A letter to Kennedy/Abrams from a worried parent

I always thought the MPAA ratings for G, PG and PG13 were permissive, while the R and NC-17 were restrictive. Meaning "parental guidance is suggested" vs. "Under 17 requires accompanying parent or adult guardian" vs. "No One 17 and Under Admitted." Of those, only NC-17 is a complete ban where the parent doesn't still make the ultimate choice, in theory.

I guess part of the problem is that you have kids working the ticket counter at the movie theater! Reliable and reasonable enforcement is the issue with the MPAA system.

I would agree it is more a societal issue, but this is where the interest and importance of the debate lies for me. Bottom line: There are no easy solutions or decisions. Just like parenting. And politics. Governance of your children or of your citizenry is important and it is hard. And I don't pretend to know the answer.

By the way, I really enjoy this thread and this kind of discussion. While we may not solve any problems or come up with any answers that work for everyone, it is the discussion of competing ideas that informs and helps us make better decisions for our own. (Too bad our politicians don't recognize that any more...)

Ain't this the truth. My 5 year old son, who has never seen a movie, wants me to tell him EVERYTHING there is about Star Wars. And he remembers everything... with my 2 almost 3 year old daughter right there with him. They are sponges.

 

So what do we do? Insist on chaperoning everything our kids ever do? You have to give your kids a little earned trust and freedom on some level.

I think part of where this debate gets... tangled... is it truly depends on the individual child and their age. You don't make the same rules for a 10 year old that you do for a 5 year old, or vice versa. We all remember when we were kids and what we did to skirt the rules. And it's a bit scary as a parent to realize our kids will do the same. But if a kid is clever enough to sneak in to a movie, maybe they are old enough to handle the content? My 5 year old isn't going to even think of sneaking into a movie (yet) because he is never going to go in alone at that young an age. If we set good boundaries for our kids at a young age like that, they are probably more apt to respect (not necessarily abide by) the boundaries as they get older. That's not to say they won't try to bend or break the rules, but by then it probably doesn't have as negative an impact.

Maybe this is my bias as a parent of very young kids, but it really is the youngest kids that need to be protected... and protected in the home. Whether it be cable TV, DVD, videogames, or otherwise. These things are not a babysitter for our kids and are too often treated as such. Having said that, I have no problem with tools, like parental locks, that help us to restrict or monitor what our kids are doing when we can't.

 

gotta love george carlin. he really had a way with words. lol.

 

Agreed, at least with respect to conscientious parents (like you) and their kids. But that isn't necessarily true for those kids whose parents pay no attention to what it is that their kids are watching or what games they are playing. I have a divorced friend whose child spent a large amount of time at a young age at his ex's parents house (grandparents), and they had no regard for watching violent news programs or other shows with him in the room. He would come home to my friend and be legitimately worried and say things like "Daddy, did you know there was a family that got murdered yesterday?" Stuff a kid of his age should not be worrying about.

Anyway, I guess all of this brings me back full circle to this question: How do I convince my over-protective wife that the original Star Wars ANH is okay for my 5 year old Star Wars obsessed son?

 

Not a fact.

I think this has been an interesting and civil discussion. I'd like to chuck my 3 cents in.

Small children, roughly from ages 2-7 shouldn't be shown any violent media. Small children are egocentric to the point where they literally think everything revolved around them. Show a 2 year old news footage of a bombing, they will think they caused it. For these children, the effects of violent images is well documented.
http://www.simplypsychology.org/preoperational.html

Similarly, the reason porn is illegal to show to a minor (whereas r and nc-17 are just guidelines not punishable by law) is because young children (I forget the cut off, roughly 12 and younger) because child psychologist have shown that porn is damaging to small kids.

However, the preponderance of the evidence in the scientific literature shows that violent media is not correlated with violent behavior in mentally stable children.

Every time a group tries to ban video games, the courts have recognized that the evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of no correlation between violent media and violent behavior.

As violent media proliferates, there has been a negative trend in violent crimes. Countries with access to violent media aren't more violent than countries without this access.

 

Honestly this thread seemed like it was purposefully made to incite controversy and I find the posters lack of response very fishy.

Everything on the topic worth saying has been said. You guys can keep debating parenting, social censorship and the psychology of violence.

I'm gonna go back to the Star Wars forums and talk about Star Wars.

 

Or it was the flood of unwarranted negative ratings that caused the original post to go hidden...

Have fun!

 

Movies can't hurt anyone. Unless they're thrown at them, but that's only if someone throws them.

That's why the parents/guardians should use their discretion when deciding what to allow these "vulnerable" individuals to be exposed to. No one is going to FORCE them to watch the movie.

Right, and that's being a parent. It's not picketing a studio claiming they eye raped your family. If there's a movie out you don't think your kids should see, don't let them see it. And if you see someone trying to push it on your kids and indoctrinate them (aside from trailers and in general presumably "audience friendly" promotion, which is different from indoctrination in this context), then make some noise. Unless the film's intention is to indoctrinate people to go and murder other people or otherwise pervert their way of thinking, serving perversive propaganda as "entertainment", then I say live and let live.

All conspiracies are covert, and it isn't that setting boundaries is the problem, it's the who is setting them. Only you should decide what is appropriate for your kids to watch (unless, of course, you are perverse and hurt kids). If you can be told how to live in one aspect of your life, the "powers-that-be" will not hesitate to tell you how to live in another.

We must be cautious.

 

Sometimes it depends on the policy of the movie theater entirely. I went with my brother (who was in his 20s) to a local theater to see Gladiator when I was just under 18, and knowing how pesky the ticket sellers were I waited in the stairwell while he purchased the tickets. They initially refused to sell him the tickets, which he had to claim were for his "college buddies" and were demanding my brother produce these other people with their licenses before any tickets would be sold. He ended up getting the tickets in the end though, and of course the ticket taker didn't stop us.

For a comparison, I had actually already seen the movie twice at another local theater with no ticket issues.

 

Regarding movie restrictions and parental control, as I said earlier, there are some people who think it should all be okay for anyone to view, and somewhat let them deal with it in their own way. I work with a gentleman who watches "the Family Guy" with his small children and he also uses the excuse that he would rather them experience these things with him present. In my view, this is irresponsible parenting, but you walk the razor's edge when telling another how to parent. The thing is, as with most decisions we make, we must live with the fallout for the next 15-20 years. I remember being very young, like 7-8 years old when my friend's brother should me his Playboy, and I can still remember it 30 years later.

As I think I have said all I can say on this, let me say this; I believe we are all our brothers keeper, and have a responsibility to lookout for each other. I remember once I visited a church were they served grape juice for communion instead of real wine. I asked the minister why they did this instead the biblical way of using fermented wine. His response was interesting. He said, "you never who might be in the crowd that service that day. What if a recovering alcoholic is there, and this one drink sends him over the edge causing him to lose his way, and setting a chain of events into motion. We must avoid the appearance of evil as much as possible. Sometimes our good intentions can be used maliciously."

 

My guess would be the level of violence in ROTS is probably the limit of what you're likely to see in a Star Wars movie. That said, I think the OP should stick to her own beliefs about what is appropriate for her child to see, and a good way to do that might be to use one of the many websites that chart the level of violence, language, nudity, etc. for each film that is released. Some good ones are http://www.pluggedin.com/ http://www.kids-in-mind.com/ and http://boxofficemom.com/ I think the OP should check out these sites after TFA comes out and it might help her make a more informed decision. They do a good job of telling you exactly what to expect.

 

hehe how do you explain those stormtroopers in star wars missing all the time?

 

I cannot imagine why anyone would ever be worried about letting their children see Star Wars regardless of what rating the mpaa gives it. I see a lot of truly hysterical parents out there that hover over their children and treat all the cliche safety concerns of our time as some sort of religion. Often these parents are doing more harm to their children than good. Some of these kids will never really grow up into an adult. They will be over reliant on mommy and daddy and be afraid of the outside world. Remember the scene in 'A Christmas Story' where the mother dresses the son in like 12 coats and the kid can't move his arms? This is hardly an exaggeration in this day and age. I truly feel sorry for those kids, never getting to just be a kid and make mistakes and learn from those mistakes because mommy is always there hovering over your every move. Not letting your child see Star Wars is approching this kind of hysteria.
Sincerly, a sane person

 

Just dropping in to point out again how arbitrary the MPAA ratings are; the extended version of The Hobbit: Battle of the Five Armies just got an R-rating. Honestly, how?
http://nerdist.com/the-hobbit-the-battle-of-the-five-armies-extended-cut-officially-rated-r/

 

Am I the only one who thinks the OP is a successful troll post?

That being said it does raise a good point of discussion. My view? I believe it is up to the individual parent to decide what his/her kid sees (that is their job as a parent after all) and I won't judge them for that. Personally I was viewing more intense and questionable choices for movies than this one will be at 8 years old (scream 1+2 etc), and watched a lot of horror/thrillers between 8-13. That wasn't due to parental decisions, but moreso me and the neighbourhood kids getting together and watching them. I turned out just fine (I hope!).

It is all about balance. Having too much ewok and jar-jar level content is too far in one direction, and at the same time it should be a movie which doesn't completely eliminate the possibility of kids being able to watch and enjoy it. I don't think everyone needs to worry too much as a well balanced movie is what we will end up with to appease all (most) age brackets and parental concerns.

 

First I would like to mention that I'm a teenager so I have a different point of view that an adult with children.

1.PG-13 isn't that bad.It's SW. JJ is a SW fan. If there would be suggestive language,pointless swearing what would happen?Public outrage from a big group of people:the parents.He surely wouldn't like that...
2.Let me give you some insight info :the teenagers of my age(14) usually play Call of Duty,GTA etc. Your son will soon be exposed to that.I will remind you that those games are rated:18. Should be for adults,some presume.Right?Wrong!Parents BUY those games for adults.Crazy ain't it? That's the sad truth.The problem usually is to know when the game is acceptable or inappropriate. Soon he will decide what games he will play.You should control the games he plays (in the future).
3.What exactly afraid of? Are you afraid of PG-13? That's how it sounds to me. SW + PG-13 =something my son can't watch. Not trying to be sounding harsh(really) but what could possibly be that scary/violent/inappropriate in TFA?. I watched ROTS when I was 9!!! I wasn't scared!!!(would like to mention I never played video games to that point or watched any violent-esque films). I was CRYING because of the sadness of that film. I remembered the Order 66 scene cause it mad me SAD,not SCARED. I remembered Obi-Wans words(,,You were the chosen one".You were supposed to destroy the Sith not join'em!!") because they were EMOTIONAL. Everybody is different. For some watching a horror won't make'em scared at night.For some it will.
I think you should let him watch TFA and don't be so afraid.Trust me, a Sith...Chancellor knows well.It's Star Tr..Wars!!!