I don't give a monkey's about context - it's still rude

The Classification Review Board will today decide whether the animated September holiday release Space Chimps will keep its PG classification or be downgraded to G.
On July 11, the Classification Board announced that the movie - described as "an intergalactic comedy that highlights the antics of astronaut chimps with the wrong stuff" - would be classified PG with a warning of mild threatening themes.
The distributors appealed the decision and last Friday a review was announced.
If history is anything to go by, the application by the distributors for the reclassification will be successful.
Last year, the review board reviewed five cinema releases and on all but one occasion downgraded the original classification

• Sleuth was downgraded from MA to M on October 22
• 30 Days of Night was downgraded from R 18+ to MA on October 17
• SAW IV was downgraded from R 18+ to MA on October 10
• 300 was downgraded from R 18+ to MA February 28
• Notes on a Scandal retained its MA classification after the January 24 review
  

The explanations for the decisions make fascinating reading for anyone with an interest in classification matters.

Studying the deliberations would make one wonder whether there is such a thing as a rude word any more.

Take the review of Sleuth as a classic example.

In its deliberations, the Review Board noted that the F word was used 16 times and he C word three times but said that was appropriate in an M classification because it was in context.

It even said that "You're a c***" is shouted loudly and with menace. But apparently that's okay for 15-year-olds.

Makes you wonder what level of bad language a film would need to contain to earn an R classification. As for Space Chimps, here's betting that it will have a G classification by week's end.