First Lucas retires, now Expendables 2 PG-13!

Discussion in 'Entertainment and Movie Talk' started by SVTStingRay, Jan 18, 2012.

  1. SVTStingRay

    SVTStingRay Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    1,636
    cause chuck norris says so!. the week of WTF

    Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

    chuck sounds like he lost his balls somewhere. so much for the internet tough-guy talk. this man made his career out of killing human beings in more-and-more deprived ways but say one bad word OMG!
     
  2. aeonpulse

    aeonpulse Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    1,606
    *FACEPALM*

    Thanks a lot, Chuck.
     
  3. Solo4114

    Solo4114 Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    4,470
    You know who you should be thanking? The studio. Because they wanted Chuck Norris more than they wanted a kickass action film.
     
  4. JoMamma_Smurf

    JoMamma_Smurf Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,560
    Well count me out.
     
  5. MooCriket

    MooCriket Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    3,366
    Oh noes. Life is no longer worth living.
     
  6. bwayne64

    bwayne64 Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    815
    Good for Chuck. Shows how tough he really is ! Stands up for his beliefs, against a world filled with degenerates, :) And kicks all their buttocks. You go Chuck.
     
    jcoffman99 likes this.
  7. Shade88

    Shade88 Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    866
    :thumbsup

    Seriously, why isn't there more posts like the one I'm quoting?

    Wow... no vulgar, That automatically makes this a bad film, because we all know that memorable scene in Star Wars when Han starts cussing out Obi Wan... Wait, that didn't happen? So I guess cussing isn't needed to make a good movie. :cool
     
    jcoffman99 likes this.
  8. Flagg

    Flagg Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,681
    That scene did happen. It will be on the super secret extended 4D cranial input version Uncle George gives us in 2022.
     
  9. MooCriket

    MooCriket Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    3,366
    Ahhh my retinas. Not in bold! You guys did see the first film right? So you do understand a sequel without some naughty words and blown apart dudes is going to be somewhat lacking for those that enjoyed the first film, yes?

    Chuck can hold those values and I applaud the man for them, but not in this film. No Chuck, not in this film.
     
  10. Shade88

    Shade88 Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    866
    Is that after Uncle George's fifth or sixth retirement announcement?:behave

    @ Moocriket: I don't remember reading that they were taking out the gore, I just read that they were taking out the vulgar... Are they even taking out the vulgar, or are they toning it down?
     
  11. wannab

    wannab Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,486
    The studio loves this as PG-13 vs R equates to more * in seats.


    Doug
     
  12. nickytea

    nickytea Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    2,305
    You're posting this on a forum with a language filter.
     
  13. MooCriket

    MooCriket Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    3,366
    In that case, if it is only the language...I'll be A-okay. I just assumed that they would tinker with some of the action/gore as well:thumbsup

    It would be great if Sly or the villain make fun of Chuck for this in the film, and Nicky...no ****, Sherlock. Were talking about an action film not an action forum.

    Love ya ;)
     
  14. jlee562

    jlee562 Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,685
    Believe me, I get that you shouldn't have to make a movie with vulgarity, but removing the coarse language from The Expendables is like removing the spaceships from Star Wars. It's supposed to have that kind of camp value.
     
  15. Lutso

    Lutso Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,307
    Hey I applaud Mr. Norris for his beliefs, but I'm just trying to figure out what type of "young people" he thinks are going to watch the Expendables.

    1) 12-year-old Call of Duty players who are obsessed with using bad words as much as possible anyway -

    2) Kids going to a movie with their parents to see people getting their bodies shot in half by shotguns? But it's okay, because there's no cussing...?

    Seems like an all-around odd situation.

    But hey I don't approve of swearing either. More power to ya.
     
  16. Mechinyun

    Mechinyun Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,241
    I hate the fact that Chuck Norris is glorified, the guy is a total ****** bag. I can't stand him or his crazy * views and opinions.
     
  17. Mechinyun

    Mechinyun Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,241
    This gets me too.. so "swear" words are "omg noooo" but shooting people in the face and blowing people up are ok?

    Yeahhhh WTF.
     
  18. familyman

    familyman Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,356
    I for one think this is awesome. I don;t use bad language, these is no need for it realy. I can exspress my self even when upset with out swearing.
    This just shows how tough he is. Finaly some one standing up for what he believes.
     
  19. KnightAsylum

    KnightAsylum Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,476
    People that use the term "vulgarity" should not be the target audience for this film anyway.
    Hate when they try to make all movies for kids. :facepalm
     
  20. SVTStingRay

    SVTStingRay Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    1,636
  21. Wes R

    Wes R Legendary Member

    Trophy Points:
    6,750
    Just what the world needs another watered down kid friendly movie with a theater full of kids saying exactly the words he wouldn't. They should just stop production.
     
  22. Godsmulligan

    Godsmulligan Active Member

    Trophy Points:
    330
    I would like to see a movie where Chuck Norris beats Kevin Costner to death and then dies of cancer.
     
  23. 0neiros

    0neiros Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,790
    Oh Please...a few F-bombs are lost, big whoop. Aren't most of Chuck's movies actually PG-13? How dare a guy stand up for his principals, I guess if he were a cash ***** like the rest of hollywood, he'd be OK in your books. ****ing tell me, is my typing the F-word really ****ing adding any ****ing thing to this ****ing post? Or could you ****ing live without the word **** being used like a ****ing comma? This is a ****ing action movie, where ****ing cussing doesn't really ****ing add anything. Worried about your ****ing violence? Watch the first ****ing few minutes of ****ing Bones, or a CSI show, and that's on ****ing prime ****ing time on ****ing TV. Now read my post and ignore all the instances of **** or ****ing...is it still coherent? So...what did you exactly miss out on? To use a Pre-Hack RPF Standard, "Lighten up Francis".
     
    jcoffman99 likes this.
  24. Monster Dave

    Monster Dave Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,831
    I read that too....I never thought it would have been Chuck whining about language in a movie that brings down the house of cards.

    :facepalm
     
  25. IndyBlues

    IndyBlues Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,036
    The first film was fine without Chuck, this would have been as well.
    Mike
     
  26. Sandman0077

    Sandman0077 Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,356
    The first movie wasn't even that good so I don't care either way. If they were going for a good story to fill with awesome actors then they wouldn't need to change anything to have Chuck Norris. Just replace him. But instead they are trying to get as many well known names in one room and create a story around them which was bluntly apparent in the first film.

    I don't see how not cursing will make it even worse. Cursing doesn't make action, actors make action. If Hollywood is that worried their film will suck bc Chuck Norris won't be in it, there is obviously some underlining issues with it.
     
  27. Solo4114

    Solo4114 Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    4,470
    Here's the issue. The problem lies not with the loss of coarse language, but with the overall neutering of the content of the film to secure a PG-13 rating. If you watched the first film, it's graphic in both violence and language. THAT'S THE POINT. That's what the film is FOR. You'd be equally justified in saying "What gives?!" if the studio also announced that for the next Veggie Tales film, they're going to feature a lot of heavy drug use and explicit sex. If you go to a film to have a particular experience, when the studio juggles that experience around JUST so that they can market that they have a particular actor in it, you're entirely justified in being irked at the change.

    And if the harsh language is gone but the violence remains, well, then it just calls into question one of my fundamental disconnects with people who have zero objection to violent content, but balk at the notion of WORDS.


    It makes no sense that someone would have no problem with watching a film where you see a character unloading a shotgun into a crowd of hired goons, then bashing another over the head with said shotgun thereby causing permanent brain damage, followed by roundhouse-kicking a guy in the chest to where his ribcage cracks and punctures a lung, while simultaneously elbowing another dude in the jaw to shatter it so that he has to take nutrition through a tube for 8 months, followed by a punch to the throat of another guy that collapses his trachea....

    ...but it's a really bad thing if AFTER the character has done all that he says something like, "YEAH, motherf**kers! That'll teach you s**t-sucking b***ches to f**k with me! A**holes!!"





    Someone, please, explain the logic underlying that. Go ahead. I dare you. I double dog dare you.
     
  28. Jeyl

    Jeyl Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,670
    I never use vulgarity myself in front of other people and even when I'm alone watching movies and playing games. I certainly don't try to type it in fully when I type here (though it still counts I guess). One of the coolest things I loved about The Dark Knight that nobody really caught was how very little profanity there was in the film. I think the only obvious line was when Jim Gordon says to the Joker "We got you, you son of a bi***". Even a lot of fan films that are set in The Dark Knight universe screw that up.

    BUT! That doesn't the violence still can't give the film an R-rating. All I'm seeing here is language, not violence. And maybe Stallone will convince the director to still shoot the material so there will be an alternate cut.

    Besides, I wasn't all impressed with the fake CGI blood in the first film.
     
  29. Jeyl

    Jeyl Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,670
    Oh, did I mention that I LOATH the PG-13 rating with a vengeance? I know a lot of awesome films have that rating, but when it comes to the "broader appeal" arguments, they always say PG-13 does better. Grr!
     
  30. Betamin

    Betamin Master Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    2,660
    PG-13?? That no good Monday to Friday!!
     
  31. Jeyl

    Jeyl Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,670
    The R rating is slowly but surely becoming the new X/NC-17 rating. Nobody wants it, and everybody keeps trying to convince us that "It's still tough and nothing will be missing!" Take this Sly response.

    Harry, the film is fantastic with Van Damme turning in an inspired performance... Our final battle is one for the ages. The PG13 rumor is true, but before your readers pass judgement, trust me when I say this film is LARGE in every way and delivers on every level. This movie touches on many emotions which we want to share with the broadest audience possible, BUT, fear not, this Barbeque of Grand scale * Bashing will not leave anyone hungry...Sly

    It's like the R rating never did anyone any good.
     
  32. aeonpulse

    aeonpulse Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    1,606
    I’m not entirely sure what’s up with all the self glorified “I don’t ever use profanity and I do just fine” posts. It’s wonderful that you choose not to use profanity, but that’s not really the discussion here. I seriously doubt that anyone concerned about the PG-13 rating is worried about a lack of profanity, it’s a lack of violence that they’re concerned about. It might sound juvenile to some, but that’s what people want in the Expendables. Nobody who went to see the first one in theaters was expecting any Oscar-worthy performances, or a perplexing story, or a deep underlying message, etc, etc… People just wanted a fun, gory, no-holds-barred action movie starring a bunch of old 80’s/90’s action stars, reminiscent of movies such as Commando, Predator, Rambo, and whatever else.

    Chuck had the opportunity to read the script before he agreed to join the project. Yeah, it’s real great that he’s “standing up for what he believes in”, but no one twisted his arm and told him he had to be part of the cast. If he didn’t like what he saw in the script, he should have just declined the offer. Instead it sounds like he came in, and started demanding changes based upon his own moral standings. People who enjoyed the first film were expecting a sequel that was even more over the top, now it sounds like we’ll more likely be getting a neutered version because of one man’s personal beliefs. Seems like a pretty crappy thing to do.
     
  33. Solo4114

    Solo4114 Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    4,470
    Minor fix, but this.


    And I say that Chuck's beliefs are illogical and nonsensical because he apparently has no problem with violence, but has a problem with expletives. Assuming his concerns have been accurately characterized.


    To me, it sounds like the studio and Stallone were more concerned with who they could brag was on the roster, so that they could say "AND Chuck Norris!! That's right guys, the beard is BACK!" They could just as easily have said "Chuck. I understand that you have a brand to protect, but so do we. Did you see the last movie? Did you read the script? They axe-kicked Gary Daniels in the head to break his neck. That, by the way, was AFTER Randy Couture used a fully automatic shotgun to shred a crowd of thugs. And you're worried about a few F-bombs? Great. Then don't be in the film."


    But no, instead, they wanted Chuck on the poster, so they'll soften the film AND hit the PG-13 demographic! This is about marketing and nothing else.

    Who would have thought that The Expendables II would become the prime example of what's wrong with the ever-increasingly marketing-driven nature of Hollywood? Especially when The Expendables I illustrated the power of savvy marketing to still produce a film that does exactly what it says on the tin.
     
  34. aeonpulse

    aeonpulse Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    1,606
    Wasn't that Terry Crews?
     
  35. Jeyl

    Jeyl Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,670
    I ABSOLUTELY AGREE 110%! I don't swear, drink or smoke (and I think I eat right), but I love this stuff! I had a fun time with the first Expandables, but no where before or after the film's release would you find me making even a mention over the profanity or the violence. It never crossed my mind.

    But Chuck Norris? This isn't the kind of thing actors should be doing. For one thing, it's just acting. The thing that I admire most in a lot of actors is their ability to "act" in ways that you normally wouldn't expect. Gregory Peck went from playing the #1 hero in To Kill a Mocking Bird to a mad * scientist who clones baby hitlers! Christian Bale had a good stream of films before he did American Phsycho which, according to IMDB, his agent said it was career suicide.

    This reeks of disappointment regardless of how awesome it will be.
     
  36. Sandman0077

    Sandman0077 Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,356
    I curse like crazy now that I'm in the Army, but the point I was making was that they are clearly just trying to get that wow factor from actors names versus script like someone said about me. If Chuck doesn't curse then replace him. But they are more worried about his name on a poster than anything.
     
  37. Kerr Avon

    Kerr Avon Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,841
    Good for Chuck for standing for his principals.

    Now that of course means I won't bother seeing it, but good for him.
     
  38. MooCriket

    MooCriket Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    3,366
    I feel much better now. I watched a loop on YouTube of Bruce Lee kicking his *#%. Chuck got owned.
     
  39. SVTStingRay

    SVTStingRay Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    1,636
    you mean i will never be able to experience the utter joy of someone in this sequel uttering "remember this **** at christmas! that makes me so sad.
     
  40. jcoffman99

    jcoffman99 Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    2,466
    I loved the Rambo films. I don't remember much vulgarity. I enjoyed the first Expendables but don't remember any vulgarity. Does that mean it didn't have any? Obviously not or we wouldn't be having this conversation. So that means it didn't make the movie memorable enough that it can't be cut. I'd much rather watch a PG-13 movie that contains almost cartoon like violence with my son than a movie filled with f-bombs.

    John
     
  41. wannab

    wannab Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,486
    I'm with you on this, I like to be able to watch action movies with my son too without all the f-bombs. However, I think this "franchise" should stand as first intended and we family guys should just take our grown up friends and enjoy it for what it is or, if objectionable, just pass on it. It is obvious they are going for the cash grab on this one with the PG-13 rating. I think the "Chuck said" thing is just a convenient excuse.

    BTW, Chuck wanted not only the expletives toned down, but the violence as well so it isn't him being a hypocrite for toning the one down and not the other. Hypocrite based on past work then yes you have a point.

    I am disappointed that they are toning the whole thing down -- blunting the knife as they say -- and are just going for the payday.


    Doug
     
  42. brooksknives

    brooksknives New Member

    Trophy Points:
    2
    Well that just sucks who is going to believe that a bunch of mercs are going aroung killing but not swearing
     
  43. kalkamel

    kalkamel Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    2,270
  44. rodneyfaile

    rodneyfaile Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,980
    Veggie Tales - starring Ron Jeremy and Lindsay Lohan. Narration by Russell Brand.
     
  45. TymerDC

    TymerDC Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,296
    GOOD GRIEF....I find it amazing that studio execs found him so important and wanted him that bad to have allowed him to dictate his own demands for the film as a whole....I would have said "well I guess we'll have to survive without you and you can go back to selling your cheap exercise equipment". Walker, Texas Ranger sucked, he wouldn't have been missed and the movie would have done quite well without him. I barely can remember any movie he was in except "Delta Force" and "Braddock" which was hardly memorable.....in fact I had to look up his filmography just to jar my memory...nothing great far as I'm concerned.
    Violence and bad language doesn't always work on certain types of movies but in this particular film I feel it does.
     
    Last edited: Jan 20, 2012
  46. aeonpulse

    aeonpulse Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    1,606
    Yeah, not much vulgarity at all in all four Rambo films, what I was referring to was the violence, and how awesomely hokey/hilarious it was. (Namely the exploding arrows from Rambo III, and the 50-Cal scene from Rambo4.) That's what I want to see in the next Expendables, because it's entertaining, and reminiscent of all those cheesy/awesome 80's movies.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 9, 2018
  47. jcoffman99

    jcoffman99 Sr Member RPF PREMIUM MEMBER

    Trophy Points:
    2,466
    I'm with ya. :)
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 9, 2018
  48. Solo4114

    Solo4114 Master Member

    Trophy Points:
    4,470
    Exactly, folks. I mean, I think it's silly to intentionally cut out profanity from a film that's already graphically violent. I also think it's stupid to cut out both just to secure a PG-13 rating and billing of a guy who'll probably be in one freaking scene. Place your bets on whether he'll appear as a Texas Ranger, by the way.

    The film might still be entertaining, of course, but it's changing horses mid-stream. It's just stupid marketing. AGAIN. The thing that's killing Hollywood.
     
  49. Weequay

    Weequay Well-Known Member

    Trophy Points:
    556
    Has to be a publicity stunt to promotwe the film and make an easy excuse for a PG13 rating.

    That rating mean more * in seats.

    No way Chuck norris has that kind of pull.

    weequay
     
  50. wannab

    wannab Sr Member

    Trophy Points:
    1,486
    They are also backing off the violence to get the rating. So like I said it's strictly a money grab.


    Doug
     

Share This Page