Quoting DoubleDownAgain:

Quote:
Quoting northbloke:

Quote:
Quoting DoubleDownAgain:

Quote:
That sounds like a good idea to me!

So 'Unrated' would be used for an alternate cut of an already rated film?

No, not automatically - that's the problem. We're having trouble wording a rule that includes all the films that have "Unrated Version", "Extreme Version", "Too Hot for Cinema" emblazened over the cover, but exclude all the extended cuts, director's cuts. alternate versions etc.

And just to throw a spanner in the works, here's another real-life example, UPC: 085391176367:



I would assume most people would want to class this as a PG-13. But look what it says in the top left: "Includes alternate theatrical version with controversial ending (not rated)"

How do we make sure that is excluded from being classed as Unrated?

Given the two options I think I'd have to go with 'Unrated' as 'Not Rated' would imply it was never rated in the first place.  This would remain consistent with 'NR' being the lowest rating.

OK, NOW I'm confused

This version of "I Am Legend" is a 2 disc set. 

Disc 1 has the original Theatrical release (That was rated PG-13).  This rating is prominent on the back cover (in the rating block, with the appropriate advisory).

Disc 2 (alternate version is  "Unrated" (a bonus disc)).  On the cover in where it describes the alternate version and on the block describing the disc is the only reference to "UNRATED".  It is not an edition.  It does not have "unrated" or "Not Rated" on the back where the rating is.

So why would this be classified as "Unrated" and not PG-13?

Another example to twist your noodles: Blade Runner. There are five cut of the film: The 1982 workprint, U.S. theatrical cut, 1982 European theatrical cut, 1991 director's cut and 2007 final cut. The U.S. theatrical, director's and final are rated R. The other 2 were never rated by the MPAA. Do we enter this as unrated despite it not being advertised as such? If we are only movie unrated if they are advertised that way, what constitutes advertisement?

Quoting CharlieM:

Quote:
So if it says "unrated" on the package "ANYWHERE" the whole package becomes unrated.

Is my understanding correct?

IMO, I would say yes. My opinion of course.

There shouldn't be exceptions on it, thus making less of a debate.

Quoting Ace:

Quote:
Another example to twist your noodles: Blade Runner. There are five cut of the film: The 1982 workprint, U.S. theatrical cut, 1982 European theatrical cut, 1991 director's cut and 2007 final cut. The U.S. theatrical, director's and final are rated R. The other 2 were never rated by the MPAA. Do we enter this as unrated despite it not being advertised as such? If we are only movie unrated if they are advertised that way, what constitutes advertisement?

I would say yes to Unrated on this too, but then again I think this should be a box set, as I see it as 5 different movies. If it were, the child profiles would have the rating.

But, again, if Unrated is going to trump the lesser ratings, then Unrated it is.

Dawn of the Dead might be the same way, but I'm too lazy to run downstairs and check.

True, almost all the bonus features are listed as being unrated.  I think if both are listed then the original rating should be applied.  Does it really matter if 'Unrated' is on the packaging?  For example, the Blu-ray version of The 40 Year Old Virgin contains both the R-Rated and Unrated versions of the movie.  What rating should it get?

It's one of those no win situations, until the program can list different versions of the movie on the same profile with different information then some sort of compromise has to be made.

I can see the point for a few different arguments.  But since there is already 'unrated' content on some, if not most, DVDs/BDs and those without 'unrated' cuts of the movie still have the original rating that would lead me to think that if the rated version is on the disc then that is what the profile should be rated, regardless of if there is also an unrated cut.

Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
You, Martian are backin a definition for Unrated and one for Not Rated. Which cause problems when the two terms share the SAME title....simple.

The two situations, an unrated/not rated version of a rated film and a film that has never been rated can never happen on the same release.  For whatever reason, you are not seeing this so I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

It can happen and it HAS many times.  

Please be so kind as to show me one of the many times an unrated version, of a rated film, is released with a film that was never rated.  I am sorry, but I think it is you who is still not getting it. 

Quoting CharlieM:

Quote:
OK, NOW I'm confused

This version of "I Am Legend" is a 2 disc set. 

Disc 1 has the original Theatrical release (That was rated PG-13).  This rating is prominent on the back cover (in the rating block, with the appropriate advisory).

Disc 2 (alternate version is  "Unrated" (a bonus disc)).  On the cover in where it describes the alternate version and on the block describing the disc is the only reference to "UNRATED".  It is not an edition.  It does not have "unrated" or "Not Rated" on the back where the rating is.

So why would this be classified as "Unrated" and not PG-13?

On this I agree.  In this case, the unrated version is bonus material and we do not track or rate bonus material.  I think I need to reword my proposed rule so this situation is covered.

Quoting AESP_pres:

Quote:
Yes I know NR is acceptable as a rating even if it means "absence of a rating", I've no problem with the use of it since more than 50% of my movies are not rated. My problem was in the fact to create another rating in the database (unrated) for a special category of movie again. We already have a false imaginery rating in the database and it's already a problem (at least for me), no need to make the database more useless than it is already by inventing something else for nothing. If a movie is not rated the rating is NR, I don't see the problem at all...

That doesn't mean there isn't one.  Astrakan explained it quite well.  At the moment, we have two different types of films being rated exactly the same...

Unrated: Any movie without a rating that has a rated version counterpart. This covers alternate cuts, director's cuts, ultimate cuts, whatever.

Not Rated: Any movie that has never received an official rating on any version. Be it because it was released prior to 1968 (in the U.S.) or because it's a direct-to-video movie or whatever. As long as a rating has never been publicized for any version of the movie, it'd be Not Rated.

...this should not be happening.