Sweeney Todd

[Trazalca]

After reading this damagin article, I am NOT a happy person right now.

I am livid. My eyes are ablaze with the heat of a sun ready to split the earth
to the core like a wet pine. I want to release a thousand rabid wolverines
into the pants of the executives responsible for wanting to make this movie a
PG-13 travesty. I want to curse the ratings board for introducing us to such a
horribly ambiguous standard that force feeds us the idea that horror films
should be made so that the parents can take the kids along guilt free. I want
to see the executives get taken out by Sweeney Todd, and be made as
breakfast entrees to be fed to those same families demanding such a move upon films
that have no business getting marked PG-13 in the first place.

I have been a HUGE fan of this story since I was a little kid in NYC.
I grew up in love with the music, the gothic and macabre tale, and the mystery
of whether or not the story really did happen. The musical is AMAZING.
The songs alone have the capability to lift one up out of everyday life,
and into an ideal that is among the best of escapisms. Mixing that with a
pretty cool horror tale, and that has to make for one heck of a movie.

When I heard Tim Burton would be doing a film version, I was stoked.
I loved what he's done with Sleepy Hollow, and there was no argument.
It fits his twisted take on movies, and I was VERY much looking forward to this
film, albeit with misgivings. Would everyone be singing? Can Depp sing?
I had to wonder about this, and still am, but now that tiny, infestimally petty
squabble in my brain has suddenly been knocked aside by the enormous
blight of anxiety that is the deadly and unforgivable rating of PG-13.

The only hope I have left in recovery from this stupid move on the part of the
studios is an UNRATED DVD with all scenes fully restored. I don't care about
the fact that the studios were wanting to fill the seats in with more people because
they couldn't handle the gore. It's one of the most rudest of gestures a studio
can make. If this was a story that nobody knew about at all, and they did this,
nobody, including me, would care. But this is a musical that's been around for
several decades now. And this rating change IS INSULTING.

Can you imagine if the studios finally decided to put out West Side Story for the
first time? They'd being crapping in their collective diapers over the fact that
there would be racial overtones implied, and reduce the two races in the story
to nothing more than innocuously layered groups that mean nothing to nobody.

If this studio can't handle the horror, then this film should have been made at
another studio that understands what's being put together here by the director
and fellow filmmakers that care about the story they worked so hard to put
into theaters. This is absolute madness. It's censorship of the worst kind.
And in case nobody picked up on the notion, I am on the side of the art,
not the studio that distributes it.

The only justification for this rating's change, and believe it or not, there is only
ONE justification for it, it is if the movie just flat out sucks.
If the movie is badly made, failing to deliver the kind of movie experience
it's supposed to give to all of us, then changing the rating to whatever you want
will not save it. It's that simple. Worser still, if this move is a sign from the studios
that the movie will genuinely BOMB at the BOX OFFICE, and they want to rake in
as many suckers to see it as possible before the word of mouth can be spread that
Depp couldn't sing this side of a barbershop quartet, then give it a PG-13.

As despicable a rating as PG-13 is, if the movie stinks, it has my blessing to have it.
Like that other wonderful musical, the Mikado, wisely advises us:
"Let the punishment fit the crime."

But honestly, whether the studio or the artist botches it up, it's still a screw-up
of a fine musical, all thanks to Hollywood that continues to run on empty and
out of touch with the masses.

[neglet]

I'm withholding judgment. Has Tim Burton ever made an R-rated movie before? He seems to do well enough generating spooky atmosphere without it. And it's not like you see the gore up close when you see the musical on stage. So a PG-13 rating doesn't automatically mean they are trampling on the original spirit of the musical. I'll probably see this no matter what--I'd pay to hear Alan Rickman read the damn Yellow Pages, so putting him in a Sondheim musical is a no-brainer for me.

[Gentlemen Death]

Originally Posted by neglet

I'm withholding judgment. Has Tim Burton ever made an R-rated movie before? He seems to do well enough generating spooky atmosphere without it. And it's not like you see the gore up close when you see the musical on stage. So a PG-13 rating doesn't automatically mean they are trampling on the original spirit of the musical. I'll probably see this no matter what--I'd pay to hear Alan Rickman read the damn Yellow Pages, so putting him in a Sondheim musical is a no-brainer for me.

Sleepy Hollow was rated R

[conman]

I was very disappointed to hear this too. I watched a taped version of the musical with Angela Lansbury in high school and was very excited to hear Burton, Depp, Bonham Carter, and Rickman were on board for a film. The first picture I saw got me even more excited. Now this?! What the f*ck Warner Bros.!

[Trazalca]

Originally Posted by Gentlemen Death

Sleepy Hollow was rated R

Yep. Thanks to all that bloody mess, and Christopher Walken.

[WhiteKnight]

So was Ed Wood. Somehow Beetlejuice managed a PG rating back in 88 even though Michael Keaton came off with cracks such as "nice fuckin' model."

Anyway, the point is Burton has obviously done R rated movies before and, if the source material calls for it, the studios should allow him to make Sweeny Todd the same way. Art in any form has a target audience and I, too, am sick of executives marketing things for inappropriate audiences when they should be trying to please the their bread and butter. "YOU DON'T BITE THE HAND THAT FEEDS YOU!"

[Gentlemen Death]

Originally Posted by Trazalca

Yep. Thanks to all that bloody mess, and Christopher Walken.

You did not like Sleepy Hollow?

[Lavoruis]

A movie of "Sweeny Todd"
was made several years ago it was quite good &gory.
Why do another one?
This depp and burton thing, is becoming a little weird?

[Trazalca]

Originally Posted by Gentlemen Death

You did not like Sleepy Hollow?

Are you kidding me? Sleepy Hollow ROCKED! I thought it was among his best films.
I'm surprised he hasn't done more offbeat horror fare. That last post was my
weak attempt at wit. Sorry for the mislead.
Anything Walken does is worth an R. Even if he just sits there
and stares at you through the camera lens.

[Trazalca]

Originally Posted by Lavoruis

A movie of "Sweeny Todd"
was made several years ago it was quite good &gory.
Why do another one?
This depp and burton thing, is becoming a little weird?

Two reasons: 1) it was NOT a musical. 2) It sucked.