|
Post by The Question on Aug 6, 2008 20:13:00 GMT -5
I'm fucking pissed off, frankly, with this horseshit of videogames and movies being made scapegoats for all society's ills. This isn't a new discussion, by any means, but I'm curious about your own views on this, particularly anyone here who may have kids of their own. It's to do with violence etc onscreen, children's' exposure to it and censorship. It may not be a horror movie, but in Britain The Dark Knight has opened up a can of worms because it's been rated a 12A, which is a fairly new classification and although means it's recommended for people 12 and upwards, children younger than this can go and see it if their parents think they can handle it (so really the parents should go and see it first if in doubt and exercise discretion). Naturally, some of the more conservative press are jumping on this now and saying the movie is waaaay too violent and it's a disgrace kids should see it, with some even going so far as to suggest it should have an 18 rating (which is the upper limit for Britain's classification in conventional cinema). Personally, I think this is total bullshit, based on the content of the movie, I think it's a cheap way for certain members of the press to get some publicity off the back of a huge film (most of whom are not film critics, and are old farts who still equate Batman and "comic book movie" with the camp TV shows and the comics of their youth, when it simply hasn't been that way for 30 years at least) . Forgetting TDK, though, I think it's bullshit on another level, one that relates to the material we like to watch - I think it's symptomatic of a society that's becoming obsessed with mollycoddling kids and shielding them from anything frightening. I think this does them more harm than good, myself, I was watching horror movies as a kid and loved them. Children like to be scared! Not just that, but they're not morons, they CAN differentiate between reality and fiction, better than the adults can half the time, it seems. Fuelling this are the horror stories in the press of how kids are running wild and killing each other instead of blaming the real, sociological culprits for what's manufacturing these tendencies in youth, it's going to the old standby and blaming movies. Related to, and possibly a knock-on effect from, this rabid nannying is the sly reintroduction of conservative values, at least in the UK, where the government are responding by introducing new, laws making it illegal to view certain types of violent images. I was a kid in the 80s and among the many wrongs I saw of Thatcher's government, the whole "Video Nasty" thing stands out as a particularly disgraceful epoch in inhibiting the rights of the individual to view and create art, and it seems this is an insidious backslide. Opinions? Are there any similar censorship issues creeping wherever you are? Do you think children are being damaged by overly violent stimulus, or did you grow up with it yourself and consider yourself to be a perfectly rounded individual? Okay, I'm going to go sit down now and see if I can't stop this blood from foaming at my mouth...
|
|
|
Post by Non-Believer Yet Damned on Aug 7, 2008 8:14:57 GMT -5
I actually share the unpopular view that rating are good. I can admit that not every 13 year old has the same maturity level as the next, but on average, most are not prepared to watch R or NC17 rated movies mentally--an opinion they would certainly debate.
I miss the old days when kids could be kids. I see no reason why a 13-16 year old should be watching Men Behind the Sun or one of the August Underground films. To use those as an example, they are very adult films. If we don't let kids legally drink, drive, vote or make life changing decisions before they are legally an adult (or in the case of driving, 16), what's so wrong about limitng what they can legally view. Of course kids drink underage, view porn before it's legal and watch lots of naughty horror movies, but when your mind is expanding and learning, this may not be the best stimuli for it. Yeah, I know that most kids turn out ok.
However. I think overall, rating are good. Kids should be sheltered until they can learn for themselves. If you don't think kids are way more susceptible to media than an adult, look at kids. They are media whores and soak up whatever is told to them. Adults are not that much better, but at least they can be legally responsible for watching American Idol or stealing a car.
If kids only realized how short childhood is before they get forced to be an adult...
|
|
|
Post by Matttttttttttt on Aug 7, 2008 10:55:16 GMT -5
I absolutely hated the fact growing up that I couldn't go see R-rated movies on my own or buy "mature" video games. Honestly, my parents didn't care because they knew I could handle it. I've been watching horror movies since I was damn near born and I never once wanted to act them out. I think a big part of it is that some kids can handle it while others can't. The laws aren't formed that way though. They're meant to punish everyone simply because they don't want to take any chances on having to make judgment calls on who is mature and who is not.
I've always thought a good way of getting around this would be through some kind of a photo ID system. I came up with an idea where children would get some type of ID to scan at theaters that would tell the theater which movies the child would be allowed to see. The parent would need to come in and fill out some paperwork in order to choose what they think their own child is mature enough to watch. This way, we allow the parents to make a judgment call on their own children. After all, who knows their children better...parents or the MPAA? The photo identification would make sure that children couldn't use one another's ID either.
Anyway, I absolutely hate the idea that the majority is punished for a few people that can't control themselves. I hated having to play a watered down version of Manhunt 2 just because the original version was "too violent". It bothers me that films have to make cuts just to get the rating they want because R-rated films or NC-17 films don't make as much at the box office. They have to find some way to get around this already because there's way too much censorship going on.
|
|
|
Post by shaggyrand on Aug 7, 2008 15:14:40 GMT -5
I hate censorship, ratings aren't censorship. I totally understand the need for an easy, quickly remembered and uniform system for parents to quickly identify content of media. The problem is that those who do the ratings use force and intimidation on distributors (be they theaters or stores) to assert authority (which neither the MPAA or the ERSB really have). Do I think a parent should have to be there when little Tommy wants to buy any game? Fuck, yes. Do I think that a 10 year old should be able to walk in to Best Buy and pick up Hostel or the newest GTA with out their guardian? Hell, no. Do I think media make people preform atrocious actions? Hell, NO.
There are no excuses for censorship. Should we force game stores to carry AO titles or force Walmart to stock porn? No, that's just as bad as forced censorship. You want the AO title? (Guess what? RockStar never planned on releasing the full Manhunt 2,. They make subpar crap games and only make profit off controversy. They could have sold the AO online and the M in store, other publishers have done it. Don't blame the ERSB for that one, that's all on RockStar... also Mattt....'s idea is far more creepy and invasive than the ratings board. Big Fucking Brother right there.) I think we should scrap them both of the major ratings boards and start over. Make them guidelines which individuals or companies can choose to follow. No more threats, or coercion.
|
|
|
Post by Matttttttttttt on Aug 7, 2008 16:58:02 GMT -5
How do you find that invasive? Now that I'm an adult and can see anything I want, the ratings don't really bother me. I'm looking at this from a child's perspective though. When I was a 15-year-old who couldn't see an R-rated film without my parents, I found it to be a bit ridiculous. My parents and I both knew that I was mature enough to see these films. I think an idea like that gives kids mature enough (like me at one point) the opportunity to see the films they choose without simply being disallowed from doing so.
I never said anything about forcing Wal-Mart or any store to sell products that they don't want. I'm just saying that R* should have given buyers the choice of what they wanted. I was just expressing my anger over a choice that stemmed from stores like Wal-Mart banning any game of the sort. Sure, it's their choice, but it ultimately keeps folks that can handle the stuff from ever getting the product they initially wanted.
|
|
|
Post by Non-Believer Yet Damned on Aug 7, 2008 22:54:08 GMT -5
How do you find that invasive? I think he was responding to your government ID for all kids. That notion does strike me of one step closer to implanted microchips. Plus it also sounds like a complete waste of money.
|
|
|
Post by shaggyrand on Aug 8, 2008 9:59:02 GMT -5
How do you find that invasive? I think he was responding to your government ID for all kids. That notion does strike me of one step closer to implanted microchips. Plus it also sounds like a complete waste of money. Exactly. Though I've had other thoughts about it after my other post. Or if it was non-governmentally issued, than the fact that the companies themselves would monitor everything kids see. It wouldn't be any kind of privileged information. Do you honestly think that if they found out exactly how many kids/ midteens were going to see R rated movies that they wouldn't start to modify them? Also how would you make sure that no one would fake them? It's really not hard at all to fake most governmentally issued IDs. So how hard would it be to fake one that was issued by the teens who work the ticket booth?
|
|
|
Post by Matttttttttttt on Aug 10, 2008 11:57:49 GMT -5
I think he was responding to your government ID for all kids. That notion does strike me of one step closer to implanted microchips. Plus it also sounds like a complete waste of money. Exactly. Though I've had other thoughts about it after my other post. Or if it was non-governmentally issued, than the fact that the companies themselves would monitor everything kids see. It wouldn't be any kind of privileged information. Do you honestly think that if they found out exactly how many kids/ midteens were going to see R rated movies that they wouldn't start to modify them? Also how would you make sure that no one would fake them? It's really not hard at all to fake most governmentally issued IDs. So how hard would it be to fake one that was issued by the teens who work the ticket booth? No, I never meant that they should be government-issued. I should have probably made that clearer in my original post. It would only be a photo ID issued by theaters for them to allow younger people to see R-rated films. As for making sure they don't fake ID's, you really can't. People create fake driver's licenses all the time, so there's really no way to ever create a foolproof system. The DMV doesn't stop giving them out though, it's just something you know and try to avoid if possible.
|
|
Coffin Jim
Administrator
What is blood? It is the reason to exist!
Posts: 619
|
Post by Coffin Jim on Aug 14, 2008 23:39:05 GMT -5
I think it all comes down to the maturity of an individual child. I was able to tell reality from fiction and right from wrong at a very young age. As a result, my parents allowed me to watch pretty much whatever the hell I pleased. I didn't turn into a psychotic killer because I was able to tell that just because a film was violent, didn't make that acceptable behavior in the real world. The majority of children nowadays, though, are imbeciles. Their parents have never bothered teaching them right from wrong, so they see something in a movie or on TV and want to emulate that. (Like the amount of idiotic Jackass clones we saw a number of years back. ) With this assertion, I think the ratings system is a good thing. It may prevent a handful of perfectly intelligent, responsible kids from seeing a film, but it also prevents all the immature fuckwads (and potential future maniacs) from seeing it.
|
|
|
Post by Matttttttttttt on Aug 16, 2008 0:28:40 GMT -5
I think it all comes down to the maturity of an individual child. I was able to tell reality from fiction and right from wrong at a very young age. As a result, my parents allowed me to watch pretty much whatever the hell I pleased. I didn't turn into a psychotic killer because I was able to tell that just because a film was violent, didn't make that acceptable behavior in the real world. The majority of children nowadays, though, are imbeciles. Their parents have never bothered teaching them right from wrong, so they see something in a movie or on TV and want to emulate that. (Like the amount of idiotic Jackass clones we saw a number of years back. ) With this assertion, I think the ratings system is a good thing. It may prevent a handful of perfectly intelligent, responsible kids from seeing a film, but it also prevents all the immature fuckwads (and potential future maniacs) from seeing it. My thoughts exactly. If parents just took the time out to talk to their kids, we wouldn't have to hear about the influence of music and movies on school shootings or idiot kids that kill babies with wrestling moves. Pay a little more attention to your kids retards! Maybe Columbine could have been stopped if the parents checked on their kids a little more often and asked if anything was bothering them. Maybe a 15-year-old boy wouldn't be in jail for life if his parents bothered to tell him wrestling isn't real and he shouldn't perform the moves on an infant. It really irritates me when parents don't take responsibility for their children.
|
|
Coffin Jim
Administrator
What is blood? It is the reason to exist!
Posts: 619
|
Post by Coffin Jim on Aug 16, 2008 13:29:55 GMT -5
My thoughts exactly. If parents just took the time out to talk to their kids, we wouldn't have to hear about the influence of music and movies on school shootings or idiot kids that kill babies with wrestling moves. Pay a little more attention to your kids retards! Yup. It's been said many times before, but I'll say it again: parents are becoming worse as time goes on. We're seeing more and more people becoming parents at a younger age now compared to 50 years ago. Part of it, I think, is because puberty comes earlier, but that's another story. These idiots are having kids when they themselves still have the minds of children. As a consequence, they have no idea how to raise a human being.
|
|
|
Post by Non-Believer Yet Damned on Aug 16, 2008 19:53:41 GMT -5
My thoughts exactly. If parents just took the time out to talk to their kids, we wouldn't have to hear about the influence of music and movies on school shootings or idiot kids that kill babies with wrestling moves. Pay a little more attention to your kids retards! Yup. It's been said many times before, but I'll say it again: parents are becoming worse as time goes on. We're seeing more and more people becoming parents at a younger age now compared to 50 years ago. Part of it, I think, is because puberty comes earlier, but that's another story. These idiots are having kids when they themselves still have the minds of children. As a consequence, they have no idea how to raise a human being. Come on...give me a break. In my parents day kids took off at 6am and came home at 9pm. They spent the day fishing or hiking with a sandwich. When I was a kid, under 10 years old, I was out most of the day, only coming home for meals. Now kids are mollycoddled and have cell phones to check in with their parents. Kids know that they can get away with anything--no real punishment from their parents or the cops. Parents are considered bad if they do what my parents did, or my parents parents. I remember being dropped off at the toystore while my mom and dad did their shopping somewhere else. Now that's a big no no. I don't think parents are any worse today then 50 years ago. The main difference is that in most families, bith parents work.
|
|
Coffin Jim
Administrator
What is blood? It is the reason to exist!
Posts: 619
|
Post by Coffin Jim on Aug 17, 2008 1:19:56 GMT -5
In that sense they may have been worse, yes, but kids being out in public alone was also relatively safer than it is today. It was the norm for children to be out playing all day.
A growing number of parents today are worse in a moral sense. I don't mean to sound like a fundamentalist nut, because I'm not—I hate all religion—but the majority of parents fostered kindness, respect, and discipline in their kids years ago. It was a world where kids were still expected to be kids and adults "ruled," so to speak.
Nowadays, parents expect others to teach their children, whether it be school or the television. Part of it stems from parents not being around, but it also stems from immaturity of the parents themselves. They pawn responsibility off onto strangers. If a child receives a bad grade at school, it's surely the teacher's fault; never the parent's. Parents let kids get away with nearly everything, and as a result, the kids have a false perception of their own maturity.
|
|
|
Post by Non-Believer Yet Damned on Aug 17, 2008 8:48:27 GMT -5
Ithe kids have a false perception of their own maturity. Of that I wholeheartedly agree! A 13 year old honestly thinks (s)he's a grownup.... That was part of the reason that All The Boys Love Mandy Lane pissed me off so much.
|
|
|
Post by Matttttttttttt on Aug 17, 2008 23:29:08 GMT -5
Believe me, I get the fact that many parents have jobs and can't be around their kids all the time. Just because you give your kid a cell phone or send him off to some extra super private school doesn't mean he's going to turn out great either. My point is that parents have to show some love and care for their children. They have to take an interest in their children's activities and monitor what they do (not on a psychotic scale though). Maybe your parents did or didn't tell you that what you're watching isn't realistic or shouldn't be copied, and you might not have needed to be told. I know I wasn't the kind of child who needed to be told not to stab people because I saw it in a movie, but obviously there are some kids out there that DO need to be told. IMO, it's because of parents like theirs that they often turn out the way they do.
|
|