Stupid movie warnings

What is with these ridiculous warnings that we now get on our movie posters? They have appeared in the past 6 months or so in the UK, although I suspect they have been around on the other side of the pond for a lot longer.

“Warning: contains extreme peril, unconscionable rumpus, and a fat man saying ‘Bollocks’”

“Caution: contains mild innuendo, repeated vomiting and animated rodents”

I mean… just give away the whole fucking plot, why don’tcha :rolleyes:

Anyway, what the hell is “mild peril”? Is there some guy at the BBFC monitoring the levil of peril that various characters encounter throughout the movie? “Hmm… Jim Carrey walked a little too close to that loose paving slab for my liking there…”

Do we have to classify and pigeonhole every last goddamn thing?

The day after tomorrow trailer on UK TV had the following warning on the bottom

Mary Whitehouse would be so happy with this. Shite in the extreme if you ask me.

Are those real warnings or fake ones that some advertizer dreamed up? If they’re real . . . shrug

I like the details. It lets me know whether or not there are going to be booies shown to make it worth my while! :smiley:

I suspect a variation of this is the reason - movie ratings are extremely vague about why a film got the rating it did. If a parent wants to keep their kid from seeing boobies, they can look at the warning reading “Warning: Contains graphic violence, decapitation, alien creatures exploding, and a couple uses of the f-word, but no kissing or anything like that,” and happily send the kid off to see the film. :stuck_out_tongue:

Well, unconscionable rumpus has been shown to cause the vapors in women of a certain age.

Silenus–do you have any idea how long, for most movies, that list of questionable things would have to be in a movie that actually got around to showing boobies?

That’d be kind of funny, actually… line after line of blah, blah, blah…

and boobies. Big ones.

OK, I exaggerated those ones slightly, but here are some real ones:

Not “language”?? Damn those heathens that invented talkies!

Yeah - maybe if they’d acquitted themselves a bit harder with the battle violence, the sex wouldn’t have been so mild…

Meanwhile, they never give you the movie warnings you want to see:

*Contains ridiculous romance plot recycled from “Pretty Woman.”

Contains extended scenes of bad acting.

Excessive use of product placement.

Bears no resemblance to the franchise/novel/comic book/mythology implied by the title.

Contains bad CGI critters fighting each other.

Plot makes as much sense as a David Lynch film.

WARNING: Movie is a complete waste of time and money.*

Contains Billy Connolly & Timothy Spall!

We have similar warnings on our tv shows here in the states. Right under the rating, there will be a string of letters telling you why the show got the rating it did. Violence, strong language, adult situations, small imaginary creatures that encourage human sacrifice, etc.

“mild sex”???

“Dear? I don’t want to impose, but it IS Tuesday.”

I absolutely love this new trend; it’s frequently more entertaining than the movie itself. I think it’s awfully generous of them to amuse us with the ludicrous thought processes that underly their archaic and prudish ratings system. It’s ones like this that crack me up:

Mild peril! Protect us, BBFC!

(Colophon, your parody examples were things of beauty, by the way. :))

“Fantasy violence.” I love it. Is there also “science fiction violence,” “mystery violence,” “drama violence,” and “poetry violence?” If not, why not.

One movie rating I’d like to see is

WARNING: Movie would be an excellent candidate for MST3K.

This thread sent me back to Joe Bob Briggs’ website with its B Movie reviews. At the end of each review, he counts the breasts and car crashes, among other things.

As examples:

From the review for American Cyborg: "Sixty-four dead bodies. Homeless abuse. Body-carving. Knife through the hand. Transmission dropped on a guy’s head. Knife in the neck. Killer transvestite. . . "

From the review for Assault of the Killer Bimbos:
"Eight breasts. One dead body. A 180 on the Squealing Airhead Decibel Meter. Three high-speed motor vehicle chases, with one great crash. . . "

and the lists do go on. So if regular killers are OK, but killer transvestites give you the creeps, or if your body count limit is 50, you have the useful information you need to make your B movie choice. It’s been too long since I read one of those reviews. Thanks for reminding me.

How about:
“Warning: does not contain nudity suggested in trailer” :mad:

BTW, have you seen CAP Alert, a wacko fundie movie review site.

Here’s a taster for Catwoman:

Uh huh. “Revelry”? “Cat able to foresee future”? The horror!

There are those “warning: contains strobe lighting” signs - however I suspect those are for epilepsy sufferers.

Maybe these warnings are similiar. Like “warning: bad acting” (me not go to see this film - helps huh?) or “warning: contains graphic and prolongued scenes of sex” (me buy two tickets and wait for six ours outside the ODC for the premiere).

CAP Alert deserves a pitting of its own, just for the contortions they use to come up with that sanctimonious “WISDOM” rating system. :rolleyes:

I’ll tell you, I haven’t read the bible, but I learn the most interesting things… I didn’t know felines with Lazarus abilities or the ability to see into the future (beyond ‘this annoying human will feed me and go away’) were a big affront to Christians. Go figure.

Fantasy Violence. Is that when you ram your fist through the car winshield of the moron who can’t figure out how to stop yakking on his phone and use a goddamn turn signal, grab him by the tongue, yank it all the way out of his mouth with the guts trailing behind it, tie oen end of his innards to your back bumper and put the pedal to the metal until…

Oh… uhh, sorry, I seem to have drifted a bit there.

So I went to the CAP Alert review for Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. I’m not surprised by its abysmal “Offense to God” rating (after all, the movie involves witchcraft, and witchcraft is very very bad, so saith the Lord), but I did have to wonder about the mention of “giant tattoos.” Who has giant tattoos in PoA? 'Cause I think I missed that part.