From A.O. Scott’s review of Spiderman 2. http://movies2.nytimes.com/2004/06/29/movies/29SPID.html
I can’t figure out if he wrote it himself, or it’s the official warning.
Kissing? Won’t somebody please think of the children?!
mpaa.org sez “Rated PG-13 for stylized action violence.”
Brian
I admit I get a lot of enjoyment out of reading those little descriptors at the bottom of the ratings graphic. Then I make up new ones.
“Rated R because we think Kevin Smith is a potty mouth.”
or
“Rated PG-13 for no reason other than it’s a stupid movie.”
Rated PG-13. Some scenes may scare and horrify parents. No self-respecting child would be bothered in the slightest.
Maybe it has brutally violent kissing?
Is Spidey into rough sex?
Rated PG-13. Please bring a 12-year-old to explain the bathroom jokes.
Since he dropped the Black Cat and married MJ, we can assume that he is not.
The Black Cat was aroused by danger and risk. In one issue she reveals that she isn’t nearly as attracted to Peter without his mask. Though, AFAIK, it is never explicitly stated that the Black Cat enjoys rough sex while perched on the Empire state building, it is implied rather strongly.
However, an anniversary issue of a few years back included Spidey explaining his powers to MJ. Unlike the film, Spidey has no hooks, or bristles with which to climb walls. He doesn’t know how he clings to walls and ceilings. But says that he can consciously control it, and can do it with any part of his body.
MJ interupts with “Any part?”
Spidey then moves to the explanation of another power.
I haven’t read a Spidey comic since the Spider Clone Saga some 7-8 years ago, so I have no idea about anything he’s been up to.
I did like the movie and the FOX cartoon, though.
If I got my hands on Tobey McGuire, you bet it would be! 
One of my favorites, from GTA: Vice City on a radio commercial: “Rated R for retarded”
Oh, and I think it was Crossroads that had the rating of PG 13 for “Underage drinking”
He’s certainly into bondage.
Overheard in the public restroom: “That’ll leave a skidmark all the way to the treatment plant!”
I believe he writes them all himself. In fact, that’s one of my favorite parts of the reviews in the NY Times. For example, Fahrenheit 9/11 has " It has graphic images of combat and its aftermath. ", Shrek 2 "It has some humor involving bodily functions, some slightly scary moments and a few teasing sexual innuendoes. ", and Bulletproof Monk " It has many scenes of comic-book style violence, some of which would be disturbing if their context was not so silly. " Far more useful than the MPAA.
From another A. O. Scott’s review: " ‘The Day After Tomorrow’ is rated Pg-13. Millions of people die, but nobody swears, copulates, undresses or takes drugs."
Thank you so much for posting that one. That was exactly the kind I was looking for but couldn’t find.
For the record, the NY Times has always been a bit snarky with their ratings explanations. They’ve been providing additional information long before the MPAA started doing it, and they’ve continued writing their own since the new guidelines were instituted. There have been some very funny ones, though none leaps to mind at the moment.
My siter pointed this one out to me. In A.O. Scott’s review of Mystic River, the ratings note explained that the movie was rated R for “profanity, abundant violence and existential despair.”
The Washington Post Weekend section does this occasionally, too.
I remember the one for ‘Stealing Beauty’. Something like: “Contains the sort of weirdos that only appear in Europe.”