|
| |
|
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 »] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jack Lemmon and James Garner are former U.S. Presidents
caught in a scandal for which they aren't responsible.
SEX/NUDITY 3 - Lots of sexual innuendo (including homosexual references). A
woman is lying in bed with bare shoulders (sheets pulled up) as Garner puts on his pants
obviously after sex. A man in his sleep begins massaging Lemmon's chest. A couple are
tussling under covers.
VIOLENCE/GORE 3 - Chases by foot and car, reckless driving, threatening with
guns, a couple of explosions, a golf ball hits someone in the head but we only hear it, a
rocket is shot at a helicopter. A man is shot in the head through a car window and we see
some blood. Pushes and falls, a boy kicks a man in the crotch, hot coffee is thrown on a
man. A man is knocked in the head, a man knocks another's gun out of his hand with a sword
leaving the man's hand bloody, a man is shot and we see his surprised face and then see
him fall.
PROFANITY 6 - One F-word and three derivatives, many mild obscenities, some
scatological references, many anatomical references. [profanity glossary]
DISCUSSION TOPICS - Political scandal, the presidency, deceit.
MESSAGE - The truth is not always what it appears to be.
|
|
Special Keywords: S3 - V3 - P6 - 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. |
|
|
|
|