I’m going to do something that might seem controversial to some. I’ll be re-vamping and re-posting some of my articles from a website I used to write for here. I’m going to start with this one about Black Christmas (2019) and some peoples’ obsession with how the MPAA rates horror movies.
I think this is probably ok, since I:
a) never signed any sort of agreement with them
b) wrote on a volunteer basis
c) wrote it
If this causes problems (I can’t imagine it will), I’ll deal with that when it happens. But I’m short on writing motivation lately since I’m trying to focus on fiction writing/the world is a waking nightmare. So here goes:
It’s easy to discount PG-13 horror movies as being nothing but cash-grabbing cop-outs. It seems like they’re trying to squeeze a few bucks out of young teens whose parents won’t let them see “real” horror. But to dismiss these films out of hand means dismissing some truly innovative, surprisingly scary stuff. You’re doing a disservice to yourself and to the industry you love (clearly not unconditionally).
I think we can all agree that the horror genre does some of its best work under constraints. Whether they be budgetary, marketability, or something else. The Motion Picture Association of America’s rating (or wherever you live’s rating system) is not in any way indicative of the movie’s quality.
In fact, as far as I’m concerned, the MPAA ratings are kind of arbitrary bullshit anyway.
To give you a little background, the PG-13 rating didn’t even exist in America until July 1, 1984. Before that there were G, M (Mature audiences, but anybody can buy tickets), R (Restricted to persons 16 plus, unless accompanied by an adult – this was later bumped to 17), and X (which became NC-17 since X became inextricably linked with porn in the minds of many).
M later became PG, and eventually PG-13 was created to indicate that although the film didn’t quite warrant an R, it was just a little bit too intense to fit within the confines of that PG rating. At least according to an article in Time magazine, we have either Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, or Gremlins to thank (or maybe both), although they both squeaked in under the PG header, with the Patrick Swayze classic Red Dawn being the universe’s inaugural PG-13 film in August of ‘84.
Since then, there have been plenty of quality, scary PG-13 horror films. For example, 2009’s Drag Me to Hell (and if you’re going to argue about this one, do me a solid and save it – I’m not going to try to explain fun things to you), or those mega-popular Insidious movies, A Quiet Place, Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark, Cat’s Eye, Critters, or Tremors 2? Should I go on? (No) Because I could.
There have been a lot of them, and they’ve been anywhere from terrible to great, just like R- or Un-rated horror movies have been. That rating doesn’t determine the quality of the narrative, the acting, or the world building. It just makes sure that it’s a little tougher for young people to see things their little brains might not yet be ready to process. And even still, they can go see the hard stuff with their parents anyway, so it’s not like they’re being banned from any other type of horror. This is just the introductory stuff, you know?
So let the young folks have their Black Christmas!
And introducing new generations to horror is extremely important if you want to see your beloved genre continue to flourish. I hope I don’t need to explain why that is. I don’t, right? Good. Let’s just be happy that studios are releasing horror that gets new asses in seats, shall we? Besides, should you see every horror movie that is released theatrically? In a perfect world, yes. Let studios know we will give them money to see them! That’s how the market works, folks.
But here’s the deal: if you don’t want to see something because you’re caught up in its MPAA rating, you don’t actually have to see it. You can just be glad it exists, and that it’s bringing crowds to theaters to see HORROR MOVIES. So that you can continue to see the HORROR MOVIES that you want to see. Because horror sells tickets, ya dig? Whether it’s super gory or relatively tame, horror sells. Stop trying to make it sell less because you want to be the Most Extreme Horror-est or whatever.
Now, I understand that with Black Christmas in particular (see, I didn’t forget this article was technically about this movie!), we were all a little extra bummed that somebody was yet again remaking and presumably toning down a beloved classic, but I ask that you please indulge me for just a few more sentences. Consider this: maybe this movie isn’t for you. It’s for your kids (or your neighbor’s kids – whatever, you know what I mean).
See, we already have the grown up version of Black Christmas – and it’s creepy, scary, groundbreaking, and wonderful. But I think that rather than being mad that remakes happened (and they did, no matter how pissed off you still want to be about it – that train has left the station multiple times), we should be happy that a new generation is getting an updated version that will hopefully resonate with them the way the original resonated with us older folks. And hopefully seeing the made-for-younger-audiences version will drive them to want to seek out the original – when they’re age appropriate, of course.
And you know what? I liked that motherfucker. It didn’t try to remake anything, really. It was pretty much totally re-imagined. I liked the weird academic cultiness, I liked the overall message, and I liked the supernatural elements. It was fun. And it’s tonally very unique in comparison to Bob Clark’s masterpiece (and I’ll admit, I haven’t actually seen 2006’s Black Xmas).
And for those weird eggs out there bitching about the “feminist agenda,” or “woke culture,” I’ve got nothing for you bruh – I mean, did you even see the original?
