Disney (and others) at the Box Office - Current State of Affairs

[LittleBuford]

For what it's worth NC-17 is not a legally enforceable rule. It's a rating given by the Motion Picture Association of America and is generally followed by movie theaters, but it's not a law.

Thank you for the correction!

 

[Disney Irish]

Wow, that's one of the worst takes I've read on the boards in a long while. So because you think your kid is advanced enough, that trumps science? I'm not going to tell anyone how to parent because it should be understood that it's not the best for the child. Well at least for a semi functioning person. So who should tell me wether my kid should be able to drink, smoke, go to school, or eat candy for every meal? And please don't say harm to the child because there's plenty out there that says that type of exposure to a child is bad for them.

I think you're taking things to extremes here. Do I believe that all kids across the board should be allowed in rated R movies, no. But do I believe that a parent should be able to make a judgement call for their own child, yes as they know them best.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

By that logic, one should have nothing to say about parents who choose not to put seatbelts on their children or who choose to give them alcohol.

Even this isn’t black and white though, I went to Germany in high school and was shocked that I could walk into a bar and order a drink. Even among first world countries there’s shades of gray on when kids are ready for certain things.

 

[Frank the Tank]

By that logic, one should have nothing to say about parents who choose not to put seatbelts on their children or who choose to give them alcohol.

That’s a ridiculous argument. Physical harm (which is the result of giving alcohol to a child or a car crash with a child that isn’t wearing a seatbelts) has a much more objective standard, which is why there are many laws that apply to adults and children alike respect to physical harm with criminal liability in a way that isn’t the case with subjective emotional standards.

That isn’t to diminish that emotional harm can occur or that it can be damaging to an individual, but the *government* has a much more colorable argument to enact laws that prevent physical harm based on objective standards compared to potential emotional harm that is based on subjective standards (and whether any harm occurs at all would vary widely depending upon the person). No one should want the government imposing rules on issues that are inherently subjective matters.

 

[Disney Irish]

By that logic, one should have nothing to say about parents who choose not to put seatbelts on their children or who choose to give them alcohol.

Another example of taking things to extremes here.

In many European countries kids are served wine at dinner, so why is there no law against that?

 

[Wendy Pleakley]

Even this isn’t black and white though, I went to Germany in high school and was shocked that I could walk into a bar and order a drink. Even among first world countries there’s shades of gray on when kids are ready for certain things.

The problem is when shades of gray means having zero rules.

The global drinking age generally ranges from 15 to 25 or so. I'd lean to 18 being reasonable. I probably wouldn't be overly concerned if a 16 year old had a drink with parental supervision.

I would have an issue with a pre-teen drinking under this notion of "personal freedom". Age limits in general might not have everyone in agreement, but at some point we can have a reasonable cut off point and it shouldn't be taken to mean a lack of freedom more than any other number of laws.

I don't think we need a law for movie going per se, but if it truly becomes an issue I'd want something like "no one under age 10 can watch an R-rated movie". Something that is slightly restrictive but still gives plenty of leeway for most kids. I don't think there's any major downside to pre-teens not watching Deadpool or whatever. They have plenty of options in the meantime.

 

[DKampy]

We live in societies that continually and in multiple ways tell people how to raise their children, imposing countless restrictions and requirements on parents. Preventing a child from being taken to the cinema to watch a violent slasher movie is hardly draconian or out of keeping with all the other societal safeguards we live with.

I agree it is not draconian….there is no such rule in place here…. Until then there is no one breaking the law…. Not to mention there has never been a law of such matters… many that grew up with kids of their own… have never known such rules…. as someone who was not able to see rated R movies…. It felt like I was lost at times as I was not able to discuss the movies my peers were discussing…. But as someone who does not have children… it is not my place to make sure other people’s children are being raised how I think they should be raised

 

[Tony the Tigger]

Not wanting to see a seven-year-old at the same screening as me when I go to watch a slasher film does not make me an enemy of personal freedom.

But your comfort level, presumably, has never had anything to do with any existing guidelines. It’s about the kids, not the general audience.

Kids are already not allowed in rated R movies unsupervised.

If a parent brings their kid, so be it. It’s uncommon at young ages, but a 15 year old? No issue.

Some people think kids shouldn’t watch any movie with a gay person in it. We wouldn’t want their opinion restricting a parent from taking their kids to a movie for that reason.

 

[LittleBuford]

Even this isn’t black and white though, I went to Germany in high school and was shocked that I could walk into a bar and order a drink. Even among first world countries there’s shades of gray on when kids are ready for certain things.

Of course. But the point is that, as much as they vary from place to place, very few people question the basic need for such restrictions or consider them an undue burden on parents’ freedoms.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

I agree it is not draconian….there is no such rule in place here…. Until then there is no one breaking the law…. Not to mention there has never been a law of such matters… many that grew up with kids of their own… have never known such rules…. as someone who was not able to see rated R movies…. It felt like I was lost at times as I was not able to discuss the movies my peers were discussing…. But as someone who does not have children… it is not my place to make sure other people’s children are being raised how I think they should be raised

I feel blessed to have had strict, yet realistic, parents. They didn’t allow things like rated R movies in the house, didn’t allow things like drinking in the house, didn’t allow things like swearing in the house, etc, but they also let it be known there would be no repercussions if we called them rather than doing something stupid like getting in a car with someone who had been drinking. I got grounded more than once for breaking rules but I can still recall the first time I was at a party in high school and called my Dad to pick me and my friends up, he was clearly disappointed I’d drank but all he ever said was he was proud of me for doing the right thing and making sure me, and my friends, all got home safe.

Rules are important but kids will inevitably make mistakes, it’s important they have rules but even more important they know they can depend on their parents when they screw up.

 

[LittleBuford]

That’s a ridiculous argument. Physical harm (which is the result of giving alcohol to a child or a car crash with a child that isn’t wearing a seatbelts) has a much more objective standard, which is why there are many laws that apply to adults and children alike respect to physical harm with criminal liability in a way that isn’t the case with subjective emotional standards.

That isn’t to diminish that emotional harm can occur or that it can be damaging to an individual, but the *government* has a much more colorable argument to enact laws that prevent physical harm based on objective standards compared to potential emotional harm that is based on subjective standards (and whether any harm occurs at all would vary widely depending upon the person). No one should want the government imposing rules on issues that are inherently subjective matters.

I don’t believe it’s ridiculous or indeed subjective to argue that exposure to certain kinds of gore and violence poses a risk to children’s wellbeing.

 

[LittleBuford]

But your comfort level, presumably, has never had anything to do with any existing guidelines. It’s about the kids, not the general audience.

I don’t understand. Can you rephrase your question?

 

[LittleBuford]

But as someone who does not have children… it is not my place to make sure other people’s children are being raised how I think they should be raised

Most of us have children in our lives whom we care about, and even if we don’t, society as a whole is shaped by the decisions parents make. One doesn’t need to be a parent to have worthwhile views on the matter, just as one doesn’t have to be a motorist to have legitimate opinions on speed limits.

 

[DKampy]

I feel blessed to have had strict, yet realistic, parents. They didn’t allow things like rated R movies in the house, didn’t allow things like drinking in the house, didn’t allow things like swearing in the house, etc, but they also let it be known there would be no repercussions if we called them rather than doing something stupid like getting in a car with someone who had been drinking. I got grounded more than once for breaking rules but I can still recall the first time I was at a party in high school and called my Dad to pick me and my friends up, he was clearly disappointed I’d drank but all he ever said was he was proud of me for doing the right thing and making sure me, and my friends, all got home safe.

Rules are important but kids will inevitably make mistakes, it’s important they have rules but even more important they know they can depend on their parents when they screw up.

I do agree with this… if you thought I was complaining about being lost… I am not…. I think I had pretty great parents… they may have been strict on some things… but like you… I knew I could come to them with any issues

 

[Willmark]

Anyone want to talk about the current state of the box office?

 

[DKampy]

Most of us have children in our lives whom we care about, and even if we don’t, society as a whole is shaped by the decisions parents make. One doesn’t need to be a parent to have worthwhile views on the matter, just as one doesn’t have to be a motorist to have legitimate opinions on speed limits.

I do have my niece and nephews who I adore and I would choose not to watch a Rated R violent horror movie with them But ultimately how my and my wife’s siblings raise there kids is not up to us

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

I do agree with this… if you thought I was complaining about being lost… I am not…. I think I had pretty great parents… they may have been strict on some things… but like you… I knew I could come to them with any issues

Didn’t think you were complaining at all, I can totally relate, I can recall many times friends would be talking about a hit movie, Aliens for example, and I was completely lost because my parents wouldn't let 13 year old me watch it. What’s ironic is I can recall watching it when I was probably 16 and still being freaked out by it, they were right not to let 13 year old me watch it, as far as I know none of my childhood friends were scarred for life by watching it at 13 either so not sure there’s a right or wrong answer to when somethings appropriate.

 

[easyrowrdw]

Anyone want to talk about the current state of the box office?

Evidently not

 

[Tony the Tigger]

I don’t understand. Can you rephrase your question?

Unless I’ve misunderstood, you’ve mentioned more than once that you as a moviegoer are not comfortable with other peoples’ children sharing the theater with you to watch a rated R movie.

My point is that your comfort level was never a factor in putting these guidelines in place, so it has no direct bearing on the discussion of whether to change those guidelines.

The guidelines have changed over time. They can change again. I remember when there was no PG-13. We just had General Audiences, Parental Guidance suggested, and Restricted to 17 and older without a parent. I don’t know that PG 13 made a difference, and I don’t know that there’s any point complicating things further when it would affect so few. I’m assuming this discussion is happening nowhere but this thread.

 

[Disney Analyst]

It's no doubt possible for parents to be unaware of kids TV and internet viewing, but are they putting in some effort? Using parental controls? Checking watch history? Looking in occasionally while their kids watch TV?

There may be less control but there's no reason for parents to be completely in the dark. How do kids watch an entire Netflix series without any parental awareness?

I don't think it's about morality. It's more about things like emotional maturity. I have no moral qualms about a movie in which fictional dinosaurs eat people, but it might give a very young child nightmares.

When parents fail to have reasonable restrictions, that's when the question about laws comes up.

I'm not a child psychologist or anything but media can be traumatizing for children. Heck, as an adult I know there are things I shouldn't watch for my own mental well being. I can make that determination. Kids need parents to protect them to a degree.

I used to sneak downstairs in the middle of the night, and watch the adult cartoons while my parents slept (shows like The Oblongs, Clone High, etc.)