MOMania

By JJ

June 19, 2007 8:59 AM | Link to this

I don’t really pay attention to movie ratings anymore. My daughter is 16 and has seen plenty of “R” rated movies since she was about 13. Mostly the scary, slasher movies are rated “R” and they are quite popular with the teen aged kids…….

We don’t to go movies much anymore, mostly because of the cost, unless it’s something I want to actually see on the big screen, or a hot August day. Sit inside the theater and soak up the a/c.

The last time I went to a movie, some kid’s cell phone range constantly. He didn’t bother to turn it off during the movie, and sat there and talked during the movie. Even when other patrons started yelling at him, he continued this behavior. We ended up finding a manger, and booting him from the theater. The crowd applauded as he was being removed.

By Jeff

June 19, 2007 9:01 AM | Link to this

Well, you’ve got movies like Facing the Giants that get a “PG” because they mention Christ, and then you’ve got movies like The Condemned that DON’T get an NC-17 because they don’t show skin - even though the violent content SURELY merits it. (AND I SAW LITTLE KIDS THERE WITH THEIR PARENTS!!!!! EEEEEEEEEEWWWWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!!!!!)

So I’m gonna have a simple rule for my kids: Mom or Dad has to watch it first. If mom and dad see it and discuss it and decide that it is ok for you, you can watch it. If we don’t think it is OK for you - for ANY reason - you’re not going to watch it.

Now, T and I have very different tastes as far as movies go. She’s more Disney Channel and Saw (what sense does THAT make?), I’m more Facing the Giants/ Terminator / Transformers/ Surf’s Up. So between the two of us, we pretty well run the gamut of anything our kid is POSSIBLY going to want to see.

Ya know something… maybe having kids WON’T mean the end of my movie watching after all…. :P

By Fulton County Mom

June 19, 2007 9:31 AM | Link to this

OK I am sure I will take a beating for admitting this,(especially as my kids are younger than tweens):

My children have seen all of the Harry Potter films to date, the first two ‘Pirates’ (I will explain in a moment) and some other non Disneyesque films.

Pirate 2 explanantion: We did a modified version just as we do w/Harry Potter 1 (Voldemorts head which Rowling has said is very scary)…when it gets to the really ‘scary part’ we hit the ‘next’button on the remote to skip the scene.

I think that it really depends on the child. My children love to play dress up and pretend…however they do have a good graps on real vs. imaginerary. They are more likely to ask me who plays Wolverine then to be upset with the character. (yes they have seen X men too).

All that said, 1- I see the movie. 2- we watch it at home not a theatre—usually during daylight time the first time. 3- We discuss the movie before and after. 4- we use the remote if a scene bothers them.

I do consider what the content of the movie is and how the situations are presented. I do not let them see gratuitous violence or ‘mature’ scenes at all.

HOWEVER, I respect other parents right to parent their kids and not let them see it.

By Jeff

June 19, 2007 9:52 AM | Link to this

FCM:

Eh, I’m not one that says that little kids HAVE to watch Disney-type movies at all. I wouldn’t mind a 5 yr old watching The American President with me or something along those lines, but I wouldn’t let them watch The Contender (two somewhat similar movies - both dealing with the President - but The Contender is much more intense with a much more mature subject matter. And yes, I know that many neoCons would have a problem with the whole “card carrying member of the ACLU” and unmarried couples sleeping together bits. I personally do not, and in fact a couple of my favorite political quotes are found in that movie) Now, would my 5 yr old WANT to watch The American President with me? Much better question. If s/he does, even I may have issues keeping up with my child academically as s/he gets older. (A problem I would LOVE to have… as many of you know, it isn’t often that I’ll admit to THAT much, much less saying someone is my academic superior!)

Anyways, back on track: To point blank answer Theresa’s question: With pretty much anything with my kid, I trust ONE person 101%, and ONE other person 100%: Myself in the first case, T in the second. There will never be a rating system better than the Mark 1 HES (Human Eyeball System). That should be true of ANY parent.

By Theresa

June 19, 2007 9:56 AM | Link to this

Hey Fulton County Mom — What did they think of the Harry Potter 4 graveyard scene? I thought that was so scary — did they want to skip it or were they OK with it? My kids like the character of HarryPotter and I think they would like the magic part but I think some of it is still too intense for them —

By John

June 19, 2007 10:05 AM | Link to this

My parents let us watch whatever we wanted. I went with my dad to see Total Recall when it came out and I turned out fine. I think it seeing movies like that when I was a kid helped me handle bad situations better. Life isn’t all sunshine and lollipops and mommy won’t always be around to hit the next button to make bad things go away. Let your kids watch what they want.

By Meg

June 19, 2007 10:15 AM | Link to this

Ratings mean little, the people who make the ratings aren’t watching for the sort of things I am. I watch it first or check it out at www.screenit.com (if you don’t want o join click no thanks at the bottom to get to the reviews!)

By DB

June 19, 2007 10:15 AM | Link to this

I was pretty strict — my kids seldom, if ever, (with three exceptions) watched PG-13 movies until they were 13. It was a bit of a joke in our house that my son was the only 4th grader NOT to have seen “Titanic”, and had to wait until he was 13. (The day he turned 13, he took it off the shelf, watched it, and then rolled his eyes and said, “Oh, good grief …”) At the age of 8/9, I didn’t think the subject matter was in his realm of experience (girl upset with fiance runs off to have an affair with hot, but poor, guy) and his imagination was such that he had nightmares the evening after the Disney movie “Hercules”, from the witches cutting the “thread of life.” He surely didn’t need to see dead people floating in the ocean with ice encrusted in their hair.

There’s one website, screenit.com, that was invaluable for reviewing movies in detail — they even count the number of profanities, and detail every behavior that hit different parental buttons (i.e., alcohol, drug use, smoking, etc.) It became so popular that it’s moved to a small subscription fee for current movies (still free for older movies), and if my kids were younger, I’d definitely have the service. There were several times that my daughter would ask if she could see a movie, we’d look it up on screenit, and once or twice even she’d agree that it wasn’t something she wanted to go see — “especially with guys going — gross!”

I do believe that kids have become too jaded and cynical because of all the stuff they are exposed to in movies and TV. It’s hard to maintain that sex belongs between two people who love each other in a committed, monogomous relationship when people are constantly “doing it” everywhere because the urge is just “too strong”. And, frankly, the sex doesn’t bother me as much as the violence. When I think of the dreadful murders, etc. that these kids have witnessed in their young lives, it makes me sad.

By DB

June 19, 2007 10:21 AM | Link to this

John: Life isn’t sunshine and lollipops, true. But it isn’t all slasher and gore, either. And that’s what mommies are for — to protect their kids from “bad things” until they are old enough to judge and evaluate for themselves. Kids grow up awfully quick these days — at least, they appear grown-up. That’s half the problem — the surface sophistication fools us into thinking that their are just as emotionally sophisticated, and it’s just not so.

By Fulton County Mom

June 19, 2007 10:22 AM | Link to this

Jeff—I was not thinking the bashing would come from you or Theresa (and it didn’t). Like you said watch it first to decide. There are movies that my children are not allowed to watch, I have the DVDs in the case and they know they are not allowed to choose them. Like you said some movies are just not for kids.

Caution Harry Potter 1 & 4, and Pirates 2 spoilers below Theresa-I had reservations about letting them watch HP 4 (and they saw the TV versions of 1 & 2 before they saw the unedited ones), mainly due to the graveyard scene.

Allow me to digress a moment before I answer: Walt Disney was once asked if he didn’t think his movies (Bambi, Snow White) were to violent/scary for kids. He replied along the lines of you have to have that moment where the Doe dies, or the Queen changes, to really understand the movie; additionally there is no really ‘haooy ending’ if you do not have those elements of scary/violent.

Now back to HP4: I did have many reservations about that particular scene. I expressed these reservations to them and after several long discussions, they told me flat out that people die that is how it is (also somethings about what happens when you die related to church teachings). They do not seem to have reservations about it all.

They do however have many reservations about a man popping out of another mans head. We skip that scene…and truthfully if you take them to the point where they see the stone go in HPs pocket, then he is in the hospital w/ a brief mention from me that he was in a stuggle w/the bad guy and the bad guy ‘lost’…they do well.

Pirates 2 was much worse. They would not even consider it for the longest time, they thought the ‘wormy guy’ looked scary in the commercial! I certainly did not force them to watch it! Eventaually they wanted to see it…they did not watch much of the Davy Jones stuff, and once Jack is attached the boat the ‘nexted’ to everyone in a voodoo swamp (they didn’t get she was voodoo priestess and I did not elaborate. OK so adults would say they missed the best parts but they did not think so.

I have seen Pirates 3 and they have not.

(OK probably more that you wanted to know)

By LM

June 19, 2007 10:30 AM | Link to this

I am not all that picky about the movies my 14 yo watches. One of the reasons is she is not a movie person and also she has a good head on her shoulders.

Another reasons my be as a reaction to another parents restrictions when our children were much younger. This parent did not allow her son to watch violent movies, including Bambie, The Lion King, and Snow White in fact most Disney movies were off the list of allowable movies. However, The Hunch Back of Norte Dame was allowed. TO me the Hunch Back had a sceen that was way to dark and icky (the one in front of the fire). Toy Story is also extreamly graphic, but what a great movie.

I judge the movie and my daughters maturity before making a decision. I recently took her to see Knocked UP, lots of cuss words, sex talk, and graphic sceens. The best park of seeing the movie together was we talked about it afterwards. We were able to have frank discussion regarding sex (we have always openly discussed sex, age apporiately).

I do feel younger childern are exposed to more mature content in TV and movies than they should be exposed to. But I am not Mother from Gwinnett County and thinks I am the moral compas for all to live their lives by.

Only you (the parent) knows what your child should be exposed to.

By Jeff

June 19, 2007 10:44 AM | Link to this

DB (10:21):

AMEN

John:

I’ll be the FIRST to tell you that life isn’t sugarplums and lollipops - and you can look back at some of the things T and I disagree about to verify that.

That said, it IS my job as both husband and father to protect my family. I’ve concentrated much of my life so far on physical protection, and even my kids are going to learn how to physically defend themselves EARLY in life in the same way that kittens do: I’m going to treat it as playing with them when they are small, and as they get older I’ll reveal more and more of the actual reasons you use some of the moves that they had known for years.

THAT said, there is more to protecting a family than JUST physical. (This is something I am just now in the process of learning.) There are things out there that can do FAR more damage than any physical attack could ever HOPE to do. And it is my job to protect my family from these things as well.

Should kids live an OVERLY sheltered life? BY NO MEANS! (In fact, my parents were over protective, so I know what I speak of there!) HOWEVER, that does not mean that we should “throw them to the wolves” early in life. We shelter them more as they are younger, and slowly remove the shelter as they develop. Even still though, my child is going to know that as long as I am alive, I will do everything in my power to keep them alive and when - not if - I allow bad things to happen to them, I am doing it for their own growth and development, and I am NEVER far away. (Wow…. starting to realize some things about God here…. cool…)

Hopefully my rant made sense, I know it was off topic (well, on topic in the larger sense of protecting kids, but anyways!), but I hope you get the point.

By violasmom

June 19, 2007 10:56 AM | Link to this

My daughter is 11 and is allowed to see PG-13 movies, depending on how my husband and I feel about the content. She’s seen all three Pirates, all three Spidermen, etc. However, she did not see the last Star Wars movie until very recently because I thought the transformation to Darth Vader was too graphic and dark for her. She also has a very tender personality so death of a character who is likeable will effect her more than violence (we almost had to leave “Bridge to Terabithia (sp?)”. If we question the content of a movie we usually watch it first and then let her see it when it comes out on DVD. There is also a website called kids-in-mind.com which gives is apparently something like screenit. Rotten tomatoes also gives kid friendly reviews. This is a great topic as I am always amazed at the number of young (3, 4, 5 yos)that I see in what I would consider inappropriate movies. I hope everyone has a great day!

By nurse&mother

June 19, 2007 11:11 AM | Link to this

I grew up watching anything and everything! My mom was a movie buff and took my sister and me to all the movies she wanted to watch. I can remember watching movies with sex scenes at a very young age and being very embarrassed. I vowed that I would not do that to my children.

I feel that all forms of media now days has too much sex in it. IMO, I think that kids are engaging in sex at much younger ages then when I was young. I see tweens dressed provocatively. I don’t want my children to emulate bad role models in movies, TV shows and magazines.

I know that I cannot shelter them forever. But I feel that until they are around at least 14 or 15, I will try my best to screen (pun intended) their shows. I have let my daughter watch more TV shows and movies than she used to. I have gradually let her watch some movies that have mild language. We have talked to her about using bad language. We told her that some grown ups use bad language, but that is unacceptable for her to use. My husband and I don’t usually swear in front of her. I have told my daughter to try to ignore the language if there is some swearing in it.

I know that life is not all “sunshine and lollipops”, but I certainly don’t think that you should expose a 5 year old to an Eddie Murphy movie or a steamy romance movie.

As far as cartoons go, I prefer Disney channel to Nickelodian (sp?). Nick seems to air shows and cartoons where the kids have bad attitudes and play mind games. Whatever happened to slapstick cartoons like Looney Tunes?

By momtoAlex&Max

June 19, 2007 11:20 AM | Link to this

My dad took my (then) 5 year old to see Pirates 2. Before he did it, I told him, dad it’s PG-13. So he says: well, do you really have a big issue with it? I didn’t really, I just didn’t think he would get it. Son saw it, he was fine.

The funny part of the story is that my dad would not let me see any (NONE) movies that were PG-13 untill I was 13. Now, with the grandkid, things are different. Live and learn?

By hll1955

June 19, 2007 11:40 AM | Link to this

for our family it depended on WHY it was rated PG or R. I have always based it on “Boo” scary (where things jump out/grab from above, below, behind etc) vs suspenseful, Psychologically scary.

Sex, implied, or shown with no private parts visible was ok after about age 10 or 11. Blood spewing, limb severing, chainsaw chasing violence depended on the child.

If prone to nightmares…forget it, no you can’t watch it til you can drive yourself to the theatre and pay for your own ticket. If you giggle at the stupid mask and the TSTL (too stupid to live) people who go to the summer camp where every teenager who has gone there in the last 15 years has died, and you go anyway…then you can go and watch it with your dad, cause mom hates those movies. But at the first sign of a sleepless night or if you torture your sister with chainsaw noises, thats the last movie of that kind you will attend til you are 50!~!

That said; I absolutely HATE it when parents bring inappropriatly aged children to adult movies.

You know your child..if they can’t sit still in front of anything but Barney for more than 30 minutes, don’t bring them to the Bourne Identity. If they have nightmares watching an old rerun of Poltergiest on TNT, keep them home during Harry Potter. If you personally are prudish about premarital sex I hate to say it, but alot of movies and heck even TV shows are more than you want your child to see..no matter what the rating is.

The rating industry is just 1 tool for parents to use in setting guidelines for their kids. The best guide is for you to leave your children home with a sitter, you see the movie, if you think it is appropriate, take the kids to see it, or let them go with a friend and their parents to see it.

Half the movies out there aren’t worth the price of admission these days. You surely don’t want to spend your money on a movie that will frighten, bore, or sexually scar your child for life. Take them to the pool instead. Healthier and cheaper than popcorn and candy and sitting in the dark.

By FCM

June 19, 2007 12:09 PM | Link to this

ViolasMom—they have a gadget that will ‘mute’ the swears on the TV…just a thought.—You got it, Blue Collar Comedy is on the do not even think about it list (though I own it and find it very funny)for when kids want to watch something.

MomtoAlex&Max—listen to Bill Cosby it is ALWAYS different with the grandkids!

By Erin

June 19, 2007 12:14 PM | Link to this

I don’t have kids yet, but I think a great deal depends on the emotional maturity level of the kid in question.

Now, I wasn’t the most mature kid when I was growing up, but I was allowed to see PG-13 and even a few R rated movies … which looking back now, really surprises me because I was also one of those really overprotected kids.

But now … I was SHOCKED at the number of really little — like 2- and 3-year-olds at Pirates 3. Same goes for Spiderman 3, which I saw at the MIDNIGHT showing when it premiered.

One little kid at Pirates 3, thankfully on the other side of the theater from me, screamed bloody murder throughout the whole thing, but did Mom take him out? Nooooooo, of course not. I feel sorry for that kid … he will probably have nightmares for awhile after seeing that, but the Mom really ought to know better than to take a 3-year-old screaming its head off into a movie like that.

By LM

June 19, 2007 12:15 PM | Link to this

hll1955 you said it. Most movies are not worth the cost, pool or some other outside activity is better.

Books are another story, if she can read it, I don’t really care what she picks. There are a few I would object to, the erotic section at the book store is out. Otherwise, reading is learning and using her imagination. And how many times has a movie been better than the book??

By Concerned

June 19, 2007 12:19 PM | Link to this

If you drop off your young teens and pre-teens for a few hours of guts and gore slasher movies here are a few suggestions, please: A) Don’t move next to me, I don’t want to deal with the aftermath of your parenting nightmares and failures. Let them torture someone elses’s pets not mine. Besides, you really don’t want me catching them in my yard with my dog, you really don’t. B) Give your uterus a break, hang up the vacancy sign, birthing may not be your gig. C) Teach you kids some basic manners, are they really so stupid to think it’s okay to sit and talk on a phone during a movie? Nevermind, I’ll rent the DVD and watch it on my 60” plasma and I won’t have to deal with your brats, your bad parenting skills and all the other intrusions that are inherent with kids that are the products of dumb parents.

By PickyKidSam

June 19, 2007 12:20 PM | Link to this

As a new dad and founder of a online parenting recommendations site - pickykid.com, my wife and I always check online for solutions to our parenting issues.

We found two websites to be very helpful when trying to select a movie for our date or family night: http://www.commonsensemedia.org/ and http://www.themoviespoiler.com/

Both sites will rate and give you details on the contents of the movie so that you don’t waste your time or money on something you will not enjoy.

By JJ

June 19, 2007 12:21 PM | Link to this

I remember when the original Exorcist came out, back in the 70’s. I was about 13 years old, and my mother was adamant about me not seeing that film. She had seen it, and there was no way in heck she was going to allow me to watch that movie. And I’m glad. I saw it YEARS later, and to this day it is probably the scariest movie I have ever seen!!!!!!I still can’t watch it. I have a hard time with movies about the Devil. No, I’m not religious in any way, but they scare the crap out of me. The Omen was another bad one too…….I didn’t see that until I was 25, and I’ll never watch it again!!!!

By DB

June 19, 2007 12:27 PM | Link to this

Of the few exceptions I made was “Lord of the Rings”, when it first came out in 2001. My daughter was 10 then, and had read the LOTR books, and knew the story. I had seen it with my older son, and had figured it was ok — a bit scary in parts, but she knew the story and could probably handle it. However, 15 minutes into the movie, she buried her face in my shoulder and asked, with tears in her eyes, “Mom can we leave? It’s too SCARY!” (During the horse hunt in the dark at the beginning).

I felt awful, and of course, we left immediately. And stuck to PG for another 3 years! But that’s my daughter, and how I handled it. I really, really hate it when small children are in movies and keep asking questions — loudly — that it’s obvious that they don’t have a clue what’s going on.

By Joan

June 19, 2007 12:30 PM | Link to this

Concerned Thank you for not going to the theaters. Thank you for renting your DVD and watching it on your 60” plasma tv and staying at your home. At least I know your angry self wont be in the theater with me and my brat.

And I don’t want you around my brat. It sounds to me like your parents didn’t like their brat either.

You should like Dennis the Menace’s next door neighbor, Mr. Wilson. You should change your blog name……

By Lee

June 19, 2007 1:10 PM | Link to this

I saw Hostel II this last weekend…the ratings clearly did not work with this movie (which is rated R). To think that an NC-17 was not slapped on that movie is simply unbelievable. Furthermore, there were kids in there at least 10 years old and less … those parents are the ones who deserve to be put on restriction.

By lovelyliz

June 19, 2007 1:14 PM | Link to this

There are plenty of websites, depending on your persuasion, that can help parents figure out what’s appropriate.

By Concerned

June 19, 2007 1:22 PM | Link to this

Joan get a reality check. Each and every one of the teen agers who ruined going to the movies for adults must have mothers like you that think your precious cargo can’t do wrong. Well Joan, each child that had to be evicted from the last movie my wife and I shelled out nine bucks for, for loud and abusive behavior,cell phones and profanity must have a mother in denial just like you, Joan. I will gladly avoid you and your offspring. Don’t get too high on the procreation horse sweetheart; any two amoeba’s floating upstream can latch onto one another and procreate, you’re not special, Joan.

By Stacey

June 19, 2007 1:32 PM | Link to this

I allow my 6 year old to watch PG kids movies (stuff like Shrek) and my husband & I sometimes take him to PG-13 movies (Spiderman 3 & X-Men). When he was in ASP at school (K-5), they had a list of PG movies that they showed on Movie Friday. The parents were allowed to review the list at the beginning of the year and mark which (if any) were off limits and sign. They had a dry erase board in the room where the kids were checked out & they usually posted on Thursday what Friday’s movie would be. They also reviewed the “opt out” sheet and any child that wasn’t allowed to see that particular movie sat in the room with one of the chaperones and played games or some other fun activity.

By JJ

June 19, 2007 1:49 PM | Link to this

Casey/Richard/Concerned why must you sprew your vicious vile in this blog? If you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything at all. Off your meds?

I agree with Joan, you need to relax. Calm down, and have a cocktail. Did the nine dollars you spent on the movie break your bank? Attitudes like yours are best kept inside the house. Please stay there with your 60” plasma. You’ll make a lot of people very happy!!!!!

By Jeff

June 19, 2007 2:05 PM | Link to this

JJ:

I hate to say it, but on this issue Casey/ Richard/ Concerned DOES have a valid point. Would I have worded it the same? No. But is the point - that other adults should not have to suffer because of your own bad parenting skills - any less valid? No.

By JJ

June 19, 2007 2:17 PM | Link to this

Jeff I hope you aren’t directing your post at me about bad parenting skills. Or were you just generalizing?

By Jeff

June 19, 2007 2:24 PM | Link to this

JJ:

I was generalizing. If a kid is disrespectful/ causing a commotion in public, to me it reflects that the parent did not do their job properly in general.

By DB

June 19, 2007 2:36 PM | Link to this

BTW, just to add fuel to the fire: Amoebas don’t latch onto each other to procreate, they divide. Get your metaphors straight :-)

By eemoms.com blapher

June 19, 2007 2:45 PM | Link to this

At eeMOMS, we have partnered up with Dr. Rus (host of Frame by Frame, a weekly movie review show on 1420 WACK in Newark, NY) to help us decide what is family-friendly.

Dr. Rus Movie Reviews

His reviews are great!

-the eeMOMS.com blapher

By Oh my

June 19, 2007 2:45 PM | Link to this

Jeff, You are absolutely right. I think that “Concerned” could have worded it differently, but what was said had a lot of truth to it. Folks just can’t seem to realize that their kids do not have the right to ruin the evening for everyone. The $9 was not the point, JJ. The kids out of control was the point.

By Concerned

June 19, 2007 3:04 PM | Link to this

JJ I don’t drink, I don’t need a cocktail. However we all need people who are responsible parents. Parents who have enough gray matter to realize their kids do not have the right to ruin my nine dollar movie. How many people, yes even your relatives suddenly go out of town when you and your brood show up for a visit? You relax, and do the world a favor, GET FIXED.

By anne

June 19, 2007 3:14 PM | Link to this

From: PEDIATRICS Vol. 119 No. 6 June 2007, pp. e1398-e1399

COMMENTARY

Go Ahead Punk, Make My Day: It’s Time for Pediatricians to Take Action Against Media Violence Victor C. Strasburger, MD

Department of Pediatrics, University of New Mexico School of Medicine, Albuquerque, New Mexico

News flash! Researchers have just found that element “X” contributes between 10% and 30% to the occurrence of heart disease. What happens next? Well, of course, the manufacturers of element X claim that there is no link and that the research is spotty anyway; Hollywood writers and producers deny that element X ever appears in any of their films, and if it does, it is never “gratuitous,” nor can anyone interfere with their right to show it, which is guaranteed in the First Amendment; and pediatricians continue to counsel parents about whether car seats should face forward or backward but apparently could not care less about element X.

Who would have thought that >50 years after the first congressional hearings on media violence that we would still be debating whether it contributes to real-life violence? As one leading group of researchers has stated, there should no longer be any controversy that a cause-and-effect relationship exists.1 More than 3500 reports, including 1000 research studies, have been made; <30 studies have found no relation.2 In fact, the connection between media violence and real-life aggression is nearly as strong as the connection between smoking and lung cancer.3 Given the complexities of performing social-science research, this finding is quite striking.4 Not everyone who smokes will get lung cancer, and not everyone who views media violence will become aggressive. In addition, as the authors of a study published in this month’s Pediatrics Electronic Pages4 and the National Television Violence Study5 pointed out, context is extremely important, as are mediating factors such as personality differences and parenting. Overall, an estimated 10% to 30% of violence in society can be attributed to the impact of media violence.6 Clearly, media violence is not the leading cause of violence in society, but it is a significant one, and one that could be altered more easily than other root causes.7

Hollywood needs to understand that the science is convincing and that an intelligent response is needed. No one is suggesting censorship. However, violence in movies has steadily been increasing during the past decade, and not only have the ratings not kept pace, but they have underrated the increasing violence—so-called ratings creep.8 Movies that were R-rated a decade ago are now PG-13.8 Webb et al4 found remarkable levels of violence in recent PG-13 films (87% overall), with 7 films containing >100 acts of violence and firearms used in nearly one third of all films. Most often, the violence is portrayed as being “justified,” which is the single strongest positive reinforcer known.5,7 The notion of justifiable violence leads nations into wars, in case anyone was wondering about the significance of all of this. So Hollywood writers and producers have to be much more careful about how they portray violence, in what context, and to whom. The Motion Picture Association of America needs to open its board to the light of public scrutiny (its members’ identities are a closely guarded secret) and add a pediatrician and a child psychologist or communications expert.

Parents need ratings that they can understand and use, and a universal ratings system for all media would go far toward helping them.9 However, parents also have to stop thinking that sex is “worse” than violence in movies. It is not.10 The United States is the only country in the world that rates movies more harshly for sex than for violence.10 Parents also need to be cautious when allowing their young children to view PG-13 movies; when I go to R-rated movies, invariably there are a few 7-year-olds sitting in the audience. We need a scientific study of why parents take young children to movies that are inappropriate for them, and pediatricians need to counsel parents that such films may be frightening and harmful.11

Finally, pediatricians need to be more sensitive to the effects of all media on children and adolescents. While pediatricians are spending their precious few minutes of office counseling on car seats and bicycle helmets, the media may represent a far greater threat to the health of young people. Virtually every concern that pediatricians and parents have about children has some root in the media (eg, violence, sex, drugs, academic performance, obesity, suicide, eating disorders).12 Pediatricians can no longer afford to dodge the bullet of media influence!

Accepted Jan 25, 2006.

Address correspondence to Victor C. Strasburger, MD, University of New Mexico School of Medicine, MSC10 5590, 1 University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM 87131. E-mail: vstrasburger@salud.unm.edu

The author has indicated he has no financial relationships relevant to this article to disclose.

Opinions expressed in these commentaries are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the American Academy of Pediatrics or its Committees.

By Jeff

June 19, 2007 3:21 PM | Link to this

anne:

Any scientist/ mathematician worth their salt knows this FACT:

Correlation does NOT imply causation.

In non-geek speak, what this means is that just because A and B are related does NOT mean that A caused B or even that B caused A.

Do I need to explain further how this relates to your post?

By Sarah

June 19, 2007 3:27 PM | Link to this

I would gladly pay extra to be able to enjoy a movie theater that will not allow anyone under the age of eighteen to enter, with or without parents. I worked in movie theater during college for two years and I can tell you, ninety per cent of the trouble makers were pre-teens and teens left unattended. Naturally the first words that flew out of the mouths of parents who were called to come get their kids early were always the same…” It wasn’t MY child doing that…” Have a nice day, Joan.

By FCM

June 19, 2007 3:35 PM | Link to this

anne—that looks like a very nicely written op-ed…It is either bandwagon or propaganda style advertising (marketing has been awhile).

As Jeff pointed out it is not necessarily causal…although there are some instances where various media have influenced behavior (War of the Worlds on the radio, and Mice and Men during Reagan’s shooting come to mind).

As most of the parents on here have said…Watch it first then decide for your individual child.

I cannot stand Howard Stern (nor would I allow my children to listen to him) however, several years ago before I was a parent he made a statement that I have kept in mind: When asked if he would let his children listen to his show he said “Hll no! That is because it is called GOOD PARENTING not because the show is wrong”

By Ms. Jones

June 19, 2007 3:38 PM | Link to this

Sorry, but kids acting up at a movie theater are not necessarily from bad parents.

Kids act differently with their parents than they do with their peers. You can have the nicest, most clean-cut, polite, church going kid, who is very respectful, kind, etc when they are around the parents. Take that same sweet kid to the mall with their friends, and you will not see a totally different person.

And just remember all of you who don’t like kids, and hate having them around you wherever you may travel, were once kids yourselves. But you seemed to have turned out ok. I am sure plenty of you bloggers were unruly at one point in your lives, we all were, it’s call the teen years.

By Joan

June 19, 2007 3:44 PM | Link to this

Sarah They do make movie theaters where no one under the age of 18 is allowed. You simply go to the nearest video store, rent a movie, and here’s the kicker - TAKE IT HOME and watch it, without those pesky kids to bother you. Then you don’t have to worry about my little brat inteferring in your perfect little world.

Have a nice day too, bless your heart.

By Oh my

June 19, 2007 3:53 PM | Link to this

Joan, So you are saying that instead of controlling your kids, everbody else should just take their movie home and watch it? That is perfectly logical (if you live in a land called “Kids rule the earth”). Most of us do not live there.

By What????

June 19, 2007 3:57 PM | Link to this

Joan, What on earth are you talking about? Why should everyone else have to take their movie home when it is your children misbehaving? That doesnt’ even make sense.

By Joan

June 19, 2007 3:59 PM | Link to this

No OhMy I was letting Sarah know that there is a place where she can watch a movie kid-free.

She would gladly pay extra to be able to enjoy a movie theater that will not allow anyone under the age of eighteen to enter, with or without parents

I was merely pointing out a solution to her problem.

By Joan

June 19, 2007 4:18 PM | Link to this

Joan, you’re a bitter old woman who probably receives no attention from her husband and your kids are your life, good for you. You’re probably also the type who thinks your unattended toddler running around in a public place is so cute and every one is just as thrilled as you are at the sight of him/her. Wrong. The thrill you experienced is when you left the establishment and removed your spoiled brats from the building. Now, about your husband and the no attention thing, lose 50 pounds sweetheart, that’s a start.

By momfirst

June 19, 2007 4:27 PM | Link to this

I use the kidsinmind.com to screen any movie my teen goes to. I love the explict nature of their commentary. I know exactly what types : language, sex, violence the movie in mind contains.

As for each parents ability to screen movies. I will screen my daughter’s movies until she is 18. Of course there will be conversations around why the choices are made and hopefully that will lead her to make her own good choices.

By Joan

June 19, 2007 5:22 PM | Link to this

Yes, I just let my little pumpkins run, yell, do what ever they want. After all, they are just kids and shouldn’t be quieted. They should be allowed to explore places and express themselves. If you don’t like that, that isn’t my problem, it’s yours. You are the one offended, you are the one who wants to pay extra for a movie with no kids.

So, yea, rent a movie, keep your complaining butts at home, and let me have fun and enjoy my children while they are young.

By the way, we will be at the movies this weekend at a mall near you. Please stay home, so we can have the entire theater to ourselves, and my kids can run all up and down the aisles, sit wherever they like and kick the seats in front of them, and I don’t have to listen to you uptight people. I would pay extra for a place with no uptight childless whiners.

By RJ

June 19, 2007 5:40 PM | Link to this

Yes! I pay attention to ratings. My kids aren’t able to most PG-13 movies. Of course everyone thinks I’m nuts!!! I was very proud of my then 8 year old daughter who told a friend that she wasn’t able to see the movie “Carrie” because it was rated R. Bravo! She’s now 13 and I allow her to see PG-13 movies and some R rated movies.

I rarely go to the movies because it’s so costly, so we usually order movies on pay per view. I can recall going to see Monster’s Ball by myself one Saturday afternoon and saw a woman with two kids under the age of 6 with her. After the very graphic sex scene, she decided to leave! Okay, what did she expect to see in an R rated movie? Not every parent makes wise decisions!

By Penguinmom

June 19, 2007 6:57 PM | Link to this

We use a great site called Preview Family Movie Review

It is a Christian site but not preachy. The great thing about it is it gives both a watchablity/entertainment rating and an appropriateness/morality rating.

Example Fantastic Four got +3 entertainment and +3 appropriateness (both out of 4) Ocean’s Thirteen got +2 entertainment but -2 morality

They also list details about what was objectionable (including details of the bad language) so you can decide if the objectionable material would bother your children or not.

We have found them to be pretty reliable on how good a movie is and how acceptable. They are obviously people who enjoy movies because they give some movies very high entertainment ratings even if the movie also has a low morality rating. This lets us know if a movie is something we might enjoy seeing without kids or if we might want to just save our money and wait.

I wish the rating system was more robust. On the TV, movies often list their ratings as R then follow that with L (language) or AS (adult situations) or V (violence) so you can know exactly what caused the R rating. Theater releases need to give these same ratings.

By Mom of 2 girls

June 20, 2007 8:14 AM | Link to this

I also use a ratings site to decide on movies for my children. These provide much better information than the MP ratings. My site of preference is [http://dove.org/]. As Penguinmom said, these sites allow you to choose what criteria are important to you, and judge the movies accordingly. Dove’s rating system is extremely easy to follow, and while I don’t always follow their recommendations, it’s nice to have enough info on the movie so I can choose.

My girls have also seen the “benchmark” movies mentioned here - HP and PotC, and they are currently 6 and 10. However, they watch them at home, not the theatre, and only after I have seen them first. They move in and out of the room as they feel the need, and are called back in when the scene is over.

Everyone has to use their own judgement on what is appropriate for their children (my younger can handle scary scenes better than my older - just a personality thing). Just keep in mind that what may be a fleeting glimpse of something for an adult can make a big impression on children.

By anne

June 20, 2007 11:20 AM | Link to this

I love it! People with non-scientific backgrounds attempting to explain biostatistical correlation and causation!

Using your logic … smoking doesn’t cause cancer. Over-eating and lack of exercise … don’t cause obesity.

Lack of knowledge combined with arrogance doesn’t cause making an idiot of oneself …

By delta dawn

June 20, 2007 11:24 AM | Link to this

@joan - get back to us in 15 years when your children you enjoy so much are in jail.

By Jeff

June 20, 2007 11:38 AM | Link to this

anne:

“people with non-scientific backgrounds…”

EXCUSE ME??? I AM a professional scientist. I KNOW what I’m talking about when I say that Correlation does NOT imply Causation.

Just because SOME correlations have a causation link as well does NOT mean that ANY TIME a correlation exists, Caustion exists as well.

For example, for several years now, smoking has been declining. For those same years, people driving blue cars has been declining. Using your logic, we could say that only people that smoke have blue cars and that when they stop smoking they buy a new (non-blue) car.

Or we could just admit that even though they are correlated, there really is no causation either way….

By anne

June 20, 2007 12:38 PM | Link to this

Jeff. You are a public school math teacher with too much time on your hands, not a public health biostatistician or statistical epidemiologist. Sometimes we need to recognize our limitations, my friend.

By Jeff

June 20, 2007 12:46 PM | Link to this

anne:

And you just proved how mis-informed you are (gee, I wonder how far your mis-informedness extends….) I switched career tracks to become a professional COMPUTER SCIENTIST more than 3 months ago…

And my former SIXTH GRADE students could recognize that article you posted for the propaganda it is….

By Jeff

June 20, 2007 12:52 PM | Link to this

anne:

Oh, and btw, even if I WAS still a public school math teacher, I would know more about math/ science than you ever would. Indeed, the difference between a math education major, a computer science major, and a mathematics major at Kennesaw State as far as math content goes is only THREE CLASSES.

By nurse&mother

June 20, 2007 4:37 PM | Link to this

I don’t always see eye to eye with Anne, but I think there is some truth to her post. I think that people young and old look to the media(all forms) to model behavior, attitudes, attire etc., whether it is conscious or subconscious. I think that people are bound to emulate these characteristics.

A little off the subject, I think that violent video games are a big influence on young folks.

By nurse&mother

June 20, 2007 5:04 PM | Link to this

I wanted to make another statement. Like Anne said, certainly you cannot say that just because you smoke doesn’t mean that you will develop lung cancer, it just means that you risks of developing it is much higher. No one in the medical field will dispute that!

IMO, I think the same thing can be said for influences from the media (movies, video games, magazines). I think that if kids are around or see a lot of sex, violence, provocative dress etc., they are more likely to accept that for the norm. I don’t think that anyone is trying to say that just because you watch a movie with a lot of violence, you’re going to go to the local post office and mow down 15 people.

I think that all the media grows on a person little by little and it may eventually influence a person whether it be conscious or subconscious. But it may not. It can just increase your risk, IMHO.

By deidreNC

June 22, 2007 7:50 AM | Link to this

i dont allow movies with major violence-major sex or especially horrible crude languange-of course that is all revelant-what i think is horribly crude another may not…if my kids want to watch stuff like that they can..just not in my house….my youngest is 15—-it was different when she was younger…but i would anyday take a film with a little sex (very little lol) than one with the horrible and crude languange you hear in some these days…

By Kat

June 27, 2007 4:05 PM | Link to this

We took my stepdaughter (8) to see Spiderman 3 this year, and Pirates 2 and Harry Potter 4 last year. We’ll take her to see Harry 5 this year once its out. Her little brother (5) has seen both previous Spiderman movies as well as the first two Pirates. I think parents just need to know their kids and gauge based on that what’s appropriate. We know Ash can handle the PG-13 fantasy-type movies like the ones I just mentioned, but there’s no way I would take her to a PG-13 horror movie like 1408 or a comedy like Blades of Glory. The rating is the same, but the things that made it that rating, or rather the way those things are presented is different.