Author Topic: Lord of the Rings - Two Towers - age rating?? (Read 917 times)

Sparks · « **on:** December 23, 2002, 05:09:04 PM »

Just curious about others opinions.......

Been to see The Two Towers - think its a good film and all so this isn't about the quality of the film but here in the UK its rated 12A which means kids under 12 are allowed in with an adult. Now IMHO it is WAY to blood-thirsty for a 10 or 11 year old to see ..... or am I just getting too old??

Sparks

Replicant · « **Reply #1 on:** December 23, 2002, 05:28:24 PM »

Well, I saw worse under that age... but I suppose I have to agree. I went to see it today and nearby were 4 very young kids, not an adult in sight tho. They didn't seem to be that bothered by it judging by their laughter.

AKS\/\/ulfe · « **Reply #2 on:** December 23, 2002, 05:30:50 PM »

You're supposed to be bothered by a mystical fictional movie?

Elves aren't real, so neither is any blood spewing from them... except for Keebler Elves, but they only bleed frosting and chocolate.
-SW

Sparks · « **Reply #3 on:** December 23, 2002, 05:54:01 PM »

Originally quoted by AKswulfe

Quote

You're supposed to be bothered by a mystical fictional movie?

Was thinking more of the pile of smouldering Ork bodies fore-fronted by an Orks head stuck on a spear - the spear sticking through the top of the skull ......... Or maybe Gollum tearing a rabbit in half and pulling its innards out with his teeth........ that sort of thing.

Originally quoted by Replicant

Quote

I went to see it today and nearby were 4 very young kids, not an adult in sight tho. They didn't seem to be that bothered by it judging by their laughter.

1. Poor cinema management

2. Is it just me that thinks kids are getting de-sensitised?? I remember Jaws scared the crap out of me.....

Perhaps I'm just overly protective.

Pongo · « **Reply #4 on:** December 23, 2002, 06:14:17 PM »

Went to see it with my 9 and 11 year old boys today.
Dont know..The rabbit thing doenst bother me at all...they have seen me clean trout and other fish..
Dont all the varios beheadings bother you more?
My kids were most bothered by the changes in the story vs the books.

AKS\/\/ulfe · « **Reply #5 on:** December 23, 2002, 06:15:35 PM »

None of those creatures are real, 'cept the bunny.

There have been movies with worse... but now movie productions can have realistic portrayals by using CGI and other new innovative methods to make very realistic sequences.

This makes it seem like movies are now more gruesome, when in fact they are not. (House of the Dead, Pet Cemetary, Halloween, list goes on)

People keep saying kids are getting desensitized by movies... exactly how do they measure this and what gives them that idea?

Me thinks it's just BS hearsay.

Kind of like Rock 'n Roll... "It's the devil's music!"
-SW

Puke · « **Reply #6 on:** December 23, 2002, 06:18:29 PM »

I took my 6-yr old son to see it the day after release. Everytime I watched the DVD at home for the first one he was entranced and would watch it. He's younger than his sister and she's been to movies that he couldn't see. He decided the Two Towers would be one he'd be taken to w/out her. So I took him. He watched it and was fine with it. In fact, I'd look at him with his huge tub of popcorn (I went all out this night) and he had that intense stare at the screen and the hand was moving fast from tub to mouth over and over like on auto-pilot. Point being, he seemed to really be into the movie. In the past I've made clear that movies are just pretend and either people in costumes or someone's artistry.

He also likes the last two Star Wars. What's funny about it is that he knows everyone by the color light sabre they use and not their name.

I think a parent knows what his child is capable of and not capable of.

Steve · « **Reply #7 on:** December 23, 2002, 06:23:19 PM »

Two Towers ARgghhh!! After being pleased with the first one.. I was hugely disappointed by vast departure this movie was from the book. Forget worrying about taking your kids... skip the movie entirely.

Elves at Helm's Deep bah!

J_A_B · « **Reply #8 on:** December 23, 2002, 06:28:32 PM »

I'd let any child watch it, even pre-schoolers. Nothing in LOTR is overly disturbing.

Seems like, in this day and age, more and more parents are becomming over-protective, trying to shield their children from anything that's even vaguely "bad".

Sometimes a nightmare or two can be good for the kids. I can remember having a few of those myself

J_A_B

Sparks · « **Reply #9 on:** December 23, 2002, 09:00:03 PM »

Judging the majority view here I'm out of phase with the mainstream and everyone raises their kids their own way. I just can't be happy in my own mind that its right though for them to see this stuff.

I see kids at my daughters school and neighbours kids who just relish the gore and violence in stuff - I know and they know its not real but they glory in it. I'm just not convinced its not unhealthy for thier minds.

Everyone seems so Blasee about it - I just don't get it.

A child as young as 6 ?? OK they may say "I know its not real daddy" but are their reasoning and comprehension skills that far along ?? I personally don't see it - a young mind is a very inquisitive thing and as such prone to suggestion and reinforcement. Is this the stuff we should be feeding them??

Quote

In fact, I'd look at him with his huge tub of popcorn (I went all out this night) and he had that intense stare at the screen and the hand was moving fast from tub to mouth over and over like on auto-pilot.

Pongo

Quote

Dont know..The rabbit thing doenst bother me at all...they have seen me clean trout and other fish..

Yes but not rip it open with your teeth??

Quote

Dont all the varios beheadings bother you more?

Yes but I just picked examples.

Askwulfe

Quote

People keep saying kids are getting desensitized by movies... exactly how do they measure this and what gives them that idea?

Me thinks it's just BS hearsay.

It's just my view AKSW - my view of kids I know and kids at my kids school. Not a measured thing - more a perception.

JAB

Quote

Seems like, in this day and age, more and more parents are becomming over-protective, trying to shield their children from anything that's even vaguely "bad".

I'm not saying that they shouldn't see anything JAB but there has to be a line - a line that moves with age and experience. It just seems to me that unless you are at the most liberal end of views on media content then you are instantly labeled as "over protective".

As I said I'm clearly out of step but I don't like the mainstream view.

Sparks

J_A_B · « **Reply #10 on:** December 23, 2002, 09:30:26 PM »

"It just seems to me that unless you are at the most liberal end of views on media content then you are instantly labeled as "over protective". "

I disagree; I feel that if anything such "child protection" is becomming ever more common. "For the children" is practically the catchphrase of the times. I feel sorry for little kids who are forced to watch mind-numbing trash like Barney or Teletubbies or Sesame Street.

Each person has to make his own decisions. My opinion is based on my own experiences...when I was small, MY parents let me watch whatever the heck I wanted to and I'm no worse off for it. The most they would to is warn me about things..."you'll have nightmares if you watch that"....sometimes they were right

More to the point, the blood and gore level in LOTR is very very tame compared to the likes of movies such as "Friday the 13th" and "The Evil Dead" which were so common when I was younger.

I DO agree that a line has to be drawn, but I think that increasingly parents are becomming too concervative with regards to violence, and FAR too liberal in other, more important matters. If anything, pointless sex situations/crude jokes and horrible language are both more troublesome in movies/TV than violence is. I'd be more comfortable letting a child watch LOTR than an hour of the average weekly sitcoms on network TV.

J_A_B

Puke · « **Reply #11 on:** December 23, 2002, 10:09:27 PM »

Quote

I personally don't see it - a young mind is a very inquisitive thing and as such prone to suggestion and reinforcement. Is this the stuff we should be feeding them??

What do you think a young mind would be prone to suggestion and reinforcement about in this movie? It's your standard Good vs Evil tale. The themes are no worse than your typical Fairy Tale or Bible Tale. Dragons, wizards, knights and kings. I would like to know just what is being suggested to the audience of Two Towers.

My son watches Animal Planet as well and has seen bears eat fish raw. He realizes that's how it's done in the wild as opposed to cartoons with the Berenstein Bears who wear coats, live in a house and cook their food. Golumn eats this way because he is a wild creature.

Good vs Evil, I like the message this movie sends.

RightF00T · « **Reply #12 on:** December 23, 2002, 11:40:07 PM »

*SPOILER*

Not havin read the books....who exactly is Gollum? The movie hints that he was a hobbit but never really explains who/when/what. Can anyone fill me in?

Pongo · « **Reply #13 on:** December 24, 2002, 12:23:06 AM »

Its not a mystery in the books. so its not a spoiler.
You know that in the first movie one of the sons of the king of gondor cut the ring of saurons finger and took it as his own.
Then on the way home after the war he was ambushed beside a river by orcs. He put on the ring(to disapear) and dove into the river to escape.
The ring slipped off his finger and he was seen and killed by arrows.

Well the ring sat there for 100s and 100s of years. Only to be found by two hobbits Smeagle and Deagle while they were swimming in the river.
Smeagle liked the ring..killed deagle and then ended up slinking off into a cave for 1000 years with the ring to protect it.
The ring kept him alive way beyond his normal span of years(as it did for bilbo)
He became Gollum. They called him gollum because of the sound he makes in his thoat.
Bilbo found the ring near Gollums cave in the book the hobbit.

It is all explained quite well in the book...
As good as this movie is..its a pale shadow of the books....

Steve · « **Reply #14 on:** December 24, 2002, 02:06:36 AM »

Ya Pongo has it. Isildur cut the ring from Sauron's hand... although not quite the way the movie showed it. Gil-galad with the spear Aiglos, and Elendil, with the sword Narsil, felled Sauron, but were themselves killed in so doing. It was then that lsildur cut the ring from Saurons hand.
Smeagol and Deagol were cousins... brothers maybe? Anyway Deagol finds the ring whilst fishing just like Pongo says... then murder was quickly afoot

Smeagol's 600 years with the ring are not well chronicled..but I think there was a lot of raw fish and the unfortunate goblin or three involved.