The PG-13 rating restricts some of the content but nevertheless its message is effective

Rating: 8/10 (22 August 2005)

Ten years ago in the country of Rwanda, one million people were brutally murdered in less than three months by opposing forces, and much of the world passed over the events giving them little notice. However one brave man (played in the film by Don Cheadle) granted over 1,000 refugees access to his hotel and helped save their lives.
I had heard very mixed reviews on this film. On a UK talk show when it came out overseas one critic called it the next "Schindler's List," and another said it was too tame and "not scary enough" to be a great movie.
Personally I felt that although the movie was very good, and extremely well acted by Don Cheadle, the PG-13 rating does indeed restrict some of the atrocities that were actually performed. It kind of seems redundant to make such a daring, un-Hollywood film and then rate it PG-13 so more people can go see it and it can bring in more money.
At the time, I thought the critic who said it "wasn't scary enough" was off her nut, but now I can understand what she was getting at - "Schindler's List" really immersed you into the Jews' struggle through its brutal depictions of senseless violence. It hurt to watch.
"Hotel Rwanda" is tamer. It still deals with hundreds of thousands of lost lives, but PG-13 is still PG-13 and it does give the film a lighter edge - an R-rating would have allowed them more freedom to really examine the full extent of the atrocities in Rwanda.
Nevertheless, for being restricted to a PG-13 rating it manages to translate its message rather well, and thanks to the lead performance by Don Cheadle it really does have moments of near-greatness. I wouldn't put it on the same level as "Schindler's List," but it's still a haunting reminder of what happened in Rwanda.