LVNSD would be much more informative than “Rated R,” or, “PG-13.”
- L - Language
- V - Violence
- N - Nudity
- S - Sex
- D - Drug use
- B - Blasphemy
Let’s include recommended age at the end, so theaters can know whom to exclude (legal reasons):
Family Guy LVNDB-18
Dexter’s Lab V-8
Looney Toons VD-8
Telly Tubbies 0
Because this could balloon quickly into including all letters of the alphabet. Does it pass the Bechtel Test?Does it include blood, but not violence? I’m not arguing for more information, but enough information to know what’s included.
Physical force against people, or animals, with the intent of harm, is the legal definition of violence.
If someone purposefully kills a dog, they’ve committed violence.
Can you make a case that animal and human violence should be separate categories?
Yes I can make the case. My case: doesthedogdie exists. I know a lot of people who get more upset about seeing an animal hurt than human on human violence.
Who gets to arbitrarily decide which is important? So what if it balloons? Again, the more info the better imo.
Doesthedogdie literally has about 100 different categories (more than even the letters of the alphabet). Analysis Paralysis is a thing. That’s why we don’t want to balloon it. It’s also why movies don’t target specific ages on their ratings already, but a range of ages. Too many options means less familiarity with the system and information overload.
I know a lot of people who are more upset by knives than guns. You can’t describe every little detail in a film, because someone could get upset about it. The ratings are a guide for parents on what’s appropriate for their kids.