|
| |
|
PLEASE HELP! Although our site is very popular, the current economic climate has reduced our revenues just when we need extra security to prevent attacks from hackers who don't like what we do. If you think what we do is worthwhile, please
donate or
become a member. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
ASSIGNED NUMBERS |
|
|
Unlike the MPAA we do not assign one inscrutable rating based on age, but 3 objective ratings for SEX/NUDITY, VIOLENCE/GORE and PROFANITY on a scale of 0 to 10, from lowest to highest, depending on quantity and context. |
|
[more »] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jason Priestley and buddies travel to California in 1962 to
meet their idol, Marilyn Monroe.
SEX/NUDITY 5 - Three close-up scenes of Marilyn Monroe's nude 1950's
calendar shot (only her breasts are shown in the photo). One scene where a couple is
interrupted while in bed; they are covered up and nothing is shown. There is a long nude
beach scene where many male and female buttocks are obvious and many breasts are shown --
although not up close. There is some sexually explicit language and conversations about
sex.
VIOLENCE/GORE 3 - Two boxing scenes, one brief and one rather long with many
punches but no gore. There is a brief scene where a man is punched by gangsters a few
times, and another where a man is threatened by said gangsters and thrown around; nothing
graphic is shown. There is a fistfight between two men; one's mouth and nose are
bloodied. A man is supposedly shot and bleeding but is really just fine.
PROFANITY 5 - Three F-words, as well as some scatological references and a
few mild profanities. There are also several scenes containing sexually explicit language. [profanity glossary]
DISCUSSION TOPICS - Lack of closeness between parent and son, the importance of
friendships.
MESSAGE - Loyalty and friendship are the most important things in life and
your own desires should take a back seat, when necessary.
|
|
Special Keywords: S5 - V3 - P5 - MPAAPG-13 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
A CAVEAT: We've gone through several editorial changes since we started covering films in 1992 and some of our early standards were not as stringent as they are now. We therefore need to revisit many older reviews, especially those written prior to 1998 or so; please keep this in mind if you're consulting a review from that period. While we plan to revisit and correct older reviews our resources are limited and it is a slow, time-consuming process. |
|
|
|
|