BBFC - Is "Universal"-rating a nightmare for working parents of CBeebies-age children?

[RemovedFromReality]

Just seen news about first ever complaint going into British Board of Film Classification about the Railway Children [ www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-23270980 ]. I take the point; you doubtless will too.

+However+, aren't there more pressing issues? The BBFC claim U-rated films are suitable for children from age 4 upwards (subject to parental discretion). Hold on; isn't that "discretion" awfully similar to what the G of PG stands for?

If "The Empire Strikes Back" were broadcast on CBeebies, I reckon I'm safe in writing we'd all be up in arms about the severed hand, the unresolved traumas of the ending, the dark psycological journey of Luke, the betrayal of Lando... Not really stuff for 4 year olds.

But "The Empire Strikes Back" is U-rated. And CBeebies is for all ages (particularly ages 0 to 6 according to the recent BBC Trust consultation).

And so we, as parents of younger children are expected to spend hours pre-watching new U-rated movies to make sure there's not an "Empire Strikes Back" in there. Or run the risk of seemingly endless nights of the whole family suffering for the suffering child's nightmares; not to mention the effects in the days afterwards.

"Suitable for all" is what it says on the packet for U-rated films (and, one day, websites?): www.bbfc.co.uk/what-classification/u

Well, now I +am+ the father, ... and I'm not impressed! Doctor Who on CBeebies? No. If the BBFC can introduce 12 and 12A, then they can sort things out lower down the age-spectrum too. And if that means less sales for "Monsters University" then so be it. My children can wait. They will be anyway; "Monsters Inc" caused enough problems!

But how about for you? How many better-spent hours have you spent pre-reviewing films for your children? Or resolving nightmares for your younger viewers? Do you feel the BBFC ought to be doing the reviewing job for you and all other parents of younger children (as it is nominally paid to) to save you time that would be better spent playing outside, making games, reading, working or doing other more constructive and productive things?

There is plenty of info out there if you look! Why do you think films contain disclaimers like: contains mild, comedy violence? I don't spoonfeed my 4yo, so don't expect to be spoonfed myself - if I'm not sure whether a film is suitable, I'll read reviews and other parents' opinions. It's not the BBFC's job to describe every film in micro-detail!

DVDs are pretty specific about any potentially unpalatable content in a film. All a working parent needs to do is read a bit, either on the DVD box or on IMDB, after checking over TV schedules or seeing a trailer.

And most of us have some means of recording TV. If you're not likely to be there when a film is broadcast (though most seem to be in the evening, anyhow) then offer to record it and watch it together.

There is a rating for CBeebies aged children: it's called Uc, and means suitable for absolutely any child. If you can't be arsed to read the BBFC parental guidance notes on a U certificate film then you'll be safe with a Uc.

Oh, and my 4yo is more scared of Peter Rabbit (on CBeebies) than anything he's ever seen at the cinema! It's down to the individual

The BBFC "binned" Uc. Uc would probably save us a few hours work!

How does one handle taking visits to the cinema with one?s young children when the BBFC's own BBFC Insight website offers "Contains mild violence and threat" for "The Empire Strikes Back"?

For me "Contains mild violence and threat" doesn't really ?do it? for:

(i) "Goodies" losing;
(ii) a main "goody" character (Han Solo) being "frozen"/burned into "carbonite" (with suitable agonised expressions);
(iii) betrayal (Lando);
(iv) extreme parental abuse (Darth Vader cuts off Luke's hand with a burning sword after revealing that he is biological father).

For Monsters' University, BBFC Insight reads "Contains mild slapstick and comic threat". In the light of the BBFC Insight review of "The Empire Strikes Back", does one trust the BBFC Insight review of "Monsters' University"? Or does one fear that some 20 and 30-something "reviewers" at the BBFC have judged "comic threat" by their own standards rather than those of a 4, 5 or 6 year old!?

Remember, I love the Star Wars movies; I just don't scenes like this are suitable for the CBeebies-age market! http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=fvwp&v=Nr3SQmR1Vpc&NR=1

I am a Star Wars fan. What are you on about? Since when was SW, ESB, or particularly ROTJ unsuitable for your average 6 year old? Who are these people who would be up in arms? You're on your own there, mate.

For Monsters University, the BBFC Insight page has a full page of detailed description, not just the snippet you quoted. Yes they probably misjudged it in the late seventies and early eighties on the Star Wars films, but the notes on modern film releases are very thorough and consistent.

I didn't realise they'd ditched Uc, sorry , I wonder why they did that? But they have replaced it with notes stating either "Contains no material likely to offend or harm" or "Particularly suitable for pre-school children", which serve the same purpose.

I'm sure I watched Star Wars as a small kid (I had older siblings)....and I survived. It's up to you, but I imagine the threat in "Monsters University" would be much the same as in "Monsters Inc". What exactly do you think would be an ideal solution? 20 different categories according to how intense and/or comic the threat is?

You know what's going to freak your kids out and so you should make the call on it - have they watched the first film? Were they OK with that? As I said before, my son is most freaked out by Peter Rabbit and the new series of Octonauts, both of which are on CBeebies. But I'm not "up in arms" and I'm not writing to the BBC complaining that my poor flower is scarred forever. I just give him hugs, tell him it's not real and turn it off if he wants to. How is any of that difficult?

Or is it because you're a "working parent" that you don't have time to reassure your kids and would rather the BBFC do all the work for you?

Just re-read your OP - if "Monsters Inc" caused them problems, then don't take them to see "Monster's University". Simple.

BBFC guidelines are based on evidence and in close consultation with child psychologists. The BBFC errs on the side of caution with imitable behaviour, animal cruelty, drugs, sexuality and any racial, sexual or disablist epithets and studios will cut their films to comply with them. Many US versions are not released in the UK for that reason.

As everyone has pointed out plenty of U films contain extremely tough shorelines - my friend's 3 year old burst into racking sobs of terror as Dumbo's mother came under threat. I have never watched Up but my DH's description of the synopsis brought me to tears. Toy Story 3 is agonising in the final sequence. DM watches Game of Thrones but won't ever watch The Wizard of Oz - it terrifies her. OTOH my DS (4) enjoys Big Bang Theory which I think is rated 12 for DVD release. He thinks Sheldon is hilarious and doesn't really get the relationship storylines. He finds Frankenweenie too sad to watch though.

You know your child and you know yourself. Your child doesn't NEED to be watching anything - so if you feel you can't pre-vet it all, don't let them watch it.

But films, stories and characters give children common talking points and role play ideas when they are developing social skills and making friends in pre-school. My DS bonded with his nursery friends over Marvel superheroes. They are also good for exploring themes and ideas that many children think about but find terrifying e.g. getting lost, being afraid, losing a parent - YOU may find these horrifying but your child will work through them and, as long as they don't watch films all the time, it will be good for them to develop empathy and understanding of the difference between stories and real life.

BTW some people are a bit shocked that e.g. I will let DS go to the cinema to watch 12A films like the big superhero blockbusters but as the BBFC guidelines allow that and I am happy he enjoys the experience and understands it is fiction and likes talking about it afterwards. If he was bored / scared / confused - I wouldn't allow it.

Hmm... interesting comments. Star Wars: A New Hope just finished on ITV2 (after my childrens' bedtime). The Empire Strikes Back is on tomorrow on ITV2 at 4:10pm: before bedtime.

Of the two, the former ends with the "good guys" winning; it's closer to Universal; even the death of Ben Kenobi is veiled in mystery. The Empire Strikes back is a different kettle of fish (more like pike); and needs more careful handling.

As explained above, the issue is with having to PRE-WATCH movies to assess for my children. BBFC get paid to do that. It seems disingenuous at best (dishonest at worst) to claim that the "headline" BBFC Insight material on (say) "Monsters University" is clear: www.bbfc.co.uk/releases/monsters-university-2013

Though I'll happily apologise and acknowledge error if you can link me to something featuring all the pscho-whatsit you quote [particularly so if the psychologists (i) actually have +young+ children of their own; (ii) have really sat back to cross-read between the films and to CBeebies!].

As for Toy Story 3, I agree: not really suitable for a 4 year-old. As with "Despicable Mw", "Shrek" and a bunch of other movies it depends on pre-existing knowledge. Ask yourself what core theme/idea your child takes away from each of those movies given their current functional-vocabulary and knowledge of stories/characters.

Are they really seeing and hearing the same parts of the film that you are? Are they really taking away the same ideas?

My wife's godson's take on the Star Wars movies (remember he saw them all before he was 7) when asked who is his favourite character? The Storm Troopers. Thank goodness he hasn't watched Revenge of The Sith; I reckon Andy Murray and those from Dunblane would find it more than deserving of its PG status! But, hey, I'm now feeling a bit like I should never have laughed at the ideas of Mary Whitehouse in my youth!

Britain's changed; few people seem to have recognised how our children are (like we were) being captured by ideas foreign to our country's history!

Rant over!

P.S. Here's the BBFC Insight on Empire Strikes Back (even less clear!): www.bbfc.co.uk/releases/star-wars-episode-v-empire-strikes-back-2011

Again, I'll apologise and acknowledge error if you can point me to the clearer version!

Crowdsourcing is probably the closest thing we have to an answer bearing in mind we all have different views on what is acceptable at what age.

There is a website here with a viewpoint on films.

Though I'll happily apologise and acknowledge error if you can link me to something featuring all the pscho-whatsit you quote [particularly so if the psychologists (i) actually have +young+ children of their own; (ii) have really sat back to cross-read between the films and to CBeebies!].

I have no idea what you mean by this? All the information about who sits on the BBFC panel is on the BBFC website as are all the guidelines about how and why decisions are made. Why don't you write to the BBFC if you are so interested or if you want to challenge? The BBFC is a statutory body and regulated by government and you have every right to engage with them.

CBeebies has nothing to do with the BBFC as it only covers cinema and recorded media distribution. Your beef seems to be that a) the BBFC's decisions because they don't chime with yours b) they should because er....

Britain's changed; few people seem to have recognised how our children are (like we were) being captured by ideas foreign to our country's history!

and possibly

Sorry - spare words crept into this sentence which should read:

Your beef seems to be that a) the BBFC's decisions don't chime with yours b) they should because er....

I suspect most 4yos would be fine with Star Wars simply because details of the plot would go over their heads and they'd just see action sequences and goodies versus buddies. Which I think was the justification at the time - sex and swearing were what they looked for most, and not too much realistic gore.

My 4yo is scared of lots of programmes on CBeebies - does that mean CBeebies content isn't suitable for small children? Not at all, just that he gets scared of all sorts of random stuff, usually the unexpected. So gory animal death scenes fine, the Jungle Book where a tiger might appear at any moment - hysteria within 5 minutes and never got any further.

Depends what you consider 'unsuitable', but I don't think it's possible to make any interesting TV epi

TondelayoSchwarzkopf: My "beef"? May I assume you are not, actually, English?

To adopt your Bart-Simpson-like tone, the "cow" that you are "having" seems to be centred around a belief that (i) the BBFC are/were correct; (ii) you weren't aware that Uc existed; (iii) you don't want to consider (or imagine) the idea that a boundary can be created at 7 as easily as at 12, 15 or 18; if rules are agreed...

Having a beef with someone is a perfectly legit thing to say...!

Btw, pls don't use Dunblane as part of a petty argument. It's tasteless and disrespectful.

As explained above, the issue is with having to PRE-WATCH movies to assess for my children. BBFC get paid to do that.

You are responsible for policing what your young children are exposed to. The BBFC offers guidance but cannot possibly know what is appropriate for every single child as every child is different.

If you can't be arsed to get more than one viewpoint on suitability of a particular movie or be prepared to say "Actually, this movie we're watching isn't appropriate, I'm turning it off" then that's your failing as a parent. You can't off-load that responsibility to a third party. The buck stops with you.

For what it's worth, when I was a child in the 70s Doctor Who scared me much more than did Star Wars or Empire Strikes Back.

I should really this.

All children are different - it is the parents' job to know their own child and not use the tv as a babysitter

I am responsible for what ds watches. The BBFC provides guidelines but it is ultimately my (our) decision. None of the examples you have complained/commented about give me any cause for concern.

Ds has been watching Doctor Who since he was 4. He is less frightened by it than me. If he had been, the answer is simple: turn the TV off.

The OP brings back memories of Mary Whitehouse campaigning on behalf of the morals of the nation . If she'd been that affronted, why did she just not turn the TV off or not go to see the play?

This post is bizarre on many levels.

I am confused by why RemovedfromReality (interesting name choice) feels this is an issue specifically for working parents - why include the word working? It adds nothing and is irrelevant surely - a sahp is with their child all the time so also cannot go and pre watch a film without their child, clearly! The whole post is blustering about nothing though.

Aside from that there are tons of review sites dealing with exactly this issue (and you can post and ask on MN :o ) Takes 5 mins to do some homework on a film and make your own decision on whether it is right for your specific child - as others have said things that upset one 8 year old may be fine for his 4 year old cousin or whatever - children are different, parents are different in their views of what they are comfortable with their children watching. Ratings aren't really about preventing nightmares, they are about broadly trying to prevent young children watching really potentially damaging stuff or inappropriate material, esp violence IMO.

This site is American, but quite comprehensive for what the OP is looking for: www.kids-in-mind.com/m/monstersuniversity.htm

Kids in Mind