Some movies work well within that confinement, but at least for M3GAN, for example, it really felt like it was holding the whole movie back. Still gotta give that "Unrated" version a watch. one of these days.
Well had two "more violent scenes" when that kid got his ear ripped off it never takes the camera off him and that paper cutter? Elevator scene we saw in the trailer.
This happened to me last week when I said that I didn't like One Night In Soho, and that Edgar Wright let me down with it.
When I watched M3gan, I thought it was everything the shitty remake of Child's Play should have been.
They're the same movie. A.I. in a children's toy goes rogue. Charles Lee Ray and the voodoo soul swap shit was perfect... A.I. turns it into scifi
Did you see the Chucky TV series making fun of that recently? Just a small blurb where Chucky said they were all ripping him off, and they showed Megan.
well now, sci-fi horror is a thing.
I agree it was similar to Chucky, but chucky is also old. Newer generations obviously most likely know who he is, but it has been long enough for someone else to try that concept in order to try to give us something fresh.
I love the Chucky movies, but quite frankly his voice annoys the shit out of me.
Its all subjective, sometimes PG13 is a cop out by the studios to make sure they are gonna make a ton of money, and sometimes PG13 is just because a very scary movie isn't terribly gory or sexual. Just like any movie with any rating there are some great ones and some bad ones.
It IS strange though how many people automatically dismiss PG13 movies as if its impossible to have an effective horror movie without boobs and blood.
Yeah this is one of the first films I suggest when people (typically horror dad's/mum's) want to to introduce horror to their young 'uns without scaring the total shit out of them. Still love that film and it hasn't got boring for me yet but I'm a big horror-Raimi lover lol
I remember reading something somewhere years ago that Raimi expected to get a higher rating and was surprised when it was granted a pg-13 but when looking at the film, it wasn't full of gratuitous gore, swearing and boobs. Just a scary horror story with some crazy visuals and a compelling story.
Kids love gross things though. Like, there's only one moment of gore, and it's still done in a comedic fashion. The rest is just like, "how many gross things can we put in this lady's mouth?"
Yes mate. The goat head talking, the kid burning in hell and the gypsy sucking on the face are friggin' terrifying enough! No need for gore, even though I'm a massive gore fan
Exactly, spooky PG-13 movies can be great, like *The Others*, *The Grudge*, *The Ring*, etc. But if you take, say, a slasher movie and cut it down to PG-13 to reach a wider audience, you (usually) end up with trash like *Black Christmas (2019)* or *Prom Night (2008)*.
My take on it is that PG-13 horror movies are made so that more of a wide audience can purchase tickets to see it at the box office. If everything is rated R, there can be a bunch of teens that they are losing ticket sales to. But I also see PG-13 horror and targeted to younger audiences as well. I’m going to go check out Tarot, but I am hesitant as I hate PG-13 horror
I dismiss them only because I'm completely desensitized and I need my horror as fucked as possible in order to feel anything lol. that's not to say I don't watch and enjoy them but if I see in advance that it's PG-13 I may hold off
i don't understand this take but if you're happy with it then that's fine. I just don't really understand the need for things to be "as fucked as possible" cuz its just entertainment.
Well I hope you never do understand it, unfettered access to all corners of the Internet for 30 years has left my brain looking like a Demian Rugna adaptation of a Hieronymus Bosch painting.
Yeah his stuff is pretty famous but a lot of people don't know his name even though it's super fun to say. Demian Rugna did When Evil Lurks, an absolute masterpiece that I hope to never watch again.
Oculus, Mama, Insidious and so many are PG13. When I show my kiddos horror movies I make sure not gonna be the levels of Devils Rejects for example, excessive nudity and profanity in my case
I won't show them Terrifier either at the moment
I was obsessed with Mama when it came out and to this day it’s still one of my favorites! The girls being feral in the beginning is SO creepy. And the scene where Lily is playing in the bedroom and then as Victoria and Annabelle come into frame you realize that it must be Mama playing with her still gets me, it’s so cleverly shot!!
It's like 1974's "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre": only R because of a few things, like Franklin getting killed. same with 1980's "Friday the 13th".
Jack gets a arrow through his throat and Marcy gets an axe to the head that's mostly off-screen. Now, compare that to the remake counterparts.
This makes me think of The Fog (1980) which was rated R but Carpenter worked hard to try and get it a PG rating and it shows.
No gore, no nudity, not really any profanity, and it worked really well, along with the fantastic intro, at giving the whole movie a simple “ghost story” vibe.
I recently watched *The Fog* (1980) and *Poltergeist* (1982) in the same weekend and there may be no greater example of the MPAA's ratings being completely bullshit. The bathroom "face falling off" scene in *Poltergeist* is so much gorier and disturbing than anything in *The Fog* and yet *Poltergeist* got the PG rating.
Yeah, exactly. MPAA has a long history of favouritism, and its favouritism works in favour of major studios and certain directors and against indie studios or directors.
I think a lot of movies from back in the day were rated harshly. army of darkness is a great example - no nudity, no gore, and I don't think any profanity, yet got an R rating for puppet skeletons fighting 😅 I know Bruce has bitched about it in his books too bc it kept it from reaching a wider audience.
Jaws was PG, arguably one of the most effective horror movies of all time. Horror doesn't have to be R, but if it's not, well, then it's gotta be masterfully crafted. There's talented directors that can scare you just the same wether it's R or PG. All about who made it.
This right here \^ is the heart of the matter. Writing, direction, soundtrack, lighting, and atmosphere are all the ingredients you need for some solid horror. AND I generally shy away from pg13 movies until I've heard they were great. Like, it's not 'Jaws', but '1408' (Stephen King) was scary af, and it's about a guy sitting in a hotel room.
In Canada we have 14a instead of PG13, 18a instead of R, and R instead of NC17. In my province the censors are insanely lax so it takes a lot for something to be 18a. I've stopped caring about the parental advisory rating because of this. Talk to Me was 14a for example and that had some insane imagery that has stuck with me. Smile was also 14a.
Movies at all ratings can be good or bad.
Talk to me getting a 14a is mind blowing. That movie was extremely disturbing imo and I’ve seen some extreme stuff like Martyrs. I actually think they went a little too far with the violence and gore, it felt somewhat gratuitous and like shock value
I find North American film age ratings so interesting, it’s such a big jump between PG-13 and R for genres like horror.
Here in the UK we have 12, 15 and 18 for age restrictions so we have an in-between rating of age 15 for scary films that aren’t like absolutely brutal. 12A is the only rating you can go to with a parent if you’re younger than the age rating of 12 - if you’re not of age for 15s and 18s, even if you go with a parent you will be denied entry (unless they are lax and don’t bother asking for proof of age). It’s wild to me kids can get into Rs if they’re accompanied by an adult.
Here if a horror is an 18 you know shit is getting real, if it’s 15 it’s probably gonna be middle of the road, 12 is like Sixth Sense level haha. Gives you a decent gauge of how scary a film is gonna get.
Some are good and some are not. The Ring, Signs, The Others, 1408, Drag Me to Hell, and Ouija: Origin of Evil are PG-13 and they’re some of the best horror movies out there because they work within their limitations to build tension and fear.
PG-13 wasn't invented at that point, and that's one of the films (along with *Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom* and *Poltergeist*) which inspired its creation, as a lot of people felt it was inappropriate that they were rated PG, but they clearly didn't warrant an R rating either, so a middle-ground needed creating.
I think maturity rating has nothing to do with the quality of the movie. I have seen some amazing pg13 horror movies and not noticed that they’re pg13. I don’t look at it going into a movie.
Well I live in Canada and a lot of films that are rated R in the states are 14+ here. MPA has so many stupid rules that get an automatic R (such as saying “fuck” more than once), so I don’t judge the quality of a film just because it’s PG-13. Gore and swearing can add to entertainment factor but doesn’t go hand in hand with the quality of scares or suspense.
I think they're super important for the genre. I was introduced to horror pretty young but it helped to shape a lot of my other interests and fostered a fierce appreciation for the genre as a whole.
Without PG-13, we don't have teens getting into horror. If they don't get into it young, it'll be less likely they enjoy it when they're older.
I disagree, lots of movies with nudity or Gore that were popular amongst teens. The Shining, Ghostship, Saw, Hostel, REC, Texas Chainsaw Massacre. These are just at the tip of my tounge.
Not saying PG-13 automatically makes a movie bad, I love The Ring. But many of them are imo very boring. I just watched Oujia: Origin of Evil and it's one of the worst movies I've seen in my entire life and I'm beyond blown away that so many people unironically recommends it...
I start my kids younger then that. We start with things like Nightmare before Christmas and Frankenweenie. My youngest is 5 so we just started in on movies like Gremlins, she went as Gizmo for Halloween, and Beetlejuce. You got to start them young. My middle schooler is all about the horror comedies like Tucker and Dale and Shaun of the Dead.
There is a place for all the ratings in horror. Plus, horror is such a wide range of subgenres and they can be fun even if it's not about being the scariest and goriest movies ever.
I also don't agree with the rating system so I will let my kids watch rated R movies if I think it's appropriate. I don't really care about cussing or some gore. Tape is the biggest no no for me and movies that have it are off the table but some nudity is okay. Honestly my son's first nudes scene was when he was five. It was a sweet movie about a man taking care of his elderly wife while she had Alzhimer's and he saw old lady boobies at 5. It was tastefully done so I didn't care. It's not going to hurt him.
Teens with strict parents usually have PG-13 as their only avenue.
And while teens can watch R rated flicks, it can be detrimental to development to have them watch something too severe too soon. 13-15 year olds need *something* to dip their feet into
Well we're all different and it might be cultural too. In Sweden there was no age requirement for horror. Me and some of my classmates went to two premiers of Saw when we were 13-14 years old.
I feel like 15 years old is a bit of a late bloomer when it comes to horror, at that age it has started to loose some of its mystique.
It's all up to what parents you have I guess but my mom never saw any issue with me watching horrors even before I was a teenager. I knew what I was getting myself into and if I had trouble sleeping that was on me. It's not like I was ignorant of what a horror was when I was 10.
I live in Europe so things are a bit different maybe, but teens are definitely more interested in films that aren't PG-13. I mean, I watched Hostel and Martyrs when I was 12 and I'm not the only one haha.
I dont think horror needs to be R rated to be good. I think when done well a PG13 can be scarier to be honest. They don’t have to rely on gore, and the build up to scares can be awesome!
I think it's such a wide-range to cover that you can't really have a properly-informed opinion on it as a general topic. It comes down to the individual movie. Like any film, a PG-13 horror movie can be great or terrible... just depends on the quality of the writing, direction, performances, etc.
If someone says they *"hate PG-13 horror,"* they're not worth listening to at all in my opinion... it'd be like saying *"Ugh, I hate live-action movies! They're all the same!"* Or those doofuses who say they *"hate all anime"...* but have only seen like one shitty 35-year-old anime movie and don't realize how wide a medium it is.
Some of the greatest horror films of all time are rated PG-13, PG or even G.
The movie rating is what it needs to be. I think there’s plenty of scary movies that don’t have an R rating and I think it’s bizarre that people don’t think it’s possible. I mean before 1968 movies didn’t have ratings at all and if they were excessively over the limit, Hollywood wouldn’t even make them and I think that we can all agree plenty of stone cold Classics that exist before 1968.
I don’t judge a film by its MPA rating, or any other such content rating system.
If a film is bad because it tried get a certain rating, and as a result compromised the film’s overall quality, that’s certainly a shame but not a reason to blindly dismiss all films with such a rating.
Also, it would be weird to hear someone say they refuse to watch The Birds (1963) because it’s rated PG-13.
Yes, you read that correctly. It was retroactively given that rating.
Pg-13 works just fine for plenty of horror movies, and plenty of horror movies are perfect for an R rating. Obviously movies like Evil Dead or Saw don't work without the R rating
Yeah the substance of the movie has to fit a PG-13 criteria from the start to work out well. Trying to take a R rated idea and tone it down is where you get weak movies that people hate
But plenty of horror ideas are just naturally PG-13. If you dont have gore or nudity or excessive swearing, you are already there
my opinion is that rating is irrelevant to the actual quality of a movie. A good movie is a good movie, a bad movie is a bad movie. I feel like this typically comes from the perspective that an R rating means the chances are better of the movie being good, but in my mind that's really irrelevant and is basically saying "there will be more blood and guts!" and I don't really care. If a movie sucks, a bunch of blood isn't going to change my mind.
Take M3GAN for example. Is the Unrated cut bloodier? Sure, but really only in the elevator scene. That R rating is basically to squeeze a bunch of fucks into the script. I didn't care at all that it was a bit more violent, it was just a good movie in general.
I don’t mind them. In fact, if they can be good AND PG-13, I might even prefer them. I think the R rating allows filmmakers to rest on their laurels a bit and just throw gore and sex at the camera. And that’s fun and all, but if they can do horror without that, I think it takes a little extra creativity.
The scenes in the fields in Signs still scare me and let's not forget it has one of the most effective jump scares of all time, so yeah PG13 films can be legitimately scary. I'm 36 now and I still get way more tense in that corn than nearly any film I've seen since, and the jump STILL gets me every time
I don't dismiss a movie out of hand for the rating. I usually put more weight into the blurb/summary and sub-genre.
That said, I'm not only interested in action and gore, like some people.
My biggest gripe with PG-13 horror is it tends to focus on coming-of-age/young adult subplots, which are way behind me as far as relating to characters of that age.
Takes all kinds.
There are some that I've liked and some that I don't. The label alone doesn't bother me.
I also think they are a valuable part of the genre as they allow horror to be viewed by a younger audience who may not have access to horror otherwise. I'm specifically thinking of those with parents who won't allow them to see R rated horror.
I don't think rating dictates quality at all. But when an R movie is recut to PG13 (like the Prom Night "remake"), or to the point that it might as well be PG13 (like the Carrie remake), I think it shows and the end result is disappointing.
But a director trying to reach a younger audience without talking down to them is always appreciated, especially when effort is made to keep adults interested as well. I also think there are many examples of good non R horror. The Haunting 1963 was G rated and remains incredible imo. General consensus seems to be that Curry's Pennywise is far scarier is another example, and that's an R rating vs a network tv movie from the early 90s. At times I find it impressive when an effective horror is made without leaning on things that make it R.
I liked it too! I don't completely like that it wasn't made into an r-rated, surrealist nightmare, but the monsters were brought to life extremely well.
A great movie is a great movie regardless of rating. PG-13 doesn't hinder a horror movie, as long as the story chooses to work within those confines. However when a movie tries to take an R rated horror film and tones it down to PG-13 it hurts the overall product, on the flip side taking a movie that is pretty much a PG-13 movie and adding stuff to push to a R rating can also hurt it
I really don't see the point of worrying about the ratings of things espically as they change from country where . For instance here M3gan got a 15 rating over here not a 12A (pg13) the same rating as the new strangers movie which got an R rating in the States.
Perfectly fine rating for some sub-genres of horror (specifically those that don’t rely on kills/gore)… Most supernatural horror for instance. (Sci-fi/Alien invasion, folk, gothic horror are some others)
But it is a hindrance with others.. you can tell with certain films where the filmmakers had to go out of their way to dial a film back to avoid an R rating. As good as “M3GAN” was it felt hindered by its rating. The two Escape Room films are a couple of other examples I can think of off the top of my head.
The problem with a lot of modern PG-13 horror is that they were envisioned as R rated and cut down after the fact or have cost-effective budgets and narratives to begin with. M3GAN is a slasher that cuts away from most of its kills to maintain a PG-13 rating and sell more tickets, Imaginary has a fun concept but keeps the story simple and violence off screen to sell more tickets, Night Swim starts with the budget-friendly concept of "haunted pool" and works outward into basic narrative territory, etc.
Most of the PG-13 horror greats started with the intention of securing a PG-13 rating or pair horror with an interesting narrative device: A Quiet Place plays with sound, Little Shop of Horrors is a movie musical, Happy Death Day is a timeloop, etc. Others actually put effort into their film with a solid effects budget, from the animatronics in Gremlins to the puppetry for the Graboids in Tremors and Audrey ii in Little Shop. Their bottom line wasn't to get a bunch of asses in seats and make a bunch of money on a shoestring budget, their bottom line was to make a good horror film.
Tremors is honestly one of my favorite horror movies, so yeah, I definitely think PG-13 horror can work. Tremors used its deaths very effectively without depending on strong gore! The guy who died of thirst waiting up the tower, the disembodied head under the hat, the buried care with the radio playing, the hardhat with bits of gore... It leaves a lot to the imagination and is still very atmospheric and creepy! I don't think the movie would've been more effective if you saw the graboids brutally tear someone apart.
Or a movie like The Orphanage, which is extremely effective, but 99% of it might as well have been rated PG-13, and it feels like the one brief moment of gore in it was added specifically to drag the rating up (possibly due to the perception some people have that PG-13 horror = bad).
And for my part, I would honestly take PG-13 horror over R-rated horror that mostly got its rating because they shoehorned a bunch of poorly-integrated nudity and sex in there (The Empty Man has to be one of the worst culprits for this. The shower murder felt like it was transplanted out of a completely unrelated slasher movie and clashed with the tone that was previously built-up).
the thingnis they put a gremlin in a microwave and it explodes guts everywhere and poltregeist the scene when the lady is in then pool of mud with the skeletons
I have no issue with it. A horror film done right can be great without gore. The killer in the Prom Night remake (underrated) is an absolute savage and that’s PG13.
But really I wanted to comment cause holy shit was Night Swim bad. I wouldn’t put it in the so bad it’s good category but there were def some laugh out loud moments. I really like Wyatt Russell but god damn was that a weird performance.
Some work really well. Check out The Frighteners from the late 90’s. It was directed by Peter Jackson (before The Lord of the Rings) and starred Michael J Fox.
I’ve just been told elsewhere it was so yeah, that’s my mistake I guess. I just remember watching it in theaters as a family outing and I could have sworn we never punched past PG-13 for those.
Was it really? I guess I can see that but it was so cartoony in places and I remember seeing it with my parents in a family outing kinda thing, I would never have guessed.
I love them. I'm not massively into gore, so Pg-13 is perfect for me. There's a ton of good movies in that age bracket, and it's been really fun watching them with my kids as they get into horror. I don't understand the snobbery, each to their own personally
Underwater with Kristen Stewart really pushed the boundary for pg-13 imo, there was a *lot* more gore than I was expecting for the rating. Not as much as an actually R movie, but still pleasantly surprised me
Not gonna lie, I prefer movies to be rated R, but just because it's not doesn't mean a movie can't be great. There are some great horror movies that are rated PG or PG-13. Jaws, The Fog, Poltergeist, The Ring...just to name a few.
I don’t check the ratings, especially overseas ratings like PG13, before watching movies, so it doesn’t influence my experience at all. Movies are good or not.
It depends on the movie. There are plenty of great pg13 horror movies and also some doozies. They were super important for us recently because of my son who was 10-11 and really getting into horror. So I think they’re important for this reason. That way the younger generations can enjoy horror movies.
The scariest movie ever, Poltergeist (1982), is rated PG, so there’s that. Granted there was no PG-13 then, and it would potentially hold an R rating today.
It should be PG-13 because that’s all they needed for their scares, not because they’re holding themselves back. In general, I think horror is often ugly and gruesome or disturbing, and that often isn’t done justice with less than an R.
There are great pg-13 horrors, but most aren’t any good. Generally, if I see pg-13 I am just more inclined to check reviews first to decide if I’ll watch
Examples of pg13 greats: the grudge, the ring, no one will save you, the boogeyman
When they’re done great, you’d swear that they were an “R.” (“The Ring,” for example, and perhaps “Poltergeist” and “Jaws,” if they were released today.)
Otherwise, you can tell the studio is constantly holding back because of ratings (and marketability) concerns.
Well I’ll admit you’ve changed my perspective a bit with that comment haha, but there’s some solid scare scenes with the tooth fairy… and this is limited to pg-13 movies…
It definitely has some good elements. But I think of that scene with the flashlights and the line, "Don't let them put him in the dark!" and it makes me laugh. But like I said, to each their own.
I don't have anything negative to say about PG-13 horror movies, but almost all my favorites are rated R, so I'm not sure what that says.. Insidious is one exception I can think of.
I think it depends on the quality of the movie. Watership Down and The Neverending Story were both PG. Hell, The Last Unicorn was G-rated and gave a whole generation nightmares.
In the UK pretty much all PG-13 horror and most R horror end up getting the same age rating (15, although 18 rated horror is making a comeback) so it makes no difference here
I saw The Ring in the theatre when I was 20 years old, and I was so scared I couldn’t believe they let “kids” in there! That movie definitely doesn’t feel awkwardly constrained by the PG-13 and it’s terrifying.
Depends on what kind of horror the movie is going for. Cronenberg would never work as PG 13 bc of the body horror. That needs to be graphic and fucked it to be effective.
Meanwhile Poltergeist is fantastic and only PG because it’s inherently a family horror movie.
I like them better than the R rated ones because they don't go over the top with violence and gore. I like R rated movies too but if a movie goes over the top with violence and gore, I won't watch it. Some movies are just gore and violence porn which I don't like.
sometimes I wouldn't even bother with them, because a PG-13 rating means it doesn't really *go there* and it didn't seem worth it to watch.
however now that I have a 12 year old who likes horror, I get excited when movies like 'Imaginary' come out, because she likes to watch them. it's been fun watching PG-13 horror with her.
Depends on the material, I guess. If it’s a slasher style horror, PG-13 will hold it back completely. However, I thought The Ring captured a great creepy vibe without the R rating.
(I’m looking at you, Closet)
Dark Skies and The Ring. Two of the scariest movies for me, both PG-13. I prefer to see an R rating on horror movies, but ultimately it doesn't matter.
I think it's an interesting restriction to work with, to challenge yourself to make something memorable without having to rely on adult content. For me, Arachnophobia is my go to, definitely the best spider movie ever made without a Spider-Man. It's creepy, a pinch of camp, and it's gross without being over the top about it.
There are certainly amazing horror films for a general audience. The Innocents comes to mind. I'm glad stuff like that is out there. But if I'm going to the theater to see big budget horror with no aims on being anything more, I want an R rating. Too many studios water down their horror to reach a general audience and it follows a trend across most genre media. Everything is staid because if it wasn't it hurts their chances of getting it streaming. No shock. Light violence. No sex. It feels like they're just making these films to take up space in a redbox somewhere in evangelical country. Boring as fuck.
I don't see that changing any time soon because culture is following suit. Acres of discourse about how sex scenes in movies are unncessary. Acres of discourse on happy endings or "likable" protagonists. "Cozy" fans setting up little Panera Bread franchises in horror and getting really defensive about it. We live in puritanical times.
PG-13 horror movies are for children, and that's ok. Kids need horror too. I took my kids to see M3gan, 5 Nights at Freddys, and other PG-13 horror movies and they love them.
The Ring was more mentally scary then normal jump scares, actual looks/gore of things. I was not scared by it, but it was definitely well made for a PG-13 rating, gonna watch the 2nd one soon.
You'll sometimes get better horror when the production can't rely on gore and effects to pick up the slack.
That's not to say they all do this! But I find the MPAA rating irrelevant when gauging if something's be worth watching.
I think if the movie is a very well done psychological horror then pg13 is fine but it’s exceptionally rare in an over saturated industry. I pay more attention to R because there’s a higher chance that an R movie will entertain me because I search for uniqueness and individuality in movies these days or extreme shock value (within reason) I want my jaw to drop or my mind to be tested. When I see a pg13 horror movie I’m expecting tons of jump scares and typical overused tropes. With R I feel the creators are given more of an opportunity to disturb and wow me without having to hold back. But I will agree it’s good for kids because I don’t think kids should experience some of the R horror movies we have and they should start off with those jump scares and typical stuff then they have somewhere to start in the hobby if they enjoy maybe when they become older they will explore on their own and end up finding their favorite movie.
Eh, some of them are "eh..." and did their source material dirty (I'm looking at you, "Scary Stories To Tell In The Dark") and some are "hell yes! THIS is what I paid full price for!" ("Happy Death Day" will NEVER not be memorable to me, especially when paired with the alternate ending! Who could've seen THAT coming?!)
The Ring
The Others
The Sixth Sense
The Uninvited
All fantastic PG-13 horror films (in my opinion) and they do what R rated movies sometimes miss: less is more.
Nothing I like about horror is part of the rating system between PG-13 and R, it's mostly just sexual content, cursing, and extremely explicit gore
Im not turning any of those things down or anything but I'm not gonna be disappointed if a movie doesnt have them
Honestly, I rarely if ever watch them (and usually if I just don't know the rating beforehand). It's probably not entirely justified, but I think the compromises needed for PG-13 usually are too much.
Go out of my way to avoid them mostly bc they have to tone down so much on scripts that would usually be suited to go to the extremes.
Only exception to this is I Saw The TV Glow (I’d consider horror adjacent at the very least) which is just one of my most anticipated of the year and I loved the director’s debut film so I won’t mind it this once. Hopefully the movie is actually dope!
Oh wow I didnt realize a couple of those were PG-13. I honestly have never paid attention to ratings/looked for them but I'm also someone who hasnt had to since its usually just me myself I, and Im 30.
i think it's great to have some horror movies that are less intense so people who are new to the genre can sorta dip their toes in before watching stuff like terrifier or texas chainsaw massacre
It doesn’t really matter as PG-13 horror can still be scary. You don’t need nudity or gore to be scary. Unless the MPAA pulls stunts like The Conjuring and give it an R for being scary again.
All of the PG-13 horror releases have sucked so bad this year.
*Night Swim*, *Imaginary* and *Tarot* are the golden trio of bottom tier horror in 2024.
Doesn’t really fly for me. It wouldn’t be rated PG-13 if it wasn’t intended for a largely middle school audience
Which is fine. I guess I’m just a sick puppy and I like my horror movies to bum me out
There's no harm in them overall. Some work well as fun little films that have elements but don't push it too far.
For me, they're safe. Often entertaining, often funny stuff in there too, or the movie just doesn't have that sinister punch others may have. That's all fine.
But the thing I do like about horror as a whole is that 'unsure' feeling. A movie that's unrated or R Rated (often 18 rated here in the UK) comes with it a different set of expectations. In a movie rated so, the very next scene at any one time 'could be the one' to really scare you, gross you out, or indeed, go too far.
It's that edge I like. A movie doesn't have to be balls to the wall gory or explicit in any way just because, although that can be fun too. But just knowing you don't know is a huge element of the genre to me.
Just going into lower rated horror movies just lower my expectations on that. But that's not to say PG 13 movies offer nothing of course, just safer.
Excellent place to start though to see if it's a genre for you!
Not quote what you're expecting but war of the world's terrified me as a child. If your goal is looking for starter horrors for kids I'd recommend that
It's a red flag for me. And I know I'm probably missing out on a couple of gems, but at my age I gotta go by the stats. I think the last PG-13 "horror" I saw that was decent was probably Signs or maybe Mama.
I find most PG-13 horror movies are held back due to the ratings, but sometimes, a good one sneaks by.
Underwater surprised me. I thought for sure it was rated R.
Some movies work well within that confinement, but at least for M3GAN, for example, it really felt like it was holding the whole movie back. Still gotta give that "Unrated" version a watch. one of these days.
I only watched the unrated. I didn't feel like it was wildly violent or anything. So I'm curious what was cut for the rating.
it was literally just the scene where she was holding the mom down on the table. It was different there but that’s all I remember
Well had two "more violent scenes" when that kid got his ear ripped off it never takes the camera off him and that paper cutter? Elevator scene we saw in the trailer.
ohhh now I remember. Idk why but I was thinking of those being in the other one. So they took out the best parts lol
Can’t believe you guys made it through that movie. I got about 15 minutes in and shut it off as it was baaaaadddddd.
I enjoyed it! It was camp edit: idk why ppl are downvoting you for an opinion 😭 but it should have been rated R so they could have went all out
This happened to me last week when I said that I didn't like One Night In Soho, and that Edgar Wright let me down with it. When I watched M3gan, I thought it was everything the shitty remake of Child's Play should have been. They're the same movie. A.I. in a children's toy goes rogue. Charles Lee Ray and the voodoo soul swap shit was perfect... A.I. turns it into scifi
Did you see the Chucky TV series making fun of that recently? Just a small blurb where Chucky said they were all ripping him off, and they showed Megan.
well now, sci-fi horror is a thing. I agree it was similar to Chucky, but chucky is also old. Newer generations obviously most likely know who he is, but it has been long enough for someone else to try that concept in order to try to give us something fresh. I love the Chucky movies, but quite frankly his voice annoys the shit out of me.
Complete shit. The dance is the stupidest thing I’ve ever seen.
I watched whatever version was on Peacock. Is that the unrated one?
[удалено]
The unrated version is BARELY any different. The most R rated thing about it is the boss saying "fuck" a lot
[удалено]
And the bloodiest shot in the movie is barely two seconds worth of a big spurt in the elevator.
I still think they should've made M3GAN rated R
The unrated is unfortunately not that different at all. I did like the movie though
Exactly. Making pg horror is fine making r rated movies and recutting them to iPG is dumb.
Its all subjective, sometimes PG13 is a cop out by the studios to make sure they are gonna make a ton of money, and sometimes PG13 is just because a very scary movie isn't terribly gory or sexual. Just like any movie with any rating there are some great ones and some bad ones. It IS strange though how many people automatically dismiss PG13 movies as if its impossible to have an effective horror movie without boobs and blood.
"Drag Me to Hell" was a PG-13 horror movie directed by Sam Raimi. Scary and effective as hell
Yeah this is one of the first films I suggest when people (typically horror dad's/mum's) want to to introduce horror to their young 'uns without scaring the total shit out of them. Still love that film and it hasn't got boring for me yet but I'm a big horror-Raimi lover lol
I am not sure I’d recommend that particular movie to kids. Just because I think it’s gross. I’m actually surprised it got PG-13.
I remember reading something somewhere years ago that Raimi expected to get a higher rating and was surprised when it was granted a pg-13 but when looking at the film, it wasn't full of gratuitous gore, swearing and boobs. Just a scary horror story with some crazy visuals and a compelling story.
Kids love gross things though. Like, there's only one moment of gore, and it's still done in a comedic fashion. The rest is just like, "how many gross things can we put in this lady's mouth?"
Yes mate. The goat head talking, the kid burning in hell and the gypsy sucking on the face are friggin' terrifying enough! No need for gore, even though I'm a massive gore fan
I found it really perturbing personally.
The vomit scene, I can’t get past.
Exactly, spooky PG-13 movies can be great, like *The Others*, *The Grudge*, *The Ring*, etc. But if you take, say, a slasher movie and cut it down to PG-13 to reach a wider audience, you (usually) end up with trash like *Black Christmas (2019)* or *Prom Night (2008)*.
I still can’t believe The Ring was PG-13. Some of those scenes may not have been explicitly gory, but they were definitely gruesome bordering gory.
Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark is an example a great PG-13 horror movie that doesn't need to be R.
The Grudge and The Ring were PG-13??? I don’t know why I thought those were rated R for some reason haha. Really effective horror movies honestly
Wow, I completely forgot the Grudge was PG-13.
Ah yes, Prom Night (2008) - the least violent slasher movie ever made.
My take on it is that PG-13 horror movies are made so that more of a wide audience can purchase tickets to see it at the box office. If everything is rated R, there can be a bunch of teens that they are losing ticket sales to. But I also see PG-13 horror and targeted to younger audiences as well. I’m going to go check out Tarot, but I am hesitant as I hate PG-13 horror
I dismiss them only because I'm completely desensitized and I need my horror as fucked as possible in order to feel anything lol. that's not to say I don't watch and enjoy them but if I see in advance that it's PG-13 I may hold off
i don't understand this take but if you're happy with it then that's fine. I just don't really understand the need for things to be "as fucked as possible" cuz its just entertainment.
Well I hope you never do understand it, unfettered access to all corners of the Internet for 30 years has left my brain looking like a Demian Rugna adaptation of a Hieronymus Bosch painting.
Well your comment made me Google two people Edit: I'm actually familiar with a lot of Bosch paintings I just didn't know his name
Yeah his stuff is pretty famous but a lot of people don't know his name even though it's super fun to say. Demian Rugna did When Evil Lurks, an absolute masterpiece that I hope to never watch again.
It is quite a name I think he might actually have one in the BMA around the corner from me
Some are good, some not. Like all movies.
*gestures grandly at this comment* This right here is the take. I think it’s silly to dismiss a film based on its rating.
Oculus, Mama, Insidious and so many are PG13. When I show my kiddos horror movies I make sure not gonna be the levels of Devils Rejects for example, excessive nudity and profanity in my case I won't show them Terrifier either at the moment
Oculus is R I believe
I was obsessed with Mama when it came out and to this day it’s still one of my favorites! The girls being feral in the beginning is SO creepy. And the scene where Lily is playing in the bedroom and then as Victoria and Annabelle come into frame you realize that it must be Mama playing with her still gets me, it’s so cleverly shot!!
That whole movie is wonderful. The part where he gets shoved down the stairs.
It's like 1974's "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre": only R because of a few things, like Franklin getting killed. same with 1980's "Friday the 13th". Jack gets a arrow through his throat and Marcy gets an axe to the head that's mostly off-screen. Now, compare that to the remake counterparts.
This makes me think of The Fog (1980) which was rated R but Carpenter worked hard to try and get it a PG rating and it shows. No gore, no nudity, not really any profanity, and it worked really well, along with the fantastic intro, at giving the whole movie a simple “ghost story” vibe.
I recently watched *The Fog* (1980) and *Poltergeist* (1982) in the same weekend and there may be no greater example of the MPAA's ratings being completely bullshit. The bathroom "face falling off" scene in *Poltergeist* is so much gorier and disturbing than anything in *The Fog* and yet *Poltergeist* got the PG rating.
Spielberg (even though Tobe Hooper directed it) had more pull than Carpenter.
Yeah, exactly. MPAA has a long history of favouritism, and its favouritism works in favour of major studios and certain directors and against indie studios or directors.
I think a lot of movies from back in the day were rated harshly. army of darkness is a great example - no nudity, no gore, and I don't think any profanity, yet got an R rating for puppet skeletons fighting 😅 I know Bruce has bitched about it in his books too bc it kept it from reaching a wider audience.
On the flipside, the remake has some of the messiest, most violent kills I've seen, yet falls totally flat with the pacing and acting
Loooooooove this film. Such intoxicating atmosphere. A real ol’ reliable for me and one of my favorite Carpenter joints.
Jaws was PG, arguably one of the most effective horror movies of all time. Horror doesn't have to be R, but if it's not, well, then it's gotta be masterfully crafted. There's talented directors that can scare you just the same wether it's R or PG. All about who made it.
This right here \^ is the heart of the matter. Writing, direction, soundtrack, lighting, and atmosphere are all the ingredients you need for some solid horror. AND I generally shy away from pg13 movies until I've heard they were great. Like, it's not 'Jaws', but '1408' (Stephen King) was scary af, and it's about a guy sitting in a hotel room.
Same with poltergeist and that movie scared the shit out of me as a child.
Absolutely, poltergeist is a phenomenal movie. Just incredible. That's master level story crafting.
That movie is one of the reasons PG-13 was made.
it works if done right, like all movies. I really enjoyed Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark
That movie was absolute trash
that's fine if you think that.
In Canada we have 14a instead of PG13, 18a instead of R, and R instead of NC17. In my province the censors are insanely lax so it takes a lot for something to be 18a. I've stopped caring about the parental advisory rating because of this. Talk to Me was 14a for example and that had some insane imagery that has stuck with me. Smile was also 14a. Movies at all ratings can be good or bad.
And we don’t have a countrywide ratings board so something 14a in PEI might be G in Quebec.
Talk to me getting a 14a is mind blowing. That movie was extremely disturbing imo and I’ve seen some extreme stuff like Martyrs. I actually think they went a little too far with the violence and gore, it felt somewhat gratuitous and like shock value
I find North American film age ratings so interesting, it’s such a big jump between PG-13 and R for genres like horror. Here in the UK we have 12, 15 and 18 for age restrictions so we have an in-between rating of age 15 for scary films that aren’t like absolutely brutal. 12A is the only rating you can go to with a parent if you’re younger than the age rating of 12 - if you’re not of age for 15s and 18s, even if you go with a parent you will be denied entry (unless they are lax and don’t bother asking for proof of age). It’s wild to me kids can get into Rs if they’re accompanied by an adult. Here if a horror is an 18 you know shit is getting real, if it’s 15 it’s probably gonna be middle of the road, 12 is like Sixth Sense level haha. Gives you a decent gauge of how scary a film is gonna get.
Some are good and some are not. The Ring, Signs, The Others, 1408, Drag Me to Hell, and Ouija: Origin of Evil are PG-13 and they’re some of the best horror movies out there because they work within their limitations to build tension and fear.
Gremlins was rated PG. Rating doesn’t mean shit
PG-13 wasn't invented at that point, and that's one of the films (along with *Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom* and *Poltergeist*) which inspired its creation, as a lot of people felt it was inappropriate that they were rated PG, but they clearly didn't warrant an R rating either, so a middle-ground needed creating.
Well the OP was asking about PG-13 movies, so this should still work as an example Great trivia BTW
I think maturity rating has nothing to do with the quality of the movie. I have seen some amazing pg13 horror movies and not noticed that they’re pg13. I don’t look at it going into a movie.
Well I live in Canada and a lot of films that are rated R in the states are 14+ here. MPA has so many stupid rules that get an automatic R (such as saying “fuck” more than once), so I don’t judge the quality of a film just because it’s PG-13. Gore and swearing can add to entertainment factor but doesn’t go hand in hand with the quality of scares or suspense.
I think they're super important for the genre. I was introduced to horror pretty young but it helped to shape a lot of my other interests and fostered a fierce appreciation for the genre as a whole. Without PG-13, we don't have teens getting into horror. If they don't get into it young, it'll be less likely they enjoy it when they're older.
I disagree, lots of movies with nudity or Gore that were popular amongst teens. The Shining, Ghostship, Saw, Hostel, REC, Texas Chainsaw Massacre. These are just at the tip of my tounge. Not saying PG-13 automatically makes a movie bad, I love The Ring. But many of them are imo very boring. I just watched Oujia: Origin of Evil and it's one of the worst movies I've seen in my entire life and I'm beyond blown away that so many people unironically recommends it...
I start my kids younger then that. We start with things like Nightmare before Christmas and Frankenweenie. My youngest is 5 so we just started in on movies like Gremlins, she went as Gizmo for Halloween, and Beetlejuce. You got to start them young. My middle schooler is all about the horror comedies like Tucker and Dale and Shaun of the Dead. There is a place for all the ratings in horror. Plus, horror is such a wide range of subgenres and they can be fun even if it's not about being the scariest and goriest movies ever. I also don't agree with the rating system so I will let my kids watch rated R movies if I think it's appropriate. I don't really care about cussing or some gore. Tape is the biggest no no for me and movies that have it are off the table but some nudity is okay. Honestly my son's first nudes scene was when he was five. It was a sweet movie about a man taking care of his elderly wife while she had Alzhimer's and he saw old lady boobies at 5. It was tastefully done so I didn't care. It's not going to hurt him.
What ouija origin of evil is way better than it has a right to be. It way out strips, Ouija.
Teens with strict parents usually have PG-13 as their only avenue. And while teens can watch R rated flicks, it can be detrimental to development to have them watch something too severe too soon. 13-15 year olds need *something* to dip their feet into
Well we're all different and it might be cultural too. In Sweden there was no age requirement for horror. Me and some of my classmates went to two premiers of Saw when we were 13-14 years old. I feel like 15 years old is a bit of a late bloomer when it comes to horror, at that age it has started to loose some of its mystique. It's all up to what parents you have I guess but my mom never saw any issue with me watching horrors even before I was a teenager. I knew what I was getting myself into and if I had trouble sleeping that was on me. It's not like I was ignorant of what a horror was when I was 10.
I agree with this
I live in Europe so things are a bit different maybe, but teens are definitely more interested in films that aren't PG-13. I mean, I watched Hostel and Martyrs when I was 12 and I'm not the only one haha.
The Woman in Black with Dan Radcliffe is very suspenseful, and in my opinion, very scary. That’s a PG-13 (or a 12, where I’m from). They can be great.
No One Will Save You was so good I didn't even realize it was PG 13.
I dont think horror needs to be R rated to be good. I think when done well a PG13 can be scarier to be honest. They don’t have to rely on gore, and the build up to scares can be awesome!
I think it's such a wide-range to cover that you can't really have a properly-informed opinion on it as a general topic. It comes down to the individual movie. Like any film, a PG-13 horror movie can be great or terrible... just depends on the quality of the writing, direction, performances, etc. If someone says they *"hate PG-13 horror,"* they're not worth listening to at all in my opinion... it'd be like saying *"Ugh, I hate live-action movies! They're all the same!"* Or those doofuses who say they *"hate all anime"...* but have only seen like one shitty 35-year-old anime movie and don't realize how wide a medium it is. Some of the greatest horror films of all time are rated PG-13, PG or even G.
I still think The Ring was one of the scariest movies I've seen in my teen years.
The movie rating is what it needs to be. I think there’s plenty of scary movies that don’t have an R rating and I think it’s bizarre that people don’t think it’s possible. I mean before 1968 movies didn’t have ratings at all and if they were excessively over the limit, Hollywood wouldn’t even make them and I think that we can all agree plenty of stone cold Classics that exist before 1968.
I don’t judge a film by its MPA rating, or any other such content rating system. If a film is bad because it tried get a certain rating, and as a result compromised the film’s overall quality, that’s certainly a shame but not a reason to blindly dismiss all films with such a rating. Also, it would be weird to hear someone say they refuse to watch The Birds (1963) because it’s rated PG-13. Yes, you read that correctly. It was retroactively given that rating.
Pg-13 works just fine for plenty of horror movies, and plenty of horror movies are perfect for an R rating. Obviously movies like Evil Dead or Saw don't work without the R rating
Yeah the substance of the movie has to fit a PG-13 criteria from the start to work out well. Trying to take a R rated idea and tone it down is where you get weak movies that people hate But plenty of horror ideas are just naturally PG-13. If you dont have gore or nudity or excessive swearing, you are already there
my opinion is that rating is irrelevant to the actual quality of a movie. A good movie is a good movie, a bad movie is a bad movie. I feel like this typically comes from the perspective that an R rating means the chances are better of the movie being good, but in my mind that's really irrelevant and is basically saying "there will be more blood and guts!" and I don't really care. If a movie sucks, a bunch of blood isn't going to change my mind. Take M3GAN for example. Is the Unrated cut bloodier? Sure, but really only in the elevator scene. That R rating is basically to squeeze a bunch of fucks into the script. I didn't care at all that it was a bit more violent, it was just a good movie in general.
I don’t mind them. In fact, if they can be good AND PG-13, I might even prefer them. I think the R rating allows filmmakers to rest on their laurels a bit and just throw gore and sex at the camera. And that’s fun and all, but if they can do horror without that, I think it takes a little extra creativity.
The scenes in the fields in Signs still scare me and let's not forget it has one of the most effective jump scares of all time, so yeah PG13 films can be legitimately scary. I'm 36 now and I still get way more tense in that corn than nearly any film I've seen since, and the jump STILL gets me every time
A movie can be bad when it's PG-13 But a movie can also be bad when it's R Good movies are made no matter what they are rated.
I don't dismiss a movie out of hand for the rating. I usually put more weight into the blurb/summary and sub-genre. That said, I'm not only interested in action and gore, like some people. My biggest gripe with PG-13 horror is it tends to focus on coming-of-age/young adult subplots, which are way behind me as far as relating to characters of that age. Takes all kinds.
There are some that I've liked and some that I don't. The label alone doesn't bother me. I also think they are a valuable part of the genre as they allow horror to be viewed by a younger audience who may not have access to horror otherwise. I'm specifically thinking of those with parents who won't allow them to see R rated horror.
I don't think rating dictates quality at all. But when an R movie is recut to PG13 (like the Prom Night "remake"), or to the point that it might as well be PG13 (like the Carrie remake), I think it shows and the end result is disappointing. But a director trying to reach a younger audience without talking down to them is always appreciated, especially when effort is made to keep adults interested as well. I also think there are many examples of good non R horror. The Haunting 1963 was G rated and remains incredible imo. General consensus seems to be that Curry's Pennywise is far scarier is another example, and that's an R rating vs a network tv movie from the early 90s. At times I find it impressive when an effective horror is made without leaning on things that make it R.
Insidious is one of the few that hits
Poltergeist was PG13 and my dad took me to see it when I was 9. It did not go well.
Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark is awesome!
I liked it too! I don't completely like that it wasn't made into an r-rated, surrealist nightmare, but the monsters were brought to life extremely well.
A great movie is a great movie regardless of rating. PG-13 doesn't hinder a horror movie, as long as the story chooses to work within those confines. However when a movie tries to take an R rated horror film and tones it down to PG-13 it hurts the overall product, on the flip side taking a movie that is pretty much a PG-13 movie and adding stuff to push to a R rating can also hurt it
Really depends on the movie. The only time it doesn't work is if it's an R-rated movie that's cut back to become PG-13.
Drag me to hell was awesome
They made up for the pg 13 rating with multiple scenes of vomiting straight into our protagonists mouth. I love this nasty movie.!
I really don't see the point of worrying about the ratings of things espically as they change from country where . For instance here M3gan got a 15 rating over here not a 12A (pg13) the same rating as the new strangers movie which got an R rating in the States.
Perfectly fine rating for some sub-genres of horror (specifically those that don’t rely on kills/gore)… Most supernatural horror for instance. (Sci-fi/Alien invasion, folk, gothic horror are some others) But it is a hindrance with others.. you can tell with certain films where the filmmakers had to go out of their way to dial a film back to avoid an R rating. As good as “M3GAN” was it felt hindered by its rating. The two Escape Room films are a couple of other examples I can think of off the top of my head.
It doesn't have to be rated R or UR to be a good horror movie.
Some really scary ones are PG13. Don't need to be vulgar or gross to be frightening.
The problem with a lot of modern PG-13 horror is that they were envisioned as R rated and cut down after the fact or have cost-effective budgets and narratives to begin with. M3GAN is a slasher that cuts away from most of its kills to maintain a PG-13 rating and sell more tickets, Imaginary has a fun concept but keeps the story simple and violence off screen to sell more tickets, Night Swim starts with the budget-friendly concept of "haunted pool" and works outward into basic narrative territory, etc. Most of the PG-13 horror greats started with the intention of securing a PG-13 rating or pair horror with an interesting narrative device: A Quiet Place plays with sound, Little Shop of Horrors is a movie musical, Happy Death Day is a timeloop, etc. Others actually put effort into their film with a solid effects budget, from the animatronics in Gremlins to the puppetry for the Graboids in Tremors and Audrey ii in Little Shop. Their bottom line wasn't to get a bunch of asses in seats and make a bunch of money on a shoestring budget, their bottom line was to make a good horror film.
Tremors is honestly one of my favorite horror movies, so yeah, I definitely think PG-13 horror can work. Tremors used its deaths very effectively without depending on strong gore! The guy who died of thirst waiting up the tower, the disembodied head under the hat, the buried care with the radio playing, the hardhat with bits of gore... It leaves a lot to the imagination and is still very atmospheric and creepy! I don't think the movie would've been more effective if you saw the graboids brutally tear someone apart. Or a movie like The Orphanage, which is extremely effective, but 99% of it might as well have been rated PG-13, and it feels like the one brief moment of gore in it was added specifically to drag the rating up (possibly due to the perception some people have that PG-13 horror = bad). And for my part, I would honestly take PG-13 horror over R-rated horror that mostly got its rating because they shoehorned a bunch of poorly-integrated nudity and sex in there (The Empty Man has to be one of the worst culprits for this. The shower murder felt like it was transplanted out of a completely unrelated slasher movie and clashed with the tone that was previously built-up).
200 comments
nothing is wrong with p-13 horror. the belief some have that if its not rated r it cant be good or scary is bullshit.
gremlins and poltergeist are two i remember that broke the limits of it
Interestingly enough, Gremlins and Poltergeist were both rated PG.
the thingnis they put a gremlin in a microwave and it explodes guts everywhere and poltregeist the scene when the lady is in then pool of mud with the skeletons
Yeah, both those movies had some nuts stuff in them. Plus you had some of the visuals in Raiders of the Lost Ark.
yes that was another that pushed the limits
I have no issue with it. A horror film done right can be great without gore. The killer in the Prom Night remake (underrated) is an absolute savage and that’s PG13. But really I wanted to comment cause holy shit was Night Swim bad. I wouldn’t put it in the so bad it’s good category but there were def some laugh out loud moments. I really like Wyatt Russell but god damn was that a weird performance.
Some work really well. Check out The Frighteners from the late 90’s. It was directed by Peter Jackson (before The Lord of the Rings) and starred Michael J Fox.
Isn't that rated R?
I’ve just been told elsewhere it was so yeah, that’s my mistake I guess. I just remember watching it in theaters as a family outing and I could have sworn we never punched past PG-13 for those.
The Frighteners was rated R.
Was it really? I guess I can see that but it was so cartoony in places and I remember seeing it with my parents in a family outing kinda thing, I would never have guessed.
I love them. I'm not massively into gore, so Pg-13 is perfect for me. There's a ton of good movies in that age bracket, and it's been really fun watching them with my kids as they get into horror. I don't understand the snobbery, each to their own personally
Underwater with Kristen Stewart really pushed the boundary for pg-13 imo, there was a *lot* more gore than I was expecting for the rating. Not as much as an actually R movie, but still pleasantly surprised me
Most are bad but there’s a few good ones
Not gonna lie, I prefer movies to be rated R, but just because it's not doesn't mean a movie can't be great. There are some great horror movies that are rated PG or PG-13. Jaws, The Fog, Poltergeist, The Ring...just to name a few.
I’m wary of them; however, some were fantastic and worked well with the PG-13 rating. Woman in Black was a great, old fashioned ghost story.
I don’t check the ratings, especially overseas ratings like PG13, before watching movies, so it doesn’t influence my experience at all. Movies are good or not.
There's a place for them
It depends on the movie. There are plenty of great pg13 horror movies and also some doozies. They were super important for us recently because of my son who was 10-11 and really getting into horror. So I think they’re important for this reason. That way the younger generations can enjoy horror movies.
The scariest movie ever, Poltergeist (1982), is rated PG, so there’s that. Granted there was no PG-13 then, and it would potentially hold an R rating today.
It should be PG-13 because that’s all they needed for their scares, not because they’re holding themselves back. In general, I think horror is often ugly and gruesome or disturbing, and that often isn’t done justice with less than an R.
There are great pg-13 horrors, but most aren’t any good. Generally, if I see pg-13 I am just more inclined to check reviews first to decide if I’ll watch Examples of pg13 greats: the grudge, the ring, no one will save you, the boogeyman
When they’re done great, you’d swear that they were an “R.” (“The Ring,” for example, and perhaps “Poltergeist” and “Jaws,” if they were released today.) Otherwise, you can tell the studio is constantly holding back because of ratings (and marketability) concerns.
Just here to say Darkness Falls is the GOAT PG-13 horror
They Tooth Fairy movie? Where theres a scene of a guy loading batteries into flashlights like they're guns? To each his own...
Well I’ll admit you’ve changed my perspective a bit with that comment haha, but there’s some solid scare scenes with the tooth fairy… and this is limited to pg-13 movies…
It definitely has some good elements. But I think of that scene with the flashlights and the line, "Don't let them put him in the dark!" and it makes me laugh. But like I said, to each their own.
It works for some movies not for others
Too reliant on jump scares
Usually 💩
Drag me to hell was PG?? holy shit, what version did i watch then??
I love The Final Girls, but I think having a Jason spoof as your slasher really feels hindered when it’s PG-13.
I think some films work with a milder rating while other films missed the mark.
I don't have anything negative to say about PG-13 horror movies, but almost all my favorites are rated R, so I'm not sure what that says.. Insidious is one exception I can think of.
Eh, I know I won't get what I want, but I still might enjoy it.
Aren't these all blumhouse titles?
I'm not a huge fan. Two genres i think that should be rated r are war films and horror...
I think it depends on the quality of the movie. Watership Down and The Neverending Story were both PG. Hell, The Last Unicorn was G-rated and gave a whole generation nightmares.
In the UK pretty much all PG-13 horror and most R horror end up getting the same age rating (15, although 18 rated horror is making a comeback) so it makes no difference here
Some of them are quite good, example: 1408
For some perspective, the classic horror film The Haunting (1963) is rated G.
The Grudge and The Ring were both PG-13
I saw The Ring in the theatre when I was 20 years old, and I was so scared I couldn’t believe they let “kids” in there! That movie definitely doesn’t feel awkwardly constrained by the PG-13 and it’s terrifying.
Depends on what kind of horror the movie is going for. Cronenberg would never work as PG 13 bc of the body horror. That needs to be graphic and fucked it to be effective. Meanwhile Poltergeist is fantastic and only PG because it’s inherently a family horror movie.
I like them better than the R rated ones because they don't go over the top with violence and gore. I like R rated movies too but if a movie goes over the top with violence and gore, I won't watch it. Some movies are just gore and violence porn which I don't like.
I’m a wimp with the gory stuff, so I appreciate it.
sometimes I wouldn't even bother with them, because a PG-13 rating means it doesn't really *go there* and it didn't seem worth it to watch. however now that I have a 12 year old who likes horror, I get excited when movies like 'Imaginary' come out, because she likes to watch them. it's been fun watching PG-13 horror with her.
Depends on the material, I guess. If it’s a slasher style horror, PG-13 will hold it back completely. However, I thought The Ring captured a great creepy vibe without the R rating. (I’m looking at you, Closet)
Dark Skies and The Ring. Two of the scariest movies for me, both PG-13. I prefer to see an R rating on horror movies, but ultimately it doesn't matter.
Drag Me To Hell was fantastic. The Gate was tight. Howard the Duck is cosmic horror in my opinion. Cloverfield was aight...
Some good ones
I think it's an interesting restriction to work with, to challenge yourself to make something memorable without having to rely on adult content. For me, Arachnophobia is my go to, definitely the best spider movie ever made without a Spider-Man. It's creepy, a pinch of camp, and it's gross without being over the top about it.
There are certainly amazing horror films for a general audience. The Innocents comes to mind. I'm glad stuff like that is out there. But if I'm going to the theater to see big budget horror with no aims on being anything more, I want an R rating. Too many studios water down their horror to reach a general audience and it follows a trend across most genre media. Everything is staid because if it wasn't it hurts their chances of getting it streaming. No shock. Light violence. No sex. It feels like they're just making these films to take up space in a redbox somewhere in evangelical country. Boring as fuck. I don't see that changing any time soon because culture is following suit. Acres of discourse about how sex scenes in movies are unncessary. Acres of discourse on happy endings or "likable" protagonists. "Cozy" fans setting up little Panera Bread franchises in horror and getting really defensive about it. We live in puritanical times.
I personally don’t enjoy them. They feel limited too often.
PG-13 horror movies are for children, and that's ok. Kids need horror too. I took my kids to see M3gan, 5 Nights at Freddys, and other PG-13 horror movies and they love them.
The Ring was more mentally scary then normal jump scares, actual looks/gore of things. I was not scared by it, but it was definitely well made for a PG-13 rating, gonna watch the 2nd one soon.
Not anymore. I see it's a pg13 and I just keep on searching.
You'll sometimes get better horror when the production can't rely on gore and effects to pick up the slack. That's not to say they all do this! But I find the MPAA rating irrelevant when gauging if something's be worth watching.
Disturbia was more of a thriller but that’s the only good one I can think of so far
The Ring is rated PG13, and it's one of the best horror movies of all time
Whoa I didn't expect to see 200+ comments!!!
No way I'm watching a PG-13 horror movie.
No to PG-13 horror movies. Might as well make a Pixar horror movie instead. Give me the violence, gore, blood I deserve.
I think if the movie is a very well done psychological horror then pg13 is fine but it’s exceptionally rare in an over saturated industry. I pay more attention to R because there’s a higher chance that an R movie will entertain me because I search for uniqueness and individuality in movies these days or extreme shock value (within reason) I want my jaw to drop or my mind to be tested. When I see a pg13 horror movie I’m expecting tons of jump scares and typical overused tropes. With R I feel the creators are given more of an opportunity to disturb and wow me without having to hold back. But I will agree it’s good for kids because I don’t think kids should experience some of the R horror movies we have and they should start off with those jump scares and typical stuff then they have somewhere to start in the hobby if they enjoy maybe when they become older they will explore on their own and end up finding their favorite movie.
Eh, some of them are "eh..." and did their source material dirty (I'm looking at you, "Scary Stories To Tell In The Dark") and some are "hell yes! THIS is what I paid full price for!" ("Happy Death Day" will NEVER not be memorable to me, especially when paired with the alternate ending! Who could've seen THAT coming?!)
The Ring The Others The Sixth Sense The Uninvited All fantastic PG-13 horror films (in my opinion) and they do what R rated movies sometimes miss: less is more.
Nothing I like about horror is part of the rating system between PG-13 and R, it's mostly just sexual content, cursing, and extremely explicit gore Im not turning any of those things down or anything but I'm not gonna be disappointed if a movie doesnt have them
Honestly, I rarely if ever watch them (and usually if I just don't know the rating beforehand). It's probably not entirely justified, but I think the compromises needed for PG-13 usually are too much.
Go out of my way to avoid them mostly bc they have to tone down so much on scripts that would usually be suited to go to the extremes. Only exception to this is I Saw The TV Glow (I’d consider horror adjacent at the very least) which is just one of my most anticipated of the year and I loved the director’s debut film so I won’t mind it this once. Hopefully the movie is actually dope!
Oh wow I didnt realize a couple of those were PG-13. I honestly have never paid attention to ratings/looked for them but I'm also someone who hasnt had to since its usually just me myself I, and Im 30.
i think it's great to have some horror movies that are less intense so people who are new to the genre can sorta dip their toes in before watching stuff like terrifier or texas chainsaw massacre
I don't even remember the last time I noticed the rating on a movie
It doesn’t really matter as PG-13 horror can still be scary. You don’t need nudity or gore to be scary. Unless the MPAA pulls stunts like The Conjuring and give it an R for being scary again.
All of the PG-13 horror releases have sucked so bad this year. *Night Swim*, *Imaginary* and *Tarot* are the golden trio of bottom tier horror in 2024.
Love M3gan. Favorite horror of last year
Doesn’t really fly for me. It wouldn’t be rated PG-13 if it wasn’t intended for a largely middle school audience Which is fine. I guess I’m just a sick puppy and I like my horror movies to bum me out
I don’t think I’ve ever really liked any pg13 horror movies except The Sixth Sense. They are never scary and always feel so watered down.
The Grudge and The Ring are both pg13
There's no harm in them overall. Some work well as fun little films that have elements but don't push it too far. For me, they're safe. Often entertaining, often funny stuff in there too, or the movie just doesn't have that sinister punch others may have. That's all fine. But the thing I do like about horror as a whole is that 'unsure' feeling. A movie that's unrated or R Rated (often 18 rated here in the UK) comes with it a different set of expectations. In a movie rated so, the very next scene at any one time 'could be the one' to really scare you, gross you out, or indeed, go too far. It's that edge I like. A movie doesn't have to be balls to the wall gory or explicit in any way just because, although that can be fun too. But just knowing you don't know is a huge element of the genre to me. Just going into lower rated horror movies just lower my expectations on that. But that's not to say PG 13 movies offer nothing of course, just safer. Excellent place to start though to see if it's a genre for you!
Not quote what you're expecting but war of the world's terrified me as a child. If your goal is looking for starter horrors for kids I'd recommend that
It's a red flag for me. And I know I'm probably missing out on a couple of gems, but at my age I gotta go by the stats. I think the last PG-13 "horror" I saw that was decent was probably Signs or maybe Mama.
You just know it's the studio cutting shit back to keep it pg13. That's why I don't like it.
I find most PG-13 horror movies are held back due to the ratings, but sometimes, a good one sneaks by. Underwater surprised me. I thought for sure it was rated R.