Advertisement

loader

Talk

Advanced search

friend thinks I am a bad mother for letting my dd8 watch 'Grave of the Fireflies' because she cried.

(58 Posts)
aroyalewithcheese Wed 19-Dec-12 21:45:39

Yes it's a terribly sad film.

But I also think its good for a child to understand the consequences of war and it is a cartoon for children.

RedToothbrush Wed 19-Dec-12 22:07:51

Well, I cried when I watched it. So I don't think its bad for her to cry. It shows she understood it. And I agree its good for kids to be shown that life isn't perfect at an early age, instead of just endless happy endings.

Great film.

Hardly bad mother material. The world isn't a always a nice place.

CogitOCrapNotMoreSprouts Wed 19-Dec-12 22:09:09

I hope you told your friend that the prospect of making your DD cry is what gets you out of bed in the morning. Wear your 'I am a bad mother' badge with pride!!!!!

BananaBubbles Wed 19-Dec-12 22:19:43

It is not a suitable film for eight year olds. It is a 12 for a start,and there are other ways of teaching an eight year old about such things. It is traumatic enough for an adult to watch.I can't see any reason to show it to an eight year old.

And animation is only one form of medium.Animations are not necessarily for children.There are plenty of animations out there which are aimed at adults.

BananaBubbles Wed 19-Dec-12 22:34:59

Seriously,why would you allow your 8 year old to watch a film that contains scenes such as these...

A teenager is shown dying of starvation.

An intense scene involves a Japanese town being bombed by Americans during World War II. The aftermath is emotionally resonant, with lots of destruction, smoke, and dead bodies.

A four-year-old girl sees a dead body covered with a blanket; she asks her brother if he is sleeping and he tells her not to look at it.

There is one very sudden fly-by shooting.

A man throws a teenage boy to the ground and treats him very roughly after he catches him stealing his food. The teenage boy is later seen covered with bruises and a police officer threatens to charge the man with assault.

A four-year-old girl dies of malnutrition and her body is cremated by her older brother

Rotting dead bodies are seen. One particularly gruesome image shows a dead woman wrapped in blood-soaked cloth from head to toe.

A boy is seen in a train station dying.

We see two funerals, where the bodies are burned over fires in caskets.

Characters suffer from malnutrition.

An emotional scene involves a four-year-old girl creating a grave for dead fireflies. She reveals to her older brother that she knows that their mother had died and her brother's emotional reaction is intense.

Several other scenes are extremely emotional and intense

forbiddenfruit85 Wed 19-Dec-12 22:41:49

Well .. a 12 is still a 12a.

So younger people than 12 are allowed to watch it.

I cried watching it too.

forbiddenfruit85 Wed 19-Dec-12 22:42:51

BananaBubbles did you just copy and paste that from imdb?

BananaBubbles Wed 19-Dec-12 22:48:14

No.It's classified as a 12,not a 12a.It was classified before the 12A,so it's not a 12A,and just because a child can watch a film doesn't mean that they should.

Do people really think that this the opening scene,is suitable for an eight year old when it opens with the body of a young boy in a train station,and that body being treated like trash,as is the can containing his sister;s bone fragments?

Or this scene with a very young child starving to death in front of her brother?

Or this scene with the bloodstained,burned and bandaged body of their mother?

BananaBubbles Wed 19-Dec-12 22:49:09

Yes.It's from IMDB.I'm not going to watch the whole film again just to list unsuitable scenes,though I have a vivid memory of several of them.

forbiddenfruit85 Wed 19-Dec-12 22:56:10

I never said an 8 year old should watch it.

If the film was recently released it would be a 12a.

And don't forget to breathe Banana

BananaBubbles Wed 19-Dec-12 22:57:51

We're discussing an eight year old watching it though. The OP allowed her eight year old to watch it,and that's what I'm responding to.

I think it's a wonderful,beautifully made,important film,but 8 is much too young to watch it,or to get any real benefit from doing so.

YouCanBe Wed 19-Dec-12 23:02:13

I think it is a great film but it is rather traumatic and I wouldn't show it to any 8 year old.

BananaBubbles Wed 19-Dec-12 23:07:11

And yes it might be a 12A,but I think the 12A rating is one of the worst things that's happened to cinema,and that children are being shown some very inappropriate films as a result of this.

I'm no prude either,but The Dark Knight,for example, was a 12A. It was much too violent and disturbing for children of 12 imho,let alone children under 12. I don't know what the BBFC were thinking when they rated it as such.

BananaBubbles Wed 19-Dec-12 23:08:14

And even 12A is aimed at 12 and over.Parents can,foolishly imho,take their 7 year old to see it if they wish,but that doesn't mean that they should or that it is appropriate to do so.

SingingSands Wed 19-Dec-12 23:12:58

I don't think it is suitable for an 8 year old at all. I think you might experience some kickback from your DD over the coming weeks. Children process what they have seen more slowly than adults, and I think your DD could be mulling this over for a while, whereas an adult would be able to compartmentalise it more easily.

It's only my personal opinion, but I'm feeling quite sad that you exposed an 8yr old to such material. Sorry.

gingerchick Wed 19-Dec-12 23:13:20

I agree with your friend I cannot think of any reason that you would let your 8 year old watch that- shocking!

forbiddenfruit85 Wed 19-Dec-12 23:14:52

Can I ask, although I am not condoning it.

So many people said they would take their children (ages under 8) to see The Hobbit, but so many disagree here.

Both films have the same rating.

TeamBacon Wed 19-Dec-12 23:16:29

It's not suitable for an 8yo at all, I think you're very unreasonable to let such a young child watch it.

There are plenty of other films that she could have watched - any of studio ghibli really.

BananaBubbles Wed 19-Dec-12 23:19:22

Not all of Studio Ghibli is suitable,the film we're discussing is a Studio Ghibli feature,as is Princess Mononoke,which is also inappropriate for a child of that age.

BananaBubbles Wed 19-Dec-12 23:20:17

I know very little about The Hobbit,well the film,I read the book years ago,,but I don't believe that I'd take a young child to see it,judging by the little that I've heard about it.

TeamBacon Wed 19-Dec-12 23:22:04

I thought grave of the fireflies wasn't technically Ghibli? Not sure on that.

Yes, I thought about mononoke when I wad typing that - I think that would be borderline... It's very violent and graphic, but I don't think its in quite the same league of grave of the fireflies. DS has seen the calmer bits of it (obviously not the bits where he's shooting off peoples heads or anything!) - he's 5.

TeamBacon Wed 19-Dec-12 23:23:28

Or is it Ghibli, but not miyazaki? God.. its late, I know this stuff normally, honest grin

TeamBacon Wed 19-Dec-12 23:23:56

Argh my typing!

BananaBubbles Wed 19-Dec-12 23:26:53

I'm not sure about how legitimately 'Ghibli' it is or isn't,I'm not really a big fan of anime as a rule,but it's certainly marketed as a Studio Ghibli feature on the dvd.,and on numerous sites.

TeamBacon Wed 19-Dec-12 23:33:56

Ahhh the way you were talking I thought you were a studio Ghibli expert.

GotF was one of the first films Ghibli produced, but it wasn't commissioned by them, and its not Hayao Miyazaki. That's why I suggested Ghibli, as I consider it separate from that.

Mononoke is an anomaly as its particularly violent compared to the other films, but other than that I stand by what I said.

But if the op is watching GotF, then chances are that she's already explored most of the miyazaki films, so my suggestion is probably moot.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now