does an R Rating honestly hurt profit? proof?

Wasn't TGWTDT from a small independent Swedish studio? With some brain cells and a little class? As opposed to big bully Fox? Catch my drift?

well I think Ridley Scott didn't have a choice and we just should blame it on 20th century fox, although they do have a point just more people will go see the movie especially younger kids because they will think it's something like avatar... I think they needed to go with the pg-13 because the truth is not many people know of the existence of this movie, it isn't as hyped as for example the dark knight rises etc. and with an R rating less people are gonna see the movie

I think the Fincher version has not done as well as expected by all accounts from what i read . But the Swedish version has done great. And hasn't it occurred to anyone that if these studios stopped paying ridiculous obscene wages to actors, and actresses, then the chances of a better return would be greatly improved . When i say that i mean right across the board of all films made.

Does an R rating hurt profit? Yes. In a way. Box office is limited, absolutely no doubt of that. Home sales are not. Ridley Scott has all the cards here, there is a common misconception about that, fostered by the need to say things in a public way, meanwhile behind the scenes there's another whole different animal. Ridley Scott did not approach Fox- they came to him. People are not understanding the dynamics of that situation at all when they express apprehension about this film's final form.

I think what worry the studios are teens of around 16 ...that actually have the monopoly of the economy both in movies and in music Enormous success of things like Twilight , Avatar , Hunger games ,Titanic ( with differences of course ) in movies and things like LAdy Gaga , Pitbull , Shakira in music are fuelled by teenagers ..usually low teenagers ( 14-16 ) that spend all their money for fun ( and they have all the right to do so ) . The problem is that we are becoming slaves of the market ...and since the market is ruled by teens we will have ALOT of teen's things ( that happen in videogames too ) Of course all the blame dont have to go on teens ... think about Game of Thrones that have to put in every episode some sex to appeal the ( stupid ) average male .

I don't fully understand the question, nor the need for it. Maybe you should ask how much, "Girl with a Dragon Tattoo" cost to make, then you might be on the way to answering your own question... Otherwise, is it not less a matter of "proof", and more a matter of practical, Financial, sense? [From the [i]Financial[/i] perspective] The purpose of the Rating is to restrict [for various reasons] who can see the movie, from the potential audience of "Everyone who would want see the movie". If you restrict some of those people from seeing the movie, your potential Profit will be generated from [i]less[/i] than, "Everyone who would want see the movie". So yes: your potential for Profit may be, "hurt". That is not to say that is what is best Creatively - but that is to say that is the Financial imperative adopted by a Studio and, if there wasn't an actual correlation between Rating and Profit, do you [i]really[/i] think they would make an issue of it just for the sake of being kill-joys? They are in the game to make money. The problem the Director has, is that what may be best Creatively, and what best serves the Studio's financial imperative, are often in opposition - but they are both, genuine and valid concerns.

Its true that the younger generation have more disposable income to spend but i would stress that i'm an avid film watcher and do more buying of films now then ever in my life because i dont spend as much on partying and clothes/ fashion etc as i used to. And given the opportunity i would go to the cinema a lot more if more originality in films were evident and 90 % of the films being made were not remakes of stories i know all to well.

@all ask yourselves this question WHY is the financial objectives of the studio ALWAYS in opposition of the directors creativity? What does this tell us about our society? they are morons

Very amusing.

I have read the book TGWTDT and the recent movie follows the book very closely. There were a few minor changes in the end and I think the book ending made more sense from a character point of view but that is a nit.

Simple answer for the American family market. Yes As far as Proof the money says. No The perception is that, parents are likely to allow a child to see the PG-13 content more than an R-rated film. Go figure. Movies lose patrons from the ratings alone, so most distributors tweak the content for a lower rating to generate more money. Remember parent and religious groups were complaining that the movie industry has been neglecting families. So the industry has been porting a lot of content to the PG-PG13 crowd to maximize profit. Unfortunately ratings from the 70's to the 2000's has changed. So PROMETHEUS has to tone down the intensity, language, and fear factor to earn that coveted PG13 rating.

neglecting families!... i find that very hard to swallow there seems to be more than enough family fodder out there these days i would say more then ever. I would also contest that game of thrones has more adult based themes in it not to satisfy the whims of adolescent males, but to come to terms with the fact we have grown up as a society in terms of our attitudes towards sex, and it really isn't that big a deal not in comparison to blowing someone's brain out and the horrors we face on the nightly news day in day out. i'm sick of living in denial of human urges and basic biological functions of the human species simply because some people cant handle the reality of procreation.

I'm a teenager, but if you're all thinking that all teenagers are hyping Twilight, Pitbull, Avatar, Lady Gaga then you're completely wrong. I won't even go further talking about how much I hate Twilight, Avatar was visually beautiful movie but its storyline and everything else was mehh, I don't even listen such music like Gaga or Pitbull. And lots of people of my age are pretty much like me. What I'm trying to say is, if studio is worrying about the money that teenagers give by watching movies, they shouldn't. If it's R, I'm 100% going to see this, as probably other teens I know will do the same, because it has incredible ideas and an amazing story. Teens, that have got some brains, can be intrigued as much as adults can be by storyline like this. BUT, those typical teenies won't pay an attention to this movie even if it's PG-13, and you know why? Because their minds are already brainwashed with mainstream and stupid crap, so they would never go to see this, no matter the rating. So I believe PG-13 wouldn't bring more money than R. In conclusion, this really should be R. Audiences that are interested in this, will go and see it and they won't even care about the rating. Ehem, yes, probably I've made tons of grammar mistakes, oh well. P.S. I love Game of Thrones, by the way. Because of the STORY (yes, I'm reading books), not because I can see some titties or anything else.

well stated ruth and we were all teens once and i was as keen to see decent films then as i am now i haven't changed at all im just more experienced but non the wiser. i believe your character is defined very young and you are what you are morally speaking the same all your life . you just learn to deal with situations differently but we are always learning and we never stop.

My feeling is with regard to a film like this it could only help it. Please and with all due respect do not ask me to explain that, I have about 50 times already and it should be common knowledge by now why that is.

The problem is not to have a sex scene , gore or a rape scene ...the problem is when you put a sex scene , gore or worse a rape scene to attract people . In game of thrones they have to put a nude every week because the relevations are made from people between 19-49 ... I think GOT would have benifit greatly from being PG13 ( since there is really little gore already and the R is basicly for nudity only ) because should have been a serie for everyone .

i can understand what your saying frantz and respect it but i find it refreshing that shows like that and bsg are a lot more realistic and you know i saw a lot of sex in the seventies as a youngster and it really didn't bother me that much and i certainly don't need it to turn me on its just a human function that's as common, and natural to me as eating, sleeping, and breathing. And lets face it if people want titillation they have the internet . Some directors and programme makers simply prefer to make adult themed programmes, younger generations have enough in my opinion.

Have you read the books, Frantz? The whole story is pretty much cruel and in the books there are lots of nudity and other nasty things. This was the way the writer wanted, so why the creators should cut all the scenes because of the younger audience? I don't care about sex scenes and to me, yes, this show could be pg, but cruelty is important, don't forget it's not a fairytale, it is compared to the middle ages and we all know even a little about those times.

Well TGWTDT was originally called Men Who Hate Women, and that was the whole basis of the story. The infamous rape scene I thought was entirely necessary to show what Lisbeth as a character has been through and possibly what motivated her to help Blomkvist. So when people say the scene wasn't appropriate they have no idea what they are talking about. And people to say that it's right to omit scenes from someone's work to make it a 15 or PG-13 just to make more money is absolutely absurd. But anyway back to the point... Much respect to David Fincher for not taking that scene out despite pressures from film production companies. He is truly a director to aspire to when it comes to rating movies and I hope Mr. Scott follows in his footsteps and not cave in from pressure from 20th Century Fox.