Is it wrong to let my kids 7 and 4 watch Harry Potter?

[Cuppacoffeeinthebigtime]

Watched the first film tonight. 7 year old insisted he was fine with it. 4 year old looked a bit horrified at some parts and had to sit on my lap but begged me not to turn it off. They are now asking to watch the other Potter films but I am thinking after the first 3 films, they would be unsuitable no?

I remember watching a superman film as a 7 year old child where I seem to remember people being turned into robots and it absolutely terrified me and played on my mind for years and that was probably much milder than the Harry Potter films.

[SunnyBaudelaire]

lashes a TWO year old is not a 'child' really , more of a baby.
How on earth would you really know what was going on in their head faced with weird shite like HP?

[BabyMurloc]

Mine have seen the first 2 movies but thats all. My 8 yo came home with the 3rd book and I told her no. I wont let mine go past the first 2 until they are older. It totally depends on the child.

[SunnyBaudelaire]

I think it might have been the second one that I tossed away in disgust, something about a dead cat hanging up IIRC - who on earth would think that suitable for a baby or toddler?

[LashesandLipstick]

Sunny okay it's clear you haven't really watched it or read it as the cat is not dead, secondly it's not even that weird, it has a happy ending ffs. It's not like anyone's suggesting letting them watch something terrifying, it's Harry Potter...

[FernGullysWoollyPully]

I didn't say a 2 year old was ready. I said my 2 year old had watched it. Watched it in the sense that it's been on while she's been there because the older children have been watching. I also said that it's gone over her head. Which it has. She's not traumatised by a few scenes from Harry Potter. It's not terrifying.

I don't think you can presume to know how one child will deal with it from another. There are other people who've said that their children aren't frightened by it.

And I really resent being told I've inflicted anything on my children. That implies abuse, pain and suffering. Which none of my children face.

[SunnyBaudelaire]

lashesandlipstick I have seen and read enough of it to recognise nasty over-rated shite, thank you. Any adult who reads this and thinks it has a structure or plot or any character development has obviously not read much.

and Hully I am sorry if you 'resent' it but yes, I think inflict is the right word for making a two year old watch this.

[LashesandLipstick]

Sunny what the hell is your problem? Just because you don't like a specific book series doesn't mean you have to have such venom towards anyone who does. What is "nasty" about it? You're being ridiculous lol

And I hardly think she glued her kid to the sofa and told him/her s/he couldn't look away or else...

[SunnyBaudelaire]

I bet you were one of those adults who waited with bated breath for the next book to come out lashes. lol.

[LashesandLipstick]

Nah Sunny, I was a child gasp when I read them and when they came out

[FernGullysWoollyPully]

Then you need to be handed a rather large grip Sunny. And maybe learn to choose your words a bit more carefully.

Thank you Lashes. You are absolutely correct I didn't glue her to the sofa! she's a nearly 3 year old who wouldn't sit still if I attempted to force her.

[SunnyBaudelaire]

Hully if you think letting a 2 year old watch a PG or 12A is normal, then it is you that needs a 'grip' not me

[LashesandLipstick]

Fern no problem! I really don't see what the big fuss is

[BertrandRussell]

I enjoy the books and the films. That's how i know they are not suitable for pre schoolers.

[LashesandLipstick]

Sunny, PG means parental guidance right? So it's up to the parents. And 12A means "no one under 12 without an adult", as Fern knew about it, she was the adult in question. If you're going to be ridiculously anal about ratings at least make sure they back up what you're arguing.

[SunnyBaudelaire]

whatever yes it is perfectly normal and desirable for babies to watch Harry Potter movies and anyone who disagrees should 'get a grip'.
How right you are.

[BertrandRussell]

PG means that a film should not be- I think the word the BBFC uses is "unsettling"- to anyone over 8.

[LashesandLipstick]

Bertrand but it's still "parental guidance", meaning that anyone under 8, it's up to the parents to decide whether it's appropriate

[FernGullysWoollyPully]

I can confidently say that my children aren't 'unsettled' Bert.

[SunnyBaudelaire]

" ridiculously anal " lol, sure thing lashes. Perhaps you too were brainwashed by this shyte as a child, and have come to see it as normal.

[LashesandLipstick]

Sunny what exactly is so horrible about it? You haven't explained why you think it's awful, horrible, has the power to brainwash people...

[redskybynight]

HP is a hard one because it's hard to be the parent of the (seemingly) only child who hasn't seen them.

My rule was that they had to read the books first, then they could decide to watch the films. This meant DS did watch all the films by age 9/10 (but knew the story and what was coming. DD aged 9 has still to see the last 3 by her own choice.

I wouldn't let a 4 year old see any of them. Maybe the first couple for a 7 year old.

[SunnyBaudelaire]

it is simply vile - quite apart from the dead cat that you say was alive.....
What stuck in my mind was the teacher drawing blood from our hero...

[fattymcfatfat]

my 6 yo has watched all of the Harry potter films and is currently half way through the fourth book. he loves them and is not at all traumatised. my DD is 18 months and has seen the first three JP movies and loves them, she watched Godzilla with me yesterday quite happily too. I know my children and I know what scares them and what doesn't, and if the 18 month old didn't want to watch, she wouldn't, it's not like I tie her up!

[Purplepixiedust]

My son had seen all the HP films by the time he was 8. We started reading them when he was 6 and would read one and watch the film, then read the next and watch the film. When reading, I missed out any swearing, watered down the romance (which comes later when they become teens) and cut out some of the stuff about Harry keep hearing his mother being killed when the Dementers were about (book 3) and that type of thing.

We did have a break after the first 3 (he found the Dementers a bit much and after reading book 4 we became aware the film was a 12 rating - it being the first one where a liked character is killed) and then again after number 6 (as I knew the Deathly Hallows would be more intense and scary - the first one is particularly dark).

He really loves them though, some books/films we like better than others so have watched most. We had a 'Harry Potter Fest' over Easter and watched all 8 films. Following this, we have started reading them again (without editing) and are currently on book 3. They take some getting through reading aloud at bedtimes :) My son is 8 3/4 now.

Personally, I think your 7 yo will be fine with the first 3, just take them steady and I would recommend reading the books as you go because then, what is on screen is expected and not so shocking. I wouldn't let your 4 yo watch any more, not just yet anyway.

[AnnPerkins]

Harry Potter is one of DS's absolute favourite things. He's just turned six and watched the first one when he was about four I suppose. We are currently reading the Chamber of Secrets together on my kindle at bedtime.

He's seen the first four films about 50 times each. I won't be letting him watch the others for a few years yet.