View Full Version : Rated R - A Walk in the Woods?
somers515
09-11-2015, 08:06
Considering watching this movie this weekend but my kids are 13 and 11. They both have gone hiking with me and the 11 year-old in particular might get a kick out of seeing the scenery of the AT on the big screen. However the movie is rated R for "language and some sexual references."
Can anyone give me any insight on how "bad" the sexual references are? I read the book a while ago - I'm surprised the movie is rated R.
Tuckahoe
09-11-2015, 08:20
It's not so much the sexual references, they are rather mild, but they drop a lot of F bombs.
Personally I would not take kids to see the movie. At that age they are just too young to get it, after all it is a film about two old men reflecting on life and strained friendships.
kenbrenner
09-11-2015, 08:33
Hi.
I know 2 people who've seen it. They said there's a lot of bad language in it.
I cannot understand why these people (movie makers) would take a subject like the Appalachian Trail (or at least related to it), and make something trashy out of it.
It just goes to show you what we're dealing with in Hollywood these days.
I wished the hiker community would actively boycott this movie.
Besides, very few scenes were shot on the trail, which is a disgrace in itself.
Pedaling Fool
09-11-2015, 08:48
What's trashy about a couple guys that have never hiked before, then decide out of the blue picked one of the toughest trails... There's going to be a lot of cursing, it's only natural. I was in much better shape than them when I first got on the AT and I cursed 'em hills (and the ATC and all the clubs...) all the time. Cursing' is just part of hiking; you can't do a story on the AT without cursing :D
slbirdnerd
09-11-2015, 08:53
I took my 13 year old last Friday. The only reason I can imagine it is rated R is the number of F-bombs, and it's pretty much all Katz. I believe if there are more than X-number of those, they have to rate it R. It gave an honest portrayal of Katz and we didn't have a problem with it. The movie was entertaining and funny, which is all it was intended to be, we both liked it. Like "Wild," it's not a 'hiking' movie, nor was it a 'hiking' book. It is what Bill Bryson intended it to be. Both movies just happened to have hiking/a trail as PART of the backdrop. I liken this movie to Grumpy Old Men.
I can tell you the theater was full, and at least 90% of the audience were senior citizens (Redford fans, I presume) who probably have never or will never set foot on the trail. There were fewer than 10 people in the theater under the age of 50 including myself and my son, 2 guys about my age next to us, and another family with 2 teen boys. I would put at least 50% of the audience over age 70 and a good number would be physically incapable of hiking at all. I'm not trying to be mean, these were my observations in light of all the concern about the movie impacting the trail. I sincerely do not believe the film's impact to the trail will be near what some members of the hiking community believed it would be.
gsingjane
09-11-2015, 08:59
I guess everybody's comfort zone is different. I remember being more concerned about this kind of thing when my children were younger, too but - if you really want your kids to see the movie, I'd go ahead. I think it's not terribly likely that the movie's language will be new or shocking to an 11 and a 13 year old.
Jane
gregpphoto
09-11-2015, 09:12
If your kids are 13 and 11 they already know way dirtier and crazier stuff that you can even imagine.
Traveler
09-11-2015, 09:13
Hi.
I know 2 people who've seen it. They said there's a lot of bad language in it.
I cannot understand why these people (movie makers) would take a subject like the Appalachian Trail (or at least related to it), and make something trashy out of it.
It just goes to show you what we're dealing with in Hollywood these days.
I wished the hiker community would actively boycott this movie.
Besides, very few scenes were shot on the trail, which is a disgrace in itself.
The story is not about the AT but about aging and relationships along with a heavy dose of introspection. Read the book. The AT is the stage which the story takes place, but could have just as easily been the PCT, Long Trail, or anyone of a half dozen others. Its not an issue of being trashy, its more an issue of understanding what the movie story is really about.
HooKooDooKu
09-11-2015, 09:14
I've seen the movie and hike with my kids...
What little scenery you see of the AT is not worth exposing your kids to the R-rated language. I don't think their is any sexual references a child is going to understand... except for the language (the kitty cat word is used).
From what I recall, there are perhaps 3 scenic shots in the whole movie... two or three more that let you know you're on the AT (such as a shot of the start of the approach trail). Everything else is either on a sound stage or the setting is off the AT (hotel room, store, etc).
IMHO, there is no reason to take a child to go see this movie.
illabelle
09-11-2015, 09:26
We watched it last night. Probably only a dozen people in the theater. Dark when we entered, so didn't see enough to judge ages of viewers.
Yes, there were several F-bombs, but not to the extent that they seemed gratuitous. I was disappointed with the sexual innuendo and would be mildly uncomfortable about kids seeing it, depending on the kids' maturity level. The scene with the couple who gave them a ride, and the scene with Beulah asking Katz to help her in the laundromat both seemed overdone, almost too explicit.
Overall, we enjoyed the film, in particular seeing scenery from parts of the trail that we have personally experienced. They did a good job of conveying that sense of wonder when you emerge from the woods to an expansive vista.
Tuckahoe
09-11-2015, 10:10
We watched it last night. Probably only a dozen people in the theater. Dark when we entered, so didn't see enough to judge ages of viewers.
Yes, there were several F-bombs, but not to the extent that they seemed gratuitous. I was disappointed with the sexual innuendo and would be mildly uncomfortable about kids seeing it, depending on the kids' maturity level. The scene with the couple who gave them a ride, and the scene with Beulah asking Katz to help her in the laundromat both seemed overdone, almost too explicit.
Overall, we enjoyed the film, in particular seeing scenery from parts of the trail that we have personally experienced. They did a good job of conveying that sense of wonder when you emerge from the woods to an expansive vista.
Oops yeah forgot all about the BJ scene.
BirdBrain
09-11-2015, 10:28
Much of what makes a movie R rated is not necessary. I think Hollywood feels it is bad if the rating is too low. Sometimes scenes are put in at the beginning of the movie just to get the rating. I would not take my young children to this movie. The swearing and the sexual innuendo have less to do with it than who the target audience. This movie was clearly intended for us old farts who likely have only a couple more chances in life to walk up a hill (sarcasm alert, but not far from the truth). The language and the sexual innuendo just makes the decision that much easier. Take them to see Ant Man, or Fantastic 4, or Inside Out, or Jurassic World, or the Minion Movie instead. I have seen all of them except Inside Out. I have no intention of growing up. As to the vulgarity, if your kids go to public school and/or are not kept in a cage, they have heard every cuss word in the movie. They will not be scarred for life. I find reading vulgarity to be infinitely more abrasive than hearing it. I hear the words in print in my own voice as I type or read. But that is just me. For the most part, I don't notice it when it is spoken. I really notice it when I am watching a movie with my mother or children. Each must decide on their own. I just see better choices in the theaters that young people would enjoy more. No need to take them to a lesser movie.
I know no adult who does not curse. I know no teenager who does not curse. The sexual references, well, the Katz scene is pretty clear to an adult, probably to a teen too. However, there is nothing in the movie that is worse than watching TV or youtube. I have seen music video's that are more explicit.
I don't have children so I may way off base here, but I am young enough to remember being a kid. The reality is unless your kids live under a rock, they have probably already seen much worse. You can try, but I don't think you can hide this stuff from your kids forever. At 13, I think 99.9% of parents would be surprised at what their kids get into.
The only scene I would be worried about would be the young couple scene. Otherwise, most teenagers have seen worse on TV.
I must be totally inured to the "bad" words, I hardly noticed them. Most music videos are far more lurid, in my opinion.
Seatbelt
09-11-2015, 12:28
One problem I see with taking kids to a movie with lots of dirty language and sexual scenes or innuendos, etc is that it appears that a parent is at least somewhat "endorsing" the behavior.
One problem I see with taking kids to a movie with lots of dirty language and sexual scenes or innuendos, etc is that it appears that a parent is at least somewhat "endorsing" the behavior.
It may be a novel idea, but you could simply use this as an opportunity to actually talk to your children about these issues as difficult as I am sure it may be.
slbirdnerd
09-11-2015, 12:43
One problem I see with taking kids to a movie with lots of dirty language and sexual scenes or innuendos, etc is that it appears that a parent is at least somewhat "endorsing" the behavior.
Fortunately, it's primarily responsible-type parents who would even take their kids to see a movie of this type and geared toward an older audience anyway, and they (we, I) have probably already taught their children how to behave and when adult language is or isn't appropriate. As for the eluded-to BJ, it was so subtle my son didn't even catch it.
I'd be much more worried about the absentee-parents who have no idea what their kids are doing, watching, or playing at home...
Sailing_Faith
09-11-2015, 12:54
There is nothing "dirty" in the movie, saw it yesterday.... Agree that kids would be less likely to get it.... Unless they are really weird like I was.
illabelle
09-11-2015, 12:56
I know no adult who does not curse. I know no teenager who does not curse. The sexual references, well, the Katz scene is pretty clear to an adult, probably to a teen too. However, there is nothing in the movie that is worse than watching TV or youtube. I have seen music video's that are more explicit.
I don't have children so I may way off base here, but I am young enough to remember being a kid. The reality is unless your kids live under a rock, they have probably already seen much worse. You can try, but I don't think you can hide this stuff from your kids forever. At 13, I think 99.9% of parents would be surprised at what their kids get into.
The only scene I would be worried about would be the young couple scene. Otherwise, most teenagers have seen worse on TV.
My husband and I do not curse. So far as I know, my daughters (both adults) do not curse. I know lots of adults that do not curse. Despite what we see on TV and elsewhere as the prevailing culture, there are still plenty of people who prefer to live above that level and not fill their minds with it. We don't live under rocks.
On the other hand, your point is well taken. As a former public high school teacher, I have no doubt that many kids know much more than we think they do.
BirdBrain
09-11-2015, 12:59
One problem I see with taking kids to a movie with lots of dirty language and sexual scenes or innuendos, etc is that it appears that a parent is at least somewhat "endorsing" the behavior.
Those that incorporate vulgarity in their speech because of habit or because they think it somehow enforces their points, have no way of comprehending the validity of your points. Many will roll their eyes and say sarcastic things like "your kids ears won't melt". It is reasonable to be a role model. Being a role model does not mean you are a wimp or naïve. It is not turning your nose up at others like you are better or something. It does mean sacrifice. It means holding yourself to a high standard so as not to disappoint those that look up to you. It is not easy to live a consistent life. It attracts criticism from those that do not try to be a role model. It invites ridicule, such as what you will receive here. And yes, there are far more important ways to be a role model other than not taking them to this movie. My children think I am larger than life. They aspire to be like me. I am their hero. It is completely undeserved. However, how can it be a bad thing to be an influence that inspires others to do better? If others think you or I are prudes, so be it. I care more about what my children think than what they think... and I suspect you do as well.
Another Kevin
09-11-2015, 13:24
The ratings people also still weight heavily the idea that movies should show consequences for actions. I actually read a review from an organization that participates in the rating process, in which the reviewer was concerned less about the language and more about the fact that a character confesses to committing adultery, habitually, with few apparent consequences beyond being chased out of a motel room, and never any show of remorse. Showing immorality is more acceptable to the raters if the bad guy is shown getting his comeuppance and repenting. They're worried about a narrative in which evil is rewarded, or even unpunished.
Seatbelt
09-11-2015, 13:52
There is nothing "dirty" in the movie, saw it yesterday.... Agree that kids would be less likely to get it.... Unless they are really weird like I was.
I guess you and I have different definitions of "dirty".
Seatbelt
09-11-2015, 13:53
Those that incorporate vulgarity in their speech because of habit or because they think it somehow enforces their points, have no way of comprehending the validity of your points. Many will roll their eyes and say sarcastic things like "your kids ears won't melt". It is reasonable to be a role model. Being a role model does not mean you are a wimp or naïve. It is not turning your nose up at others like you are better or something. It does mean sacrifice. It means holding yourself to a high standard so as not to disappoint those that look up to you. It is not easy to live a consistent life. It attracts criticism from those that do not try to be a role model. It invites ridicule, such as what you will receive here. And yes, there are far more important ways to be a role model other than not taking them to this movie. My children think I am larger than life. They aspire to be like me. I am their hero. It is completely undeserved. However, how can it be a bad thing to be an influence that inspires others to do better? If others think you or I are prudes, so be it. I care more about what my children think than what they think... and I suspect you do as well.
Well said, much better than I could say it, thanks!
We live in a country where nudity is taboo but guns are revered. Go figure.
MuddyWaters
09-11-2015, 14:05
Vulgar language, nudity, adult topics, are substitutions for real content.
It is widespread in entertainment industry. Especially comedy.
I wouldnt take young kids, or even watch it with my mother.
swisscross
09-11-2015, 14:28
My parents took my sister and myself to see "Stripes" when I was 14.
Father was ex military and thought a military comedy would be ok.....
It was the last movie we saw as a family.
Thirty-three years later I still remember the shower and mud wrestling scenes like it was yesterday.
Children absorb everything.
No way I would let my 11yo see a R rated movie.
Pedaling Fool
09-11-2015, 14:31
We live in a country where nudity is taboo but guns are revered. Go figure.
I don't know what country you're talking about; nothing hotter than naked women with guns:D
rotorbrent
09-11-2015, 14:41
No I would not take my kids to see the movie for hiking the AT get the National Geographic Appalachian trail disc and show your children the trail.
If you want to show them the world then yes.
It was mostly gray haired Robert redford fans when we saw the movie
Y'all sounding more like nuns than hikers. Get a grip. Jeez.:rolleyes:
BirdBrain
09-11-2015, 15:28
The question was about if parents should take children to the movie. It is not about if we as hikers are going to be damaged if we hear bad words. The vocabulary of Katz is quite typical of many hikers. It is not that out of place for that movie. Some of the other scenes were a bit forced. But again, that is not the issue. There are better choices for a family movie night that all would enjoy.
Pedaling Fool
09-11-2015, 15:34
The question was about if parents should take children to the movie. It is not about if we as hikers are going to be damaged if we hear bad words. The vocabulary of Katz is quite typical of many hikers. It is not that out of place for that movie. Some of the other scenes were a bit forced. But again, that is not the issue. There are better choices for a family movie night that all would enjoy.The question was answered in the first few posts, as is the case with most threads, everything else is just banter, nothing wrong with that.
somers515
09-11-2015, 15:52
Thank you all for the insight. I was on the fence and this conversation tipped me toward not taking my kids. Guess I'll have to pick something else for family movie night. As for the extra banter it was interesting as well!
BirdBrain
09-11-2015, 15:52
The question was answered in the first few posts, as is the case with most threads, everything else is just banter, nothing wrong with that.
You are correct. I apologize for distracting back to the OP from the thread drift. :D Hopefully, I have provided enough cover for other sheltered immature delicate flowers like me.
Okay. My work is done here. I must be moving on.
rocketsocks
09-11-2015, 16:06
I don't know what country you're talking about; nothing hotter than naked women with guns:D
I believe if I saw a naked women with a gun on the trail...I'd be abliged to inform her that in several states guns are not allowed. ;)
daddytwosticks
09-11-2015, 16:09
Save your money. I wasn't impressed with the movie. The book was way better. If one wants to see good senic pictures of the AT, simply look through this forum's photo gallery. IMHO. :)
The book was great. I haven't seen the movie yet.
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed that is the only thing that ever has."
- Margaret Mead, Anthropologist
My parents took my sister and myself to see "Stripes" when I was 14.
Father was ex military and thought a military comedy would be ok.....
It was the last movie we saw as a family.
Thirty-three years later I still remember the shower and mud wrestling scenes like it was yesterday.
Children absorb everything.
No way I would let my 11yo see a R rated movie.
My dad took the family to Deliverance when I was 11 and I turned out OK.
shakey_snake
09-11-2015, 17:43
I cannot understand why these people (movie makers) would take a subject like the Appalachian Trail (or at least related to it), and make something trashy out of it.
LOL. Hardest I've laughed in a while. Thanks.
The scene with the couple who gave them a ride, and the scene with Beulah asking Katz to help her in the laundromat both seemed overdone, almost too explicit.
That was taken directly from the book.
Traveler
09-11-2015, 20:10
My dad took the family to Deliverance when I was 11 and I turned out OK.
That may explain a lot.... :D
Around the campfire, we're all just hikers. I had to learn to steer clear of arguments and definitions of who's hiking purely and who isn't. These were the sort of arguments that drove me off the trail long ago. I found myself much happier hiking solo, or among hikers who had more interesting things to talk about.
Be content with what you've hiked, and how you've hiked, and leave it at that.
Ugh, sorry... that last post was meant to go with a whole 'nother thread. Sigh.
Sailing_Faith
09-11-2015, 22:09
Ugh, sorry... that last post was meant to go with a whole 'nother thread. Sigh.
yea, but it fits here.... And in just about any other thread on the forum,....
Wise Old Owl
09-12-2015, 01:08
I took my 13 year old last Friday. The only reason I can imagine it is rated R is the number of F-bombs, and it's pretty much all Katz. I believe if there are more than X-number of those, they have to rate it R. It gave an honest portrayal of Katz and we didn't have a problem with it. The movie was entertaining and funny, which is all it was intended to be, we both liked it. Like "Wild," it's not a 'hiking' movie, nor was it a 'hiking' book. It is what Bill Bryson intended it to be. Both movies just happened to have hiking/a trail as PART of the backdrop. I liken this movie to Grumpy Old Men.
I can tell you the theater was full, and at least 90% of the audience were senior citizens (Redford fans, I presume) who probably have never or will never set foot on the trail. There were fewer than 10 people in the theater under the age of 50 including myself and my son, 2 guys about my age next to us, and another family with 2 teen boys. I would put at least 50% of the audience over age 70 and a good number would be physically incapable of hiking at all. I'm not trying to be mean, these were my observations in light of all the concern about the movie impacting the trail. I sincerely do not believe the film's impact to the trail will be near what some members of the hiking community believed it would be.
You only have 8 more years to join the club.... it has benefits and OMG. PM me when you figure this out, it's all good.
squeezebox
09-12-2015, 02:52
Any suggestions for a good AT documentary/ movie.
daddytwosticks
09-12-2015, 16:59
My dad took the family to Deliverance when I was 11 and I turned out OK.
Can you squeel like a pig? :)
greenmtnboy
09-12-2015, 20:49
What gets me about the theater experience is how loud and overpowering the assault is on the senses; it is the antithesis of the hiking experience, at least the form of sensory experience. I didn't like the fact in the book Katz chose a trail name that was profane, obscene and offensive. From what I know it is not a movie that I would take idealistic young people to. Frankly you wonder why Bryson chose Katz to hike with; I believe in redemption but not with those who obviously don't want it. These guys remind me of the rowdy bullies and wastrels I remember from boyscouts that sane people tried to avoid.
We saw the movie today.
In my opinion the movie captures none of the magic of the trail.
I didn't have any issue with the sex scenes in the Wild movie, but the Implied BJ given to the driver of a muscle car while Bryson and Katz were in the back seat came off as just stupid.
Not my place to say if those kinds of things make it inappropriate for anyone, but for the lack of joy that it captured, I would not subject anyone not already familiar with the trail to this.
There were some good bits, but I will not be recommending this movie to anyone I know. Not people at work, not my Mother, not anyone on line.
As for the scenery, not all that great.
I just saw the movie. I liked it. Trail has a role in the movie it is not just a backdrop. As far as taking kids to movies that are rated R I consider this off-subject, no interest to me in a AT forum.
Saw the movie. It was okay. Not really realistic. Did not like sexual comments. Would have loved to bring grandson (11). He is aware but still, not right to have him hear some of the words used and some of the scenes. Unnecessary really.
Comments about movie....not enough of scenery; packs way too light, did not give any realism to carrying any weight; too many changes of clothes; and where did the bathrobe come from?; they never used their hiking poles in the movie, why not?, yet they struggled hiking; never drank water from water bottles or even indicated they had water bottles unless I missed that; young guy hikers who passed them come up on them later in the movie to help them out, but those guys would have been long gone and not behind them unless they took multi days off trail.
Non-hikers probably would not have noticed these things but it bothered me.
Liked Wild better.
Sarcasm the elf
09-12-2015, 23:24
Any suggestions for a good AT documentary/ movie.
If you don't mind spending some money, Scott "Squatch" Harriot's three A.T. documentaries are some of the best I've seen. He hiked the A.T. over a three year period and focused on interviewing and re-interviewing hikers throughout their journey. The documentaries capture a lot of the essence of the AT, but focuses on people that hike it . He has a similar set of documentaries from his PCT hikes, but I haven't seen them.
http://www.squatchfilms.com/
Hi.
I cannot understand why these people (movie makers) would take a subject like the Appalachian Trail (or at least related to it), and make something trashy out of it.
It just goes to show you what we're dealing with in Hollywood these days.
I wished the hiker community would actively boycott this movie.
Besides, very few scenes were shot on the trail, which is a disgrace in itself.
It's a movie based on the book. The book spent a lot of time off trail, and had lots of f-bombs. Don't blame it on Hollywood.
BigGreenMoose
09-13-2015, 17:52
Although I don't have kids, a site I often refer friends to is Kids-in-mind
http://www.kids-in-mind.com/w/walkinthewoods.htm
They do IN-DEPTH reviews of movies specifically so parents/guardians can know what their kids might be in for.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk