The Last Duel, Let There Be Carnage, and the PG-13 Economy
A few months ago I talked about the box office bust that was The Suicide Squad (which is still one of my favorite movies of the year). I then later went and saw Venom: Let There Be Carnage, which I thought was rated R but in actuality was rated PG-13 in a move that felt like Sony being weak-willed and toothless, taking all the real edge and heat out of the movie in order to make sure they can maximize profits.
While watching the movie, I couldn’t help but feel like the entire film was trimmed just enough to maintain a PG-13 rating. Early in the film it looked like there was a moment when a very violent impalement was going to happen, only for the whole impalement to take place off camera and then the actual violence to be completely bloodless. More than a couple of moments looked like language was cut, or a violent action would be cut around to minimize how truly graphic Andy Serkis and crew wanted to make it.
I do think the heads of Sony came out and said they were planning on neutering the movie for a PG-13 rating, and while the movie does feel like an R-rated movie if pushed a little further it looks like this idea came through loud and clear. I was actually really disappointed by this, feeling that they chose to try and recoup their money instead of letting the actual vision of the movie (from the director’s vision to the true nature of the characters) come through. And to that end, it did feel like an incomplete movie – a Battle of the Five Armies Theatrical Cut, if you will, with enough cuts made to make the movie feel like it lacked something. Why would Sony intentionally neuter all the good stuff out of the movie?
Probably because it made them a ton of money at the box office.
Okay, maybe not a ton of money. But for comparison’s sake, Venom LTBC made almost $500 million, compared to The Suicide Squad not even breaking even on their budget (they had a BO of $170 million). I’m not going to say all that money was due to the rating – the character is popular, the first movie made $800 million, Tom Hardy and Woody Harrelson are draws to the movie theater, it had a Theater-only 45-day window (probably) – but the rating certainly didn’t work against them.
Not only that, if Sony wanted to, they could release an R-Rated Director’s Cut if they want to, putting even more money in their pockets. Just look at Batman V. Superman: Dawn of Justice. Release the original in theaters at the much more profitable PG-13 with most of the violence and language neutered, make a nice box office return, then later release the cut that all the hard-core fans want to see. As The Suicide Squad proved, it’s not like those hard-core fans are going out to the theaters anyways – they’ll watch it at home and bitch about it later.
It’s hard to be too mad at Sony for going about their release this way (if they even release an R-rated cut) – this is pretty standard for Hollywood. Try to make something that a lot of people will see in a small amount of time and apologize for how crappy it is with cheaper DVD and Bluray releases.
So how does this relate to The Last Duel?
Sir Ridley Scott complained that The Last Duel tanked because of Millennials, not a bad marketing campaign or his inability to release a movie less than 2 hours 40 minutes into theaters (I’m looking at you, House of Gucci and Blade Runner 2049, the latter of which Scott produced) or the fact that movie-goers in general are not up for a cerebral movie about rape, land property rights, serfdom, and medieval France. It’s the Millennial’s faults… though there are a lot of Boomers out there that probably didn’t see it either. I’m sorry I’m harping on this… it’s so strange to blame the audience that tries to support you (people like me) and I try not to take it too seriously, and I know that he’s partially right that people would rather watch this movie on a streaming platform (which is both insane and a shame to me), but it’s also strange that Scott fails to address that the subject matter might be a little too niche to bring in a crowd.
(I should note at this time that he might be okay this year – House of Gucci is doing decently well and may beat The Last Duel’s meager $30 million return. Fans of the podcast know I’m not as keen on Sir Scott’s contemporary dramas as I am his historical ones, but it is important to note how they do juxtaposed against the box office of his historical dramas. It should also be noted that its spiritual predecessor and one of my favorite director’s cut of all time, Kingdom of Heaven, also had a fairly terrible box office performance, though nowhere near as bad as The Last Duel).
To bring it back around to ratings, the box office, and PG-13 movies, I think that The Last Duel, a movie that was kept to the director’s vision, made in a completely creative and amazing workspace telling a compelling, interesting, and adult story, was a magnificent triumph of a movie that failed in one regard: the box office. Contrasted to Venom: LTBC, which was neutered by the studio, is released and makes a decent amount of money in returns.
Is this a problem? IT’S A HUGE PROBLEM! In some ways, it validates everyone’s fears about the cinema – that all the creative, experimental, mature, unique movies are dying while generic, cookie-cutter, safe, average movies are being green-lit and churned through the mill to decent profits. In this regard, I do think that Sir Scott should blame the audience and their temperament about The Last Duel’s failures, but he must also bemoan the death of an industry – and a type of big-budget movie – that is slowly becoming extinct.
