|
| |
|
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 »] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jodie Foster and Richard Gere star in an Americanized
version of the French film "The Return of Martin Guerre." Gere is a Civil War
soldier who returns home to wife Foster, after six years at war. But things aren't quite
right. Is he who he claims to be?
SEX/NUDITY 3 - No nudity. There are three separate sex scenes, with nudity
and sex clearly suggested, but nothing is shown except a lot of wrestling and groaning
between the sheets.
VIOLENCE/GORE 4 - One fight scene in which a rival goes after Gere first
with a torch and then with a shovel. One very disturbing scene with Klansmen who have
severely beaten a man and who burn a cross and threaten the family. A few scenes in which
characters shove each other around. We also see the feet of hanged men dangling, the hand
of a corpse and a dead dog. Another hanging is dramatically suggested with the drop of the
scaffold trap door, but we don't actually see it.
PROFANITY 2 - Not much. Some harsh language. Since this is set in the South
in the 1860's, the radical slur "nigger" is used occasionally. [profanity glossary]
DISCUSSION TOPICS - Fraud, lying, theft, sexual temptation, extramarital sex,
murder, racial intolerance and self sacrifice.
MESSAGE - Everyone has the ability to change their lives for the better --
to become better. Yet deceit often leads to tragedy no matter how well intended.
|
|
Special Keywords: S3 - V4 - P2 - 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. |
|
|
|
|