|
| |
|
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 »] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bruce Willis tries to protect an autistic boy from ruthless
government agents.
SEX/NUDITY 0 - None.
VIOLENCE/GORE 7 - A couple of explosions (one involves glass; many shards
fly into a man's face leaving his face very bloody and killing him). A man is hit in the
back of the head with a club. A few gunfights with people being shot and killed. There are
several bloody scenes: A man is shot leaving a very bloody abdomen; a bloody smear on a
wall and bloodstains on a floor are shown; a man has bloody hands; a bloody corpse
(torso); lots of blood is shown oozing out of a chest wound; a woman is shot in the back
and a man is shot in the head leaving small, bloody wounds; and we see a man's very bloody
face lying in pool of blood. Men repeatedly hit and kick each other resulting in bloody
faces and mouths and a man is thrown from a moving train and hit by an oncoming train (not
seen though). A man is shot in the chest and killed. There are several falls; once from a
great height into glass. A child is nearly hit by a train and later a car. Reckless
driving, chases and scuffles.
PROFANITY 6 - About 9 F-words, some scatological references, a few
anatomical references, many mild obscenities. [profanity glossary]
DISCUSSION TOPICS - Government, secret codes, autism, law enforcement.
MESSAGE - You can't trust the government; the life of one person is worth as
much as the lives of many.
|
|
Special Keywords: S0 - V7 - P6 - 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. |
|
|
|
|