|
| |
|
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 »] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sylvester Stallone stars as an expert mountain climber
forced to help a viciously psychotic villain (John Lithgow) recover 100 million dollars,
scattered in three suitcases on assorted Rocky Mountain precipices. Michael Rooker and
Janine Turner co-star.
SEX/NUDITY 1 - Stallone does takes off his shirt -- repeatedly, despite
sub-zero temperatures.
VIOLENCE/GORE 8 - Naturally, since this is a film about mountains, a number
of people fall (and fall) to their deaths, while the camera attentively follows their
trajectories. Also, a number of people are riddled with bullets, some in slow motion, and
some people are blown-up. Splattered blood is everywhere. There are also a number of
violent fights with punching, kicking and stabbing, which look (and sound) very realistic.
During one such fight, Stallone impales his adversary on a stalactite (it's the one
pointing down) and holds him there for a while, while blood dribbles all over. A pack of
wolves tries to chomp on an unconscious man -- who's dangling from a tree -- but nothing
is shown. Stallone burns 33 million dollars, which may unnerve some people.
PROFANITY 7 - Lots of F-words and derivatives, used imaginatively. [profanity glossary]
DISCUSSION TOPICS - Greed, guilt, psychosis, evil and cold-blooded murder.
MESSAGE - You mustn't blame yourself, if you've done all you can to prevent
an accident.
|
|
Special Keywords: S1 - V8 - P7 - MPAAR |
|
|
|
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
|
|
