To be annoyed with DH for letting 4yo DS watch a 15 film?

[evmil]

I have been away with a friend for the weekend, DH has had the boys (2 15yo's, 14yo, 13yo and 4yo DS). I have come home to find out that earlier DH let DS watch two of the Christian Bale batman films (which are both 15 rated).

DS has been describing in great detail the graphic parts of both the films and I have had a blow by blow account of how Bane broke Batman's back.

I'm annoyed at DH for letting him watch it, and i said so, but he thinks I'm being really unreasonable. My point is that it isn't suitable for him (which DH agreed with!) and that we'd discussed him watching these movies before, as he has asked, and both said that they were not suitable. Despite this, DH let him watch them as apparently DS was bugging him . Also, he watched them one after the other, which meant he has spent 3 hours this morning starring at a screen!!

I know it isn't the end of the world, but I am annoyed and DH thinks I'm over reacting. I think DH has been an idiot.

So aibu?

YANBU.

In our house, films have to be suitable for the youngest person watching.

I would be much more than annoyed.

I can't remember the details of the first batman film but the second one scarred me for life. I'd go mental at dh for showing our 4 year old that. The scene with the pencil in the eye .

I haven't seen those particular films but my ds loved Gremlins at 4. That's a 15 too I think.

Sorry my arse is getting splinters here.

Yanbu. I'd be furious.

YANBU.

Not suitable for a 4yo. Hence the 15 certificate. Your DH must know he is in the wrong, surely?

I'd imagine he simply couldn't be bothered having to do something else with DS. Of course he thinks you're over reacting and an idiot. Far easier to take that route than acknowledge he's a lazy feckless parent.

YANBU.

I would go absolutely bat-crazy if DH did that!

YANBU what a lazy Dad he is

BIL took our 4 year old nephew to see that film at the movies when he came out. But he's an utter knob, so.

The Batman trilogy with Christian Bale has an age rating of 12 for all three films (in the UK at least). Still not appropriate for a 4 year old, but there's not nearly as much violence as in a 15.

I was going to say, Batman is a 12A, not a 15. Still not really suitable for a 4 year old though.

It depends on the film and the child.

Dd1 and ds both take things very much as they come and are neither scared nor troubled by what they see.
Dd2 is like me and is likely to be found hiding from anything scarier than a Disney U rating.
I have only once seen an 18 and have no wish to repeat it. I only saw that because it was in school lessons.

Ds is 8 yo and he has seen something labelled 15. However this was the A-team. I'd got a set from a charity shop labelled pg, went to look to get more on Amazon and found the same set has been reclassified as 15. That was Saturday evening family viewing when I was little, so I wasn't too bothered.

However I would check a pg thoroughly before letting d2 watch, and wouldn't let her anywhere near a 12 and she's 4 years older than ds.

Your dh is being a dick.

The older three do not really need looking after do they? He should have taken the youngest to the park or played a game or anything.

I'd be thinking about not having those DVDs in the house if the youngest is able to see them.

Did he also give your youngest a drink of beer, a cigarette and some knives to play with?

Of course YANBU. Not just the content of the films but that he watched two of them together because your DH couldn't be arsed to engage and do something with him.

YANBU. I would be furious.

Are they seriously only a 12a?? The one with the Joker in particular is extremely dark - ffs the Joker "makes a pen disappear" by slamming someone's eye onto it. No YANBU I would have gone mental at dh. They are most definitely not children's films and certainly I know my own 4yo, who is made of really stern stuff, would probably have nightmares after watching any of them.

I would have thought it depends entirely on the child and exactly why the film has been rated how it has... maybe I'm wrong but that was how my parents always thought of it :)

So your DH just couldn't be arsed looking after him then. The older ones can pretty much look after themselves I assume. Your DH was being lazy and doesn't want to admit it.

I'm amazed that specific film could hold a four-year-old's attention, tbh.

I don't think you're being unreasonable, we all have our own standards with what we want our DCs to watch (our 2 year old DD loves the Simpsons, for example, yet I often get a glaring from DW for letting her watch it), and those films are pretty violent, and not in a cartoony way, either.

That said, I would say some children's films can be much more disturbing for little ones than films made for older viewers - Watership Down? Bambi? The Dark Crystal?

grace I inadvertently let my DTs watch Gremlins aged 3, I remembered watching it as a child but had forgotten the level of violence.

They absolutely loved it, but I was frantically forwarding through the worst bits in shock, before looking at the TV guide and realising it was a 15 .

Apart from insisting on a Gremlins tshirt each a while later, they don't seem too scarred by the experience. I on the other hand am still mortified at my poor parenting and now check carefully before letting them watch any of my childhood favourites!

OP yanbu as it sounds like your DH didn't make an innocent mistake, but let your DC watch it to give him an easy time of it.