Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

...to wonder why a small baby was at a film premiere??

126 replies

Igetknockeddownbutgetupagain · 21/07/2012 19:00

The shooting at the Batman premiere in Denver is terrible news and I have just been watching a report about it on the news (hark at me getting up on the day's events).

On screen appears a young guy, early to mid twenties, standing next to his partner, talking about how he'd been holding his baby in the cinema screen...

Why? I am dumbfounded. How did they get in, with a baby? I just can't wrap my brain around it!

OP posts:
Methe · 22/07/2012 01:34

it was a midnight showing of the premier of a 12a film. One of the fatalities was a 6 year old girl. You have to worry about some people :(

Kayano · 22/07/2012 01:34

Nobody is saying that though. Your just making it up. People have said he should not have left the baby, not that the baby should have/ could have got shot for that.

The baby wasn't hurt thank god, no one is blaming him for the shootings or the babies, that is moronic.

I don't know if you are even reading the same thread as me

goodasgold · 22/07/2012 01:42

Yeah Methe you have to worry about a once in a lifetime freak who would kill innocent people. Blaming the parents of a six year old girl. FFS. She could have gone to the roller disco and this freak could have turned up. He didn't decide to kill because of the rating of the film. Step back if you do not have family in this area and show some sensitivity.

Pitmountainpony · 22/07/2012 01:48

Young couple- maybe big fans wanting to go and knowing the baby would sleep through.....the only concern would be the level of the noise.
We take our baby to showings of kiddo films- she rarely cries and if she does we just quickly leave till she settles.

It is very sad- I am not 100% sure what happened but think he put the baby down on the floor to protect him which is pretty smart if bullets are spraying into the audience- then there was tear gas and it is understandable someone might leave, unable to find his GF .....can you imagine the panic in there.
Anyway thank goodness they survived unlike the other poor 12 people.

Want2bSupermum · 22/07/2012 01:51

I am in the New York area and a lot of people here go to the cinema if it is really hot as they have excellent air conditioning. Right now the movies coming out are all for teenages or seniors. The seniors flock to the cinema this time of year.

cocolepew · 22/07/2012 01:52

Theres a picture in the Huffington Post of the man that helped the lady and her children. He's 19 and ran back when he heard her shouting "my kids". He went behind her and pushed them out to safety.

goodasgold · 22/07/2012 01:53

It's nothing to do with the parents taking their baby to the show. It is to do with a deranged individual deciding to shoot people. How you can blame anybody else but the gunman is beyond me.

cocolepew · 22/07/2012 01:53

Goodasgold are you deliberately missing the point?

Want2bSupermum · 22/07/2012 01:55

Aghhh - DD pressed on the mouse!

While it isn't a movie that I would take my DD (aged 1) to see, I would take her into a midnight of such a movie showing if it was 100F with high humidity and our air conditioning was broken.

goodasgold · 22/07/2012 02:10

No I don't think I'm missing the point. I think a few others may have done.

What do you see to be the point? COCO to me the point is that my neighbours. To me the point might be more salient than you. If you don't have people crying because they don't know who the fuck was caught up in that. Well good on you.

cocolepew · 22/07/2012 02:25

I have no idea what you are on about tbh.

goodasgold · 22/07/2012 02:33

COCO my neighbours are from this place, they are not there now but are going to be and they are fucking distraught, more than you or I could be, and to blame a parent is wrong. The man shooting people is wrong, everybody else is an innocent bystander. Judjing people for the age they take their children to the movies for is wrong.

What point have I missed?

cocolepew · 22/07/2012 02:37

Nobody has blamed anyone for the shootings except the gunman. The op, and others, wondered why there was small children at a film, that probably wasn't appropriate for them, so late at night .

mathanxiety · 22/07/2012 02:45

Films are rated differently in the US.

Since this was a huge event aimed at the under 25 age group, it's likely that the usual babysitters of a lot of the children there weren't available because they were all going.

Socknickingpixie, I agree about the British tendency to exclude children and how different it seems to be in other parts of the world.

goodasgold · 22/07/2012 03:21

What point have I missed?

What is the point? That they shouldn't have taken a little baby? By all accounts they shouldn't have taken a big man. They shouldn't have gone themselves.

He shouldn't have tried to kill them.

thelittlestkiwi · 22/07/2012 05:06

It goes without saying that no one deserves to be shot going to the cinema, or anywhere else.

But I think it is reasonable to question why kids or 4,6 or 9 are at what I'm guessing is a pretty violent film. Is this really common in the UK or America? Personally I'm too ito watch anything over a PG these days.

IMHO watching violence brings it into the conciousness and desensitises us to it.

Anyone know of any research on this?

SailorSoldier · 22/07/2012 08:04

goodasgold I suspect you are just too upset to see that nobody is blaming anyone but the gunman in this scenario.

This thread came about because the OP read the news story and was curious about a different concept that came up as she was reading it. No blame. Just curiosity about a different cultural norm.

I suspect if she hadn't mentioned where she heard about people taking kids into the cinema to see what I've heard is quite a scary/violent film at midnight, you would probably be agreeing that it's a bit strange.

Dprince · 22/07/2012 08:57

No one is saying the parents are to blame, or that is anyone is to blame except the gunman.
We are questioning whether taking children to the comma at midnight to see a fairly violent film is a common practice.
I don't know anyone who has taken children under 3 to the cinema, anyone that has taken them to a late night showing. So to me it seemed strange.
It would seem strange to me had someone mentioned it, not related to any violent crime.

Dprince · 22/07/2012 09:00

cinema not comma

FanjoPingpong · 22/07/2012 09:05

When my niece was six weeks old we took her with us to the cinema. She slept through Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. It's not an unusual occurance. If it had been a midnight premiere of the third part of a trilogy you love (Batman, Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, etc.) I certainly would have brought her along to that, too.

Batman's a 12A, which means that anyone under the age of 12 can go in when accompanied by an adult. If it was a 15 or 18, a six year old child would not have been allowed in.

mumblecrumble · 22/07/2012 09:10

Our dd came to the cinema with us till she was three months old. if I was going to a cool premier in the middle of the night it would have been easy to sling DD up, pop her on the boob and there we are - lovely night for all three of us.

It is perfectly allowed - certainly in Odeons as we researched it.

Very sorry for theose people, disgusting behaviour. Some how makes it worse thast he was a medical student. Not looking forward to hearing about his back story.

Dprince · 22/07/2012 09:13

That's the thing fanjo its much more common that I knew. Which is fine I just have never come across it. Either seen a baby there or know anyone who has taken a baby. I think its quite nice really.
at the time it seemed strange, but seeing so many people do it, its not strange just not something I have come across.
I don't think questioning something that seems strange means you are taking any blame from the gunman.

bestegg · 22/07/2012 10:01

The film is just short of three hours long, I was getting restless by the end of it having been sat for so long, so i would imagine young children would also be feeling restless by the end.

i am suprised there were young children and babies at the screening in america, bit having seen young children at the screening of the second batman film in the UK, which is more violent and noisy, i wouldnt have said the content was particularly unsuitable in the newest batman film.

Kayano · 22/07/2012 10:20

I stopped watching Jeremy Kyle an judge judy every morning because I thought this baby has ears and all they will hear is her mum listening to people argue and shout on the tv

No way would I take a baby to a violent film that long. I even fell asleep during it!

Nb I would take a baby to the cinema but I would go to a baby screening because it is quieter and more time appropriate.

I also agree this thread is not blaming anyone but the gunman just picking up on something a lot of people find inappropriate in any midnight screening

JamieandTheOlympicTorch · 22/07/2012 10:25

A baby in the cinema PALES into insignificance against a mass murder. How strange to start this thread

Swipe left for the next trending thread