The Republic of Heaven

I was wondering...How will they do the angels? They are supposed to be naked. What do you guys and gals think? The best thing i can think of is that "areas" will be covered by bright light.

Mod edit: Poll edited to hopefully give the equivalent UK film ratings, or at least a rough idea

They're going to have to take creative license and cover them up with something. That's the only way they can make the film marketable. It's not a big issue to me. I'm not worried.

o yea I'm not worried either. Just wondering how people think it will be done.


I voted PG-13 btw. I mean the Potters and all the comic book movies are. They'll try for the PG but they won't get it. I mean really, think about it. Kidnapping, "cutting" fighting bears, just everything, It's a PG-13 movie.

I'd think that the Amber Spyglass would be a 12/15, but the others will probably be a PG.

And the angels arn't actually naked-they're just light. Its very hard to see them clearly.

Amusingly enough, the angels are to humans what humans expect them to be. We have sick minds, clearly.

As I'm from a different country to most people on this forum, I use a different rating system. In mine, I'm gessing an M15+ (recommended for people over 15. Not to be confused with MA15+, where it si restricted to people over 15). That's what simliar films seem to get (oens like Harry Potter, Star Wars etc all got those)

Yes, you're in Australia, just like me.

moonflash wrote:Yes, you're in Australia, just like me.

I wonder if we know each other outside this forum (you can never totally remove the chance of that coincidence. Damn that would be weird). Do you think we'll get an M rating (when it actually comes out here)

moonflash wrote:Amusingly enough, the angels are to humans what humans expect them to be. We have sick minds, clearly.

Don't they see each other as structures?

I doubt that they'll have them nude... probabbly wearing togas or something...

Yeah, they're beings of architecure and design rather than matter. It's a very cool idea.

Aren't they structures of intelligence? Imagine that...Well, I suppose imagining that is beyond our feeble mortal minds.

moonflash wrote:Yeah, they're beings of architecure and design rather than matter. It's a very cool idea.

I would totally love it if they were walking Parthenons. This is sadly unlikely.

moonflash wrote:Yeah, they're beings of architecure and design rather than matter. It's a very cool idea.

So...walking, talking aquiducts then?

Should be intresting?

More design than architecture, then... they're structures, not beings.

moonflash wrote:More design than architecture, then... they're structures, not beings.

I know.

Would be fun though.

I just wanted to say sorry about not putting the other ratings in the pool. I was not thinking about the other countries and their rating systems. Thanks to who ever thought to modify the poll.

HDM Head 24-7 wrote: The best thing i can think of is that "areas" will be covered by bright light.

I like this idea. There are alot of camera tricks they can use too. Same effect without changing yet another detail to appease the vocal minority.

i think they should just let it go, and let the angels be naked. new line should realize that this story is aimed toward adults, as children won't understand it, and dispense with trying to make it child-appropriate. they need to just be faithful to the book, and accept whatever rating they're given.

iwishiplayedguitar wrote:i think they should just let it go, and let the angels be naked. new line should realize that this story is aimed toward adults, as children won't understand it, and dispense with trying to make it child-appropriate. they need to just be faithful to the book, and accept whatever rating they're given.

Actually, PP wrote them as children's books, you know. And I have found them in the children's sections of book stores. New Line may follow through with that and keep the kiddies in mind.