Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

Original poster

Annoyed to see young children at cinema screening of the hunger games?

14 replies

Gillysilly · 15/12/2013 23:21

Am worried I am being ur as they have the right to be there but it was annoying to have children aged 18mths-4 years in the cinema making noise and going in and out to the toilets. So my question is would you be a bit annoyed as well?

OP posts:

FeastOfPhteven · 15/12/2013 23:22

Bit of an odd film to take child to see, inappropriate more than annoying really.

Original poster

Gillysilly · 15/12/2013 23:24

Yes inappropriate which is why it was annoying as I would expect young children at a young children-type film, so seeing young children there was unexpected and this is probably why it annoyed me.

OP posts:

Madeyemoodysmum · 15/12/2013 23:25

This 12a rating is wrong on so many levels. I hate it. Your either a child or not. It's seriously stopping me from going to the cinema in the day time. Only late shows for me!

Original poster

Gillysilly · 15/12/2013 23:30

It was 7.30pm screening, how late does it need to be to avoid this problem?

OP posts:

MumpireCallsTime · 15/12/2013 23:30

My 11 year old watched the first one and we loved it. She loves percy jackson too which was more frightening.
She came with me to see something called about time. A "comedy". That was far less suitable ..... :-(

Madeyemoodysmum · 15/12/2013 23:32

That's bloody ridiculous. Some parents are very selfish! Hope the kids are up with nightmares. Serves them right. I'm in a very bad mood today so excuse me.

Elsiequadrille · 16/12/2013 00:52

I'd be annoyed they'd taken them to see something age inappropriate. How selfish.

ravenAK · 16/12/2013 01:03

I think, if I wanted to go & see a kids' film - & the Hunger Games franchise is squarely aimed at about the 11-15 market, I reckon - my 9yo ds is a huge fan of the books - but preferred not to watch it with a boisterous audience of children, I'd go to a late showing.

I would expect any showing to be full of unaccompanied young teenagers, though, as that's the target demographic, & IME they're at least as likely to be noisy & in & out of their seats as younger kids with parents.

I'm taking ds later this week & his behaviour will naturally be exemplary , but I don't anticipate enjoying the movie that much myself, because I'm with OP on being a tad irritable & intolerant of noisy kids in the cinema.

However - it's still, y'know, a kids' film. So YABslightlyU...

bruffin · 16/12/2013 01:16

I saw a very small girl sneaked into The Girl With a Dragon Tattoo. She was sitting in front of us but didnt notice her properly until they left at the end or would have reported her. Its an 18 with some horrific torture scenes.
Ive seen too many posts of parents wanting to take babies to the cinema or a toddler to see James Bond etc and there are usually other posters encouraging them

steff13 · 16/12/2013 05:26

It was 7.30pm screening, how late does it need to be to avoid this problem?

Sometimes it doesn't matter; my husband and I went to see The Pursuit of Happyness in the theater at an 11 pm showing, and there was a preschooler there with her mother. She couldn't have been more than 4.

I assume theaters in the UK have ushers, I think the only thing you can do is let the usher know that the child (or anyone, really) is being disruptive.

nooka · 16/12/2013 05:41

Catching Fire is not a kids film! The series is Young Adult, at dd's primary I had to give permission for her to read it in grade 6. 12A is about right as far as certificates go I think, 12 and up on your own and 10/11 year olds with an adult.

It's not in any way a film for young children, I would have thought that they would apart from anything else have been very bored. Plus IMO they should be asleep in bed in any case. Some parents are incredibly thoughtless I think, or just don't want to pay for babysitters.

I took ds and dd to see the film a couple of weeks ago and it was excellent, and most of the audience were adults. No babies!

NurseRoscoe · 16/12/2013 05:50

I think as a parent you know your own child. Some kids are the sort to sit still and watch a film, if so then I don't think parents are unreasonable to take them if it's the sort of film their child would enjoy. My toddler wouldn't sit still in the cinema for love nor money but will watch films at home with the odd wander around the room, so it's DVDs for us until he's a bit older!

Taking kids to an evening screening when they generally should be in bed is fine if they will behave like an adult would, it's not up to anyone else to judge what another person is doing with their child as long as the child isn't being abused in any way but it's selfish of the parent to take a child who won't behave or be quiet to a non essential place like a cinema that requires people to sit still and be quiet, more so at an evening showing where it is expected most people will be adults

katese11 · 16/12/2013 05:55

It's so not what 12As were designed for! They were brought in with Spiderman because the parents of 10 and 11 yos were complaining that their kid wanted to see it. It doesn't mean it's fine for anyone from borth upwards. I was at baby cinema with a newborn once and heard the guy telling someone who'd come with a 4yo - "yeah, it's fine for them...it's a 12A" Can't remember which film it was (Bond?) but remember thinking it def wasn't suitable!

KittyVonCatsington · 16/12/2013 06:47

The Hangover is a 15-doesn't mean I would show it to my 15 year old pupils. I agree with you, OP. When I went to see it a few weeks ago, many primary aged children were there. The material is just not something I would wish to show to a small child

Flip