|
musht -> RE: How Come There are No Sci-Fi Films for Kids Nowadays? (2/1/2013 8:18:21 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: directorscut quote:
ORIGINAL: musht quote:
ORIGINAL: directorscut quote:
ORIGINAL: musht quote:
ORIGINAL: directorscut Super 8 is unfortunately much too intense for kids. I'd have to disagree. The BBFC does indeed give it a 12 rating because it "Contains one use of strong language, moderate threat and soft drug use". I suppose it depends on what age group of kids this thread is referring to but certainly I think Super 8 would be suitable for kids as young as 7 (possibly 6) as long as they had a parent with them. The main leads are kids after all (between 12 and 13 I would say), I suppose it would be up to the parent though, and everyone's different. I like how you quote the BBFC's 12's rating as a counter-argument. 12 rated films are not for kids. Some kids under 12 might not have a problem with Super 8 (although I certainly wouldn't show it to someone under-10 at least), but it is certainly not a kid's film. The target audience is clearly teenagers. Compare this to the kid's movies the OP was talking about like E.T. or Flight of the Navigator or D.A.R.Y.L. - it is far more intense, violent and horrific than any of those movies. It's a guideline, not a rule. The HP films from Goblet of Fire onwards are all 12s as are the last two LotR films but I really wouldn't see a problem showing them to kids as young as 7. Kids are a lot more resilient than people give them credit for. But I have no kids and am not exposed to them on a regular basis so I'm not basing this on personal experience, god knows if I ever do have kids I could completely change my mind. I would say it ceases to be a guideline and becomes a rule when it becomes illegal to sell to people under the stated age. I will accept that point, because it is correct. But there's no law preventing parents from buying them and showing the to their kids if they think they can handle it, they just have to wait until the DVD release.
|
|
|
|