James Mangold has had a lot to say during his pre-Oscars press. Nominated for Best Adapted Screenplay for “Logan,” the filmmaker has railed against post-credits scenes, and explained how he tried to make his superhero movie more like an Ozu film. We’ll leave it up to others to decide if he succeeded on that front; I can’t recall any Ozu film with the same amount of bloody mayhem that’s in “Logan.” However, it may surprise you to learn (or actually, maybe not) that Mangold has some very strong opinions about on-screen violence too.
READ MORE: James Mangold To Direct Cat Movie ‘Crenshaw’
Speaking with The Credits, the director pointed out — as many other filmmakers have — the hypocrisy of the MPAA giving violence the go-ahead onscreen, as long as there’s no actual carnage. For Mangold, showing the consequences of violence wasn’t just about rolling with the freedom of an R-rating, it was informed by the needs of the character.
“I have a lot of misgivings about violence and PG ratings. A PG film might show hundreds of people dying, falling off buildings, getting mowed down by rapid fire guns, but you don’t feel the deaths because the ratings system dictates the amount of agony being played by the actor. In a weird way, that makes violence more palatable because when we excise the upsetting bits, we de-sensitize ourselves to death to the point where it’s almost like shooting ducks at a carnival,” he explained. “We wrote a movie about a character struggling with the PTSD from three lifetimes of mayhem and violence, so it was important to feel the toll all that bloodshed has taken on Logan’s soul.”
It’s a wise perspective, and there were other ways an R-rating opened up narrative opportunities for Mangold, beyond just showing a lot more blood. The director says he could be nuanced in a way with “Logan” that he wouldn’t be able to with a standard, four-quadrant blockbuster.
“This movie could not legally be marketed to children, which means there’s no Happy Meals, no action figures, no advertising on Saturday morning cartoons. I don’t have to worry about the attention span of a 12-year old. I don’t have to keep the story ‘up-cut’ to keep kids engaged. I only have to think about pleasing grown-ups. From writing onward through the directing, I had the freedom to make a more sophisticated movie,” Mangold said.
We’ll see if his peers agree when the Oscars are handed out on March 4th.
Okay, first, I don’t know any PG movies post the 80s that show hundreds of people dying or getting mowed down by gunfire. I think he is talking about the PG-13 rating. You would think an actual filmmaker would know something about film ratings. And I agree that the PG-13 rating has gotten more liberal on its violence. Something that has as much gun violence and killing as Black Panther isn’t good for kids to see. You had the white bad guy literally telling a security guard to run and then shoots him in the back and makes a joke. Then you have the black bad guy shoot the white bad guy at point blank range later in the film. So cool right.
This was exactly my thought coming away from Black Panther. (SPOILERS, I guess…
There’s people getting run over by cars (as a joke), tons of death, finishing up with the hero straight up stabbing someone in the chest. Because there’s no blood or excessive agony shown, they get a PG rating. But I think this sends the exactly wrong message to the many children seeing the film, that there are no consequences to violence. And we all end up desensitized to the violence.