'Breaking Dawn' Is Not Yet Rated & It All Depends On Bella's Birthing Scene!

Wed, August 10, 2011 12:55pm EST by 13 Comments

‘Breaking Dawn: Part 1′ hits theaters Nov. 18 but will it be too graphic for a PG-13 rating?

You might have to be 17-years-old before you get to see Bella and Edward tie the knot. Wyck Godfrey, one of the producers of the Twilight films told HollywoodNews.com that director Bill Condon has a version of Bella’s birthing scene that should hopefully land Breaking Dawn a PG-13 rating — but they’re not sure!

“I have seen numerous cuts,” Wyck says. “I think that process is taking place right now. We don’t have any word yet on the rating but I think we’re going to be okay. We’re releasing it PG-13 and it’s incredibly powerful already. It definitely captures what the book captures.”

One of the reasons why Bella’s birth is considered graphic is because Edward is forced to bite his way through the placenta to get their daughter Renesmee out.

We can’t wait to see Bella’s dress, and especially the highly anticipated sex scene! But it’ll all depend on what the Motion Picture Association of America decides — are you worried?

— Chloe Melas

Read More On R-Patz And K-Stew Here!

  1. New ‘Breaking Dawn’ Playing Card Reveals Great Dialogue From The Movie!
  2. Kristen Tells Fans Don’t Call Me ‘Hot!’ Is She Downplaying Her Beauty?
  3. Kristen Stewart Will Start Filming ‘Snow White’ August 15 — Will Robert Pattinson Join Her?

Leave a Reply

To comment, please fill in the fields below, enter your comment and select the Comment button.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

View Comment


Posted at 7:54 PM on November 18, 2011  

it is rated PG-13, but is it aprropriate for 14 year olds? My little sis is 14 & want 2 c it, is it ok to c?

Share this comment at Share with Twitter


Posted at 10:58 PM on September 14, 2011  

Well I think they can come up with something. The birthing scene doesn’t have to show Edward biting through the placenta, it just has to be mentioned, and show some slight evidence of it, like the placenta laying ripped to shreds on the table or something. Also the sex scene just has to show a little motion, kissing, and him breaking the bed. Not a lot of gasping and moaning. I’m sure they can do just those things and make everyone happy and have a PG13 rating.

Share this comment at Share with Twitter


Posted at 8:22 PM on September 13, 2011  

It should be PG-13 because Adults don’t understand that we already know everything and we have had the Sex Ed talk and we’ve seen the video in seventh grade! Stop saying that we shouldn’t be allowed to see it because like 95% of Twilight’s fan base are teens! GIVE IT A REST!

Share this comment at Share with Twitter


Posted at 8:20 PM on August 18, 2011  

Look, I’m 11. I like Twilight and I’ve read the whole saga – I’m from the UK.
All the Twilight films so far have been a 12A.
If they made the rating to a 15, they’d lose millions of pounds. It would be a disaster and Twilight would probably hit rock bottom.
And you may say I shouldn’t read the Twilight books – I’m too young, they’re too graphic.
I don’t care. I like them, so I’ll read them.
Even if Breaking Dawn was a 15, when it came out on DVD, I’d probably see it anyways.
This film will not be rated any higher than a 12A.

Share this comment at Share with Twitter


Posted at 3:23 PM on August 10, 2011  

unfortunatly people that age will read books like tis the books dont go in to specific detail excempting the birth scene i have faith that the producers and people in charge of cuts and scenes will do the books proud. I believe that it should be PG-13 as many adults under estermate how much we as teenagers already know.

Share this comment at Share with Twitter


Posted at 2:28 PM on August 10, 2011  

13 year old should not be allowed to watch this movie..the book is beautiful and explicit and it is not fair that because of these little kids us older ppl can not fully enjoy the real breaking dawn..instead we have to watch a kiddie version of it..parents r crazy 4 even letting their kids read a book about 2 ppl having sex…It needs to be rated R…

Share this comment at Share with Twitter


Posted at 2:54 PM on August 10, 2011  

I totally agree. i want to see the FULL version and not the one for little kids.

Share this comment at Share with Twitter


Posted at 2:59 PM on August 10, 2011  

It’s a book for teens anyway. I can see how the movie would be inappropriate for family viewing, but that doesn’t mean it’s needs to be R rated. The book and the movie are totally appropriate for a 13 or 14 year old sans parental supervision. Even with both having the graphic violence of the birth scene. Or the sex scenes. Which is why as I pointed out in an earlier comment that it could be useful to have a lower restricted rating set somewhere between the PG-13 and the R, (think maybe R-14 or R-15 as the Canadians or British have)as it would keep families out of certain movies, like Breaking Dawn, but still allow teens who want to go see it the ability to.

Share this comment at Share with Twitter


Posted at 12:48 AM on August 11, 2011  

I read Breaking Dawn when i was 12 and was perfectly fine with what happened. I think the movie will probably be rated PG-13. Even if it was rated R think about all the Twimoms. My mom promised me that even if the movie is rated R we will still being seeing it on opening day. I think a lot of Twimoms did that for their Twihard daughters as well. And for your information the books were writen by Stephenie Meyer for teenagers not people in their 20s or older. Walk into an library and you will not find a single Twilight saga book in the adult section you will only find them in the teen section. So rated PG-13 or not the theaters will be crowded with teenagers and their moms get over it.

Share this comment at Share with Twitter


Posted at 1:47 PM on August 10, 2011  

This is an example of why the MPAA needs a restrictive rating for teenagers placed between the PG-13 and the R. Other countries film rating systems have such a rating, like Canada has a 14 rating that is restricted, and the British have a 15 rating that is restricted. Having such a rating would benefit everybody. It would allow films that are inappropriate for families with children under the age of about 13 or 14 to watch together, but are perfectly alright for teenagers to see on their own in the theaters the benefit of the doubt. I’m thinking of movies like Jennifer’s Body or even some of the R rated comedies like Bad Teacher, or even films Lost In Translation. Those movies keep getting an R rating even though they are rather soft Rs. Especially compared with other R rated movies like Saving Private Ryan or the Saw and Hostel series.

Having a lower restricted rating would surely benefit the studios as well. It would mean less unrated cuts down the line on the video market, as it would also mean that the studios wouldn’t have to edit movies down that would have had a soft R rating anyway. They would just get the softer teen restricted rating the first time. I’m thinking specifically of the unrated versions of Hancock and King Arthur, even the R rated extended cut of Sucker Punch as examples of movies that once again are bad for families with children under the age of 12 or so, but are perfectly okay for teenagers on their own. You can’t tell me studios wouldn’t like a teenage restricted rating, because it would mean that the studios would finally have access to the teen market on films that they previously wouldn’t have had access to.

Other reasons for why it would be a good idea to have a teen restricted rating is that the MPAA could then use the PG-13 ratings solely for movies that are aimed at families. Which is a good thing because it would keep families out of the new Bond and Batman films when they become really dark. The new rating would also help with the problem of all the unrated cuts and mostly abolish the need for the NC-17 rating. As most movies like the uncut and unrated versions of Judd Apatow’s comedies or the Saw films would get the R rating in the first place. Another virtue is that parents would then always know that a movie’s R rating is serious, and not to be taken lightly (as in The King’s Speech or Once anyone?) just by the fact that a film has an R rating. They could still take their kids or teens to see it, but only at their discretion. And then the MPAA could leave the NC-17 to be only awarded to legitimate movies that feature real and explicitly demonstrated, as in it’s actually shown, sex between the actors. I’m thinking of movies like Shortbus, 9 Songs, even Anti-Christ.

In the end a restricted teen rating would be a win-win situation for everybody. It would be a win for the teenagers left at the multiplex on Saturday afternoon who want to see something maybe a bit more complex or harder than the PG-13 rating would allow. It would tell parents which movies are soft Rs (as in Rs that are totally appropriate for teenagers) and which ones are hard Rs (meant for adults). It would even help families know that The Dark Knight, Twilight, and even latest Bond films are not appropriate for family viewing.

Share this comment at Share with Twitter


Posted at 2:30 PM on August 10, 2011  

WHt are u lkle writing an essay??? Who has tht kinda time??? I tjink u may hav some issues. Sorry bout tht

Share this comment at Share with Twitter


Posted at 3:12 PM on August 10, 2011  

I find it troublesome that you suggest I have problems for taking time out of my day to offer up a thoughtful comment. Why even add a comment if it’s not going to be thoughtful or add anything to a conversation? Your comment adds nothing to a conversation. It just tries to take me to task for writing what you perceive to be an essay, before going on to suggest that I have issues for writing at length to defend my position. You don’t even spell correctly in your comment. How does what you posted have any merit whatsoever? I could see if you responded to any of the points I made in my comment, about how it could a useful post on your part. But your post doesn’t try to criticize my logic or fix it, or offer up any other solution. All your post does is try to end a conversation before it’s even started. So please tell me why did you even post in the first place if you had no interest in having an intelligent and well reasoned online discussion in the first place?

Share this comment at Share with Twitter


Posted at 5:13 PM on May 31, 2012  

As someone who owns the entire series of books, I would be interested to see that they do it justice. Graphic and explicit or just enough without being too much? It will be interesting. The books were addictive, once I started reading I couldn’t put them down. Taylor as Jacob is shorter than I would expect for casting purposes but he has the moxy to carry the role off. TEAM JACOB!!! (still can’t believe that’s the same kid from Sharkboy and Lava Girl!!! HA HA HA)

Share this comment at Share with Twitter