By Marc Bernardin
Updated September 03, 2009 at 04:17 PM EDT

I like Guy Ritchie, director of British underworld gems like Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels and Snatch, as well as Robert Downey Jr.’s upcoming Sherlock Holmes redux. And I like Lobo, the DC Comics interstellar bounty hunter created by Keith Giffen in the ’80s, who revels in wanton, planet-scale acts of mayhem. Lobo, who rides a giant space-faring motorcycle-sled-thing, is the last of his race…because he killed the rest of his people. Probably because he thought calling himself “the last of his race” sounded cool. Lobo, who used “frag” as a four-letter substitute decades before “frak” came into vogue. So the two of them seem like a match made in director-subject heaven, right? Well, they would be if Warner Bros’ proposed Lobo flick wasn’t planned as a PG-13.

Don’t get me wrong: I think PG-13 is a fine rating and, by and large, does the job it’s supposed to. But, to me, Lobo is supposed to be insanely, over-the-top-y violent and bloody. He was created as a commentary of sorts on Wolverine and The Punisher, two Marvel characters whose main raison d’etre is to kill, flamboyantly and with great zest. I want my Lobo movie to be as pulpy and juicy and eviscery as possible. I want my astral sphere’s to bleed.

Was Warner so stung by Watchmen, which flaunted it’s R-rating and barely broke $100 million in its theatrical run, that they decided not to cordon off a whole segment of the moviegoing population? I guess I’d rather they make a PG-13 Lobo movie than no Lobo movie — because it really could be a lot of fun — but shouldn’t a film be everything it could be? Is it just me?

Photo Credit: Ritchie: Albert L. Ortega/PR Photos