AIBU to find it annoying that so many unsuitable films are marketed at children?

[redpickle]

My DS is 5 and keeps going on and on about the last Star Wars - The Force Awakens. He's asked to watch it so many times in the last year but it's really not suitable (12 rating). Yet, toys, lunch boxes, games etc for these films (Spider-Man is another one) all aimed at his age.

Not expecting anything to change but just wondered if it's just me? His Christmas list is full of this stuff - should I avoid the merchandise? Or hope it bridges the gap until he's old enough to watch it?

Just watch the cartoons - ds has a scooby doo cartoon with batman and robin in. Plus some old ones with Spider-Man in. Not difficult really

YANBU. I'm completely with you on this op and I'm a bit fed up with the competitive attitude i've seen lately among my friends where its 'cool' that your kids can tolerate a film not rated for them, that they are somehow 'tougher'. It's ludicrous! by all means watch what you want but its not some badge of bloody honour. Pisses me right off. I think its braver of my Ds to stand in the school queue and admit that he doesnt like 'such and such' film because it was scary infront of his peers.

We went to see Kubo and as the poster upthread mentioned it was actually really creepy, he did have nightmares about it. Its not because he's a wuss or wrapped in cotton wool, its because its about two 'Ring' like sisters trying to cut his eye out and kill his mum. There's no deeper issue.

oh, and as others have said, just watch the Lego/cartoon versions - that ties in with the merchandise anyway

I seriously don't get this. So you make a film that's aimed at, I dunno, 10 or 11 year-olds. But you shouldn't be allowed to sell merchandise like lunch boxes because as well as the 10 / 11 year-olds having them, 4 year-olds might want them too? That's ridiculous. Let your child watch the film or not, it's your choice and your responsibility. Kids always want things that are too old for them, and they always will, whatever film companies do!

"In 70's and 80's for example, the typical action/adventure/fantasy films were always meant to be watched by youngsters. "

I'm not sure about this - weren't most 80s action films 18s? Things like Terminator, Predator and Max Max 2 (though I think 3 was a 15)

I remember watching Terminator aged about 8 or 9. Every other kid of my age also watched it, alongside with other films of similar genre. I also loved westerns and martial arts films very much. I only wasn't allowed to watch MMA tournaments because my mother thought its "unladylike"
But then all this stuff was on cable/satellite tv, or pirated VHS. So much for foreign ratings as nobody really paid attention.
However, i don't remember anyone being traumatised or complaining about having nightmares.
I would be seriously worried if a 10+ kid started having nightmares from something as innocent as Star Wars.

As for merchandise, its a different thing. my 12yo DS has quite outgrown character underwear and lunchboxes. They are appealing to quite younger kids.

That doesn't sound like particularly decent, responsible parenting, Nataleejah. The reason you think all these things are fine is because you were desensitised to the violence as a small child.
The Marvel comics were not written for children, they were written for adults. They have dark themes, violence and sex, and 'damagrd' people as heroes (and anti-heroes).
There's nothing wrong with that, btw, fantasy is healthy, and allows us to explore things that would not be acceptable I'm rl, but it just isn't appropriate for small children.

The PG/12A thing is difficult. In the past, things that past the censors and got PG would not now. But that's up to us to be responsible parents and not show children things they're not yet ready for. Grease, for example, had a whole storyline about Rizzo's pregnancy scare, but people seem to think it's a kids film. Back to the future is a good example. We bought the boxed sed cheaply, because we thought the children would enjoy it. We watched it first to vet it, and were shocked at the language deemed suitable (lots of crap, shit, can't think what else) and the attempted rape scene. I don't really want my 5yo walking round saying Holy Shit, it's just not okay.

And yes, my eldest (Y6) has friends that were taken to see Jurassic World and Spectre, and some were taken out crying, others were fine, but I know from seeing them myself that my DD is not ready for them.
Desensitising children to violence is harmful, and can lead then to make poor decisions or use unacceptable levels of violence themselves. Why would parents think it's a badge of honour that their child isn't scared or horrified by someone having their eyes put out, or by playing call of duty or whatever?

Ritacudrington
12a was introduced for Spiderman not Batman. I remember as ds was young at the time and there was a big furore about it. We didnt take ds and went by ourselves.
I dont mind adult humour goes right over childrens heads.
My dc loved the Simpson but there were two different levels which spoke to adults and children differently.

I think that the younger age ratings translate as:

U - everyone, utterly inoffensive
PG - likely to be fine for everyone, certainly once KS2 age, but check if you have a sensitive child
12 (12A in cinema) - suitable for secondary age children, but younger ones can be admitted.

Why shouldn't films be made for secondary school age pupils? And have related merchandising?

It's not as if there's a shortage of other stuff for other age groups.

YANBU stick with your gut instinct. Others will do differently but you have to be true to yourself, your son will not be harmed by not watching it. Steer him towards other more suitable things.

bruffin the 12 certification was introduced in 1988/89 for Tim burton batman in the cinema. There was no video 12 certificate then so it was a 15 on video.

I remember there was a big hooha when mrs.doubtfire came out in the cinema. It got a 12 certificate yet Jurassic park got a pg for the cinema.

I was talking about 12a

That doesn't sound like particularly decent, responsible parenting, Nataleejah. The reason you think all these things are fine is because you were desensitised to the violence as a small child.

20-30 years ago lots of things were normal what today isn't socially acceptable, e.g. playing outside all day long unsupervised. More freedom, less mollycodling.
You may call me 'desensitized', but i am not scared of actors, their make-up, or special effects. Not real = nothing to fear. Plenty of things in RL to worry about. Getting worked up over a film rating is such a first world problem really.

I had a look at one of those american 'parent guides' for Terminator. The only problem most of the reviewers had was the brief appearance of bouncing breasts. Punk getting his heart ripped out and the Terminator murdering about 30 people in various degrees of bloodiness - no problem! Just cover your kids eyes for the nude lady!

When I was at school kids watched The Exorcist and The Omen for a dare but I was too much of a wuss.

I'd still argue there's a difference between kids watching 'unsuitable' films for a dare and films being actively marketed at them, though.