and producers are FAR less likely to purchase an R-rated script that cannot be easily made PG-13, and will therefore be far less interested in even READING R-rated material.

      Granted, a spec is far more likely to get you work than actually be purchased and made, but if your entire catalog of specs are blatant R-rated fare, the producers/studios are going to be a lot less likely to offer you any work. You're not showing them you can write something they can actually USE. You'll be labeled an "R-rated writer", and I honestly think that will close doors for you.

      Just show some diversity. Don't focus entirely on R-rated movies. Write some PG-13 or even PG movies.

      That's what I'm going to be doing. I have many concepts that are of more marketable ratings (even a G-rated family movie!), and I'm going to bump a few of those to the top of my "need to write" list instead of hammering through one R-rated script after another.

      And if you are writing nothing but R-rated scripts, be aware that if any of them get bought, they will more than likely be cut down to PG-13. Ask yourself if anything you write is even capable of being cut down like that. If not, maybe you need to write something that shows a little more diversity. If you can't write something without gratuitous language, violence, or nudity, then you need to stretch your wings more as a writer.

      That's not selling out, and it's not being a hack. It's being aware of the market you are selling yourself to, and I don't think there is anything wrong with that.

      To be honest, I would call the writer who can't write a script without a plethora of language, sex or violence a hack before the diverse writer who can write a PG or PG-13 script. Of all the "greatest writers" in Hollywood history, I don't think any of them wrote strictly R-rated fare. It shows no creativity as a writer, IMO. Unless the story truly needs to be told R-rated, it is lazy and uncreative to write it as such.
      For more of my thoughts on screenwriting, check out my blog.
      Jonny Atlas Writes!

      - Sic Semper Tyrannis.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: The "R" Rating: Why So Serious?

        Originally posted by JonnyAtlas View Post


        And if you are writing nothing but R-rated scripts, be aware that if any of them get bought, they will more than likely be cut down to PG-13. Ask yourself if anything you write is even capable of being cut down like that. If not, maybe you need to write something that shows a little more diversity. If you can't write something without gratuitous language, violence, or nudity, then you need to stretch your wings more as a writer.

        That's not selling out, and it's not being a hack. It's being aware of the market you are selling yourself to, and I don't think there is anything wrong with that.

        To be honest, I would call the writer who can't write a script without a plethora of language, sex or violence a hack before the diverse writer who can write a PG or PG-13 script. Of all the "greatest writers" in Hollywood history, I don't think any of them wrote strictly R-rated fare. It shows no creativity as a writer, IMO. Unless the story truly needs to be told R-rated, it is lazy and uncreative to write it as such.
        I couldn't agree more.

        I wrote an R-rated comedy spec that got the attention of a great management company. They liked the writing, but felt I'd be better served by putting together something with a more commercial hook. The idea that we wound up developing is a PG-rated family comedy. Writing it has been a real learning experience. Writing something for that kind of audience involves more than just cutting out all your cuss words -- it really informs the slant of the humor and your set pieces, and forces you to approach your storytelling in a whole new way.

        One of my fave TV shows is Reno 911. It's adult and profane; I also think it's funny as hell. Interestingly, two of the writers on that show -- Robert Ben Garant and Thomas Lennon -- have carved out quite a career for themselves writing family flicks. They're the writers behind NIGHT AT THE MUSEUM and THE PACIFIER -- four-quadrant films (with a PG rating) that did big numbers at the box office (PACIFIER cleared $113M domestically, and MUSEUM cleared $250M).

        If you're writing a spec, you should write what you love. But also keep in mind that at some point down the road, a certain amount of flexibility may be required if you're to meet the needs of the folks who are hiring you. Obviously, not every writer wants to pen four-quadrant films. But the top-tier managers and producers have a strong interest in that kind of material.

        It really helps to have a healthy respect for a wide range of material. The fact that a screenplay is geared toward a mainstream audience doesn't mean that it won't challenge you as a writer. For me, writing this PG-rated family comedy has been a lot more complicated than writing the R-rated comedy that got me in the door.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: The "R" Rating: Why So Serious?

          Originally posted by JonnyAtlas View Post
          but if your entire catalog of specs are blatant R-rated fare, the producers/studios are going to be a lot less likely to offer you any work. You're not showing them you can write something they can actually USE. You'll be labeled an "R-rated writer", and I honestly think that will close doors for you.
          there are many writers whose entire catalogue is r-rated. (tarantino, alexandre aja, paul thomas anderson, neil marshall, alex garland...off the top of my head)

          and there is another much larger contingent of writers (too numerous to list) whose work is almost entirely r-rated with one or two exceptions at most.

          Of all the "greatest writers" in Hollywood history, I don't think any of them wrote strictly R-rated fare. It shows no creativity as a writer, IMO.
          paul "taxi driver" schrader wrote, i believe ONE non r-rated feature film in his career. if only he had YOUR creativity maybe he'd of actually gotten somewhere...

          p.s: just to spite you I will be adding extra "gratuitous language, violence, and nudity" to all of my scripts while you simultaneously work to make yours grandma-friendly.

          Good luck to both of us, I say.

          (we'll need it)

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: The "R" Rating: Why So Serious?

            I don't think you should write a PG or PG-13 film to make it more commercial. If all you can write is colourful language, heart stopping violence and graphic sex, well, then you should write a PG or PG-13 film as a challenge for yourself. Not because you want to make it more commercial.

            I always try to follow Charlie Kaufman's philosophy of always challenging yourself as a writer to come up with better arcs, characters, and stories.

            mesmerist, your example of Garant and Lennon going from Reno 911 to writing family flicks is the equivalent of Bob Dylan switching to a electric guitar.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: The "R" Rating: Why So Serious?

              The ONLY R rated film in the top 25 highest grossing films of all time doesn't count. Why? Because the Bo was inflated by the over-zealous Christian Right.

              The people who would normally never take their family to see an R rated film DID for this one. Because it was about Jesus.
              What does the comment 'over-zealous Christian Right' (bringing in BOTH religion and politics into the thread) have to do with anything?

              There is certainly a lesson in PASSION OF THE CHRIST here for us as Writers and those interested in daring and successful Guerrilla Marketing:

              Follow yer bliss, despite what "Hollywood" cares to put its decadent clique-ish, money-addicted and money-blindered stamp of approval on.

              Mad Mel, indeed.



              ' ... Do-It-Yourself, and rebel against the outrageous amounts of money Hollywood wastes to justify its lack of vision.' -- Lydia Lunch


              Ah, maybe add 'the huge amounts of money Hollywood MAKES to justify its lack of vision' I suppose ...

              Who among us would rather write VISIONS than MONEY-MAKERS? (Yeah, it's a trick)

              ***

              As for writing 'R' vs 'PG-13' ... I'd say write it how it captivates and excites us as WRITERS.

              It'll be re-written and re-shaped (probably) despite us anyway, so let those others remove the offensive dialogue or scene to dumb it down for a more-profitable rating, as they will despite us.

              If I were Directing SHOWGIRLS, I'd fight for Elizabeth Berkley naked ... as the Writer I'd certainly assume a PG-rated SHOWGIRLS was pretty pointless ... and far more offensive

              But then ... pointlessness and SHOWGIRLS ... that's another discussion.
              sigpic
              "As human beings, our greatness lies not so much in being able to remake the world -
              that is the myth of the atomic age - as in being able to remake ourselves."
              -Mahatma Gandhi.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: The "R" Rating: Why So Serious?

                Originally posted by Arroway View Post
                watering down your story to accomidate the market? there's a word for that and it rhymes with "quack".

                as soon as you start writing what you think will sell or what you think is popular rather than what you have a natural, honest, affinity for...it's all down hill from there. you've crossed a threshold that's hard to crawl back from.
                I'm with Arroway. Once you force your work into a room with low ceilings-you have to bend your bones just to fit inside...that's no way to posture yourself comfortably.

                If PG-13 is like a natural instinct everytime you write something...that's different.
                sigpic

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: The "R" Rating: Why So Serious?

                  Originally posted by tabula rasa View Post
                  What does the comment 'over-zealous Christian Right' (bringing in BOTH religion and politics into the thread) have to do with anything?

                  There is certainly a lesson in PASSION OF THE CHRIST here for us as Writers and those interested in daring and successful Guerrilla Marketing:

                  Follow yer bliss, despite what "Hollywood" cares to put its decadent clique-ish, money-addicted and money-blindered stamp of approval on.

                  Mad Mel, indeed.



                  ' ... Do-It-Yourself, and rebel against the outrageous amounts of money Hollywood wastes to justify its lack of vision.' -- Lydia Lunch


                  Ah, maybe add 'the huge amounts of money Hollywood MAKES to justify its lack of vision' I suppose ...

                  Who among us would rather write VISIONS than MONEY-MAKERS? (Yeah, it's a trick)

                  ***
                  It has quite a bit to do with the discussion. The point of my OP was to show that R rated films hold such a small market share that from a marketing standpoint they can be impractical. The only R-rated film in the top 25 domestic B.O. hits is The Passion of the Christ. As I stated in the line you quoted, "The people who would normally never take their family to see an R rated film DID for this one. Because it was about Jesus."

                  That is absolutely relevant. I'm a Christian, and I grew up in the church - Southern Baptist not less! Believe me, I am familiar with the culture. Those families do not see R rated films. Ever. Perhaps the parents will go see one here and there on their date night, but as a family it would never happen. They made an exception for The Passion. Hell, my wife went to an uber-conservative school for her undergrad, and no one who went to school there was allowed to watch R rated movies - unless it was The Passion of the Christ!!

                  But you're telling me this fact has no bearing in a discussion about the practicality of R rated scripts in a market where they don't open? Of course it does. It shows that the only R rated movie in the top 25 is there regardless of its rating. It is, more or less, a fluke.

                  Originally posted by tabula rasa View Post
                  As for writing 'R' vs 'PG-13' ... I'd say write it how it captivates and excites us as WRITERS.

                  It'll be re-written and re-shaped (probably) despite us anyway, so let those others remove the offensive dialogue or scene to dumb it down for a more-profitable rating, as they will despite us.

                  If I were Directing SHOWGIRLS, I'd fight for Elizabeth Berkley naked ... as the Writer I'd certainly assume a PG-rated SHOWGIRLS was pretty pointless ... and far more offensive

                  But then ... pointlessness and SHOWGIRLS ... that's another discussion.
                  You're right, it will be re-written an re-shaped no matter what. Still, you're example is Showgirls. It may be the highest grossing NC-17 movie of all time, but it still tanked. Studios don't even TOUCH NC-17.

                  I do see your point, and artistic integrity is great. Still, screenwriting is far more than just an artform. It's marketing, it's business, and it's sales. Tonight, He Comes still sold, but not for years. People said "this is absolutely brilliant, but we can't touch it." Eventually someone bought it, and the rewrite/editing process cost the studio so much time and money I know they were regretting taking the project on.

                  My point is not that you have to take all the scripts you have written and tame them down, or even that you have to tame down your writing. Just be aware of the market, for crying out loud. Yeah, we do this because it is our art form and we love it, but we also do this because we want to see our movies MADE, right? And we still do this because we want to get PAID, right? The only way that's going to happen is if you are conscious of the market.

                  Mind you, I'm saying all this as I'm in the process of writing an R-rated splatterfest of a horror movie. However, I'm writing it as such because that's genuinely what the story calls for. If the story called for PG-13 and I wrote it as over-the-top R anyway, I wouldn't be being true to the needs of the story. I would be narrowing my chances of a sale just because I wanted to be over the top. That's just silly.
                  For more of my thoughts on screenwriting, check out my blog.
                  Jonny Atlas Writes!

                  - Sic Semper Tyrannis.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: The "R" Rating: Why So Serious?

                    Originally posted by Jake Schuster View Post
                    With "The Passion", churches were buying out blocks of tickets, and often for multiple viewings. Often entire theatres were booked for four or five showings per weekend. So the number has that slightly artificial aspect to it.
                    I'm no religious fanatic, but I do not see the reasoning, anymore than you can blame the millions of mindless fanboys for the flood of funny book movies.

                    It takes all kinds buddy.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: The "R" Rating: Why So Serious?

                      Originally posted by vmf View Post
                      I'm no religious fanatic, but I do not see the reasoning, anymore than you can blame the millions of mindless fanboys for the flood of funny book movies.

                      It takes all kinds buddy.
                      He wasn't blaming the religious culture for a flood of Christian movies, he was stating that th Passion's grosses have a "slight artificial" feel. I think that's accurate. As stated, the group of moviegoers who normally stay far away from the R rating completely ignored the rating for this movie. That fact is responsible for the film being the only R rated film in the top 25 (domestic only).
                      For more of my thoughts on screenwriting, check out my blog.
                      Jonny Atlas Writes!

                      - Sic Semper Tyrannis.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: The "R" Rating: Why So Serious?

                        Originally Posted by tabula rasa http://messageboard.donedealpro.com/...s/viewpost.gif
                        What does the comment 'over-zealous Christian Right' (bringing in BOTH religion and politics into the thread) have to do with anything?


                        Originally posted by JonnyAtlas View Post
                        It has quite a bit to do with the discussion.

                        The point of my OP was to show that R rated films hold such a small market share that from a marketing standpoint they can be impractical. The only R-rated film in the top 25 domestic B.O. hits is The Passion of the Christ. As I stated in the line you quoted, "The people who would normally never take their family to see an R rated film DID for this one. Because it was about Jesus."

                        That is absolutely relevant. I'm a Christian ...

                        ... [edited etc]

                        But you're telling me this fact has no bearing in a discussion about the practicality of R rated scripts in a market where they don't open? Of course it does. ...
                        I'm only 'telling you' that you made a personally (and objectively indefensible) religious and political opinion call in your purely-subjective judgement:

                        Because the Bo was inflated by the over-zealous Christian Right.


                        Defend (or try to defend, if you wish, it's just an exercise in writers being careful or careless about what they write) WHY and HOW they are not merely devout Christians, but rather 'over-zealous' (according to you)

                        Make sure your defense of 'over-zealous' is not about your political or religious opinions (you stating yours invites us to state ours) ... and only about Filmmaking ART or BUSINESS ... and then you will not have brought politics or religion into DD (as I suggested or wondered why you did)

                        Otherwise, my comment stands, and DD is setting the happy (but unexpected) precedent of allowing rather sharp political and religious COMMENTS and DEBATE to be made.

                        Good for DD, imo.

                        But I'm pointing out that it occurred, and I'm disagreeing witchoo about the 'over-zealous' Christian Right crack.

                        THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST isn't something to be used as a whipping boy; it's the humilation of Hollywood's jaded expectations and the triumph of a filmmaker's vision and daring.
                        sigpic
                        "As human beings, our greatness lies not so much in being able to remake the world -
                        that is the myth of the atomic age - as in being able to remake ourselves."
                        -Mahatma Gandhi.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: The "R" Rating: Why So Serious?

                          has the "religious right" ever, since the inception of that phrase, been referred to as "under-zealous" by anyone?

                          ever?


                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: The "R" Rating: Why So Serious?

                            Aah, now I see. I missed the point of your post the first time.

                            Yeah, I get what you're saying. The phrase "over-zealous" was intended merely as a description of their reaction to the film, and in no way intended to describe their overall demeanor. It goes along with Terrance's comment about churches buying tickets in bulk, etc. I consider the Christian right's rabid consumption of the film to be over-zealous. To describe the entire group as "over-zealous" in general would be, well, a crass generalization, which I usually try to stay away from (although sometimes unsuccessfully - I'm only human). Sorry for the miscommunication on my part.
                            For more of my thoughts on screenwriting, check out my blog.
                            Jonny Atlas Writes!

                            - Sic Semper Tyrannis.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: The "R" Rating: Why So Serious?

                              Originally posted by Arroway View Post
                              has the "religious right" ever, since the inception of that phrase, been referred to as "under-zealous" by anyone?

                              ever?


                              Perhaps when their over-zealousness wanes to a point just below zealous, this term will become appropriate. However, I'm sure they will then be accused of not being zealous enough.

                              On Passion of the Christ; it certainly benefited from the endorsement of, and promotion by, the various Christian bodies, which resulted in followers feeling they should see the movie and also pursuade others to go. The violence, I assume, was deemed acceptable by religious leaders in this case due to the subject material.

                              The movie is not, IMO, relevent to a discussion about "R" ratings due to these unique circumstances.
                              TimeStorm & Blurred Vision Book info & blog: https://stormingtime.com//

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: The "R" Rating: Why So Serious?

                                Well, just wanted to say, the fact that the highest grossing R film is The Passion just further proves the OP's point.

                                The BO numbers on R movies pale in comparison to PG-13 movies.

                                Want to make a movie that'll make more money? Go PG-13.

                                Not saying you should purposely not write any R movies, but it's not a terrible decision to gear your writing towards PG-13, mainly because:

                                While you are likely not to get any script sold/produced/etc (it's just statistics as I think WB said), you WILL improve odds by writing PG-13. They want to produce movies that make money. They produce more PG-13's because they make more money. Therefore, they are more willing to buy more scripts with that rating.

                                Of course... a good story with good writing tops any rating it may/may not have though. But that's not the point.
                                Last edited by JayKid; 07-15-2008, 07:13 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X