Too Dark for kids?

[adhokk7]

It's not about them growing up and becoming the Joker. It's about them growing up too soon.


Don't take your kids to see this movie. Let them sneak in or pirate it like we had too. At least they'll have earned it.


:doom: :doom: :doom:

This makes no sense whatsoever. In one swing, you're encouraging parents to keep their children shielded from things that will, in your words (whatever they may mean) make them grow up too soon. At the same time, you're essentially encouraging kids (and you *know* there are kids reading this board) to go behind their parents' backs and break their parents' rules. In essence, encouraging those children to grow up too soon (again, whatever that means), but without the guidance of their parents. Talk about screwing a kid up, living like that can't be good for anyone, in my most humble opinion, and is a far more dangerous concept than watching a movie could ever be.

[Doc Samson]

My neice wants to go badly, but there's just no way. Its not even so much the Joker, but Harvey's face is awesome and completely realistic looking as well, but utterly not for a child, in any way. I kept thinking his eyeball might fall out at any second...

[Lots o lafs]

10 and up. I saw it not that scary cept for one scene.

[KangConquers]

I honestly wouldn't take anyone under 13 to see it personally. There's a few graphic disturbing images, and much explicit violent content.

I don't believe in censorship, but I do believe in monitoring what kids watch, and if I had a son or daughter, I would not let them see this movie until they were in their teens.

[Psycho_Sith]

I took my 9 year old son to see it & he loved it, but he's seen worse.

[Spelunking Man]

When I was small, I watched an american werewolf in london (R-rated movie) at home, I became phobic watching the victim with a torn throat (with dangling flesh - yuk!). Yeah, I would not recommend bringing kids to this movie because of the same element - two-face!

[Lots o lafs]

It was about as graphic as the new harry potter(Excluding the magic trick and GREAT BIG FONEY... batman).

T F doesn't look as graphic as the bootleg pic.

[Scar Predator]

It's definitely too dark for young kids. Most kids in the pre-teen and up crowd will be fine. Parents should really think twice about sending kids under 10.

[Lots o lafs]

10 and up should be fine

[Spider-Man '92]

Definitly too dark for kids. It's very suggestive, and very heavy (in my opinion). This movie really borderlines R-Rating.

[terry78]

I think this has less to do with it being too dark for kids than it does people just not wanting kids in the theatre that could possibly be disruptive.

[Ammo]

Early elementary school? No.

Late elementary school? Yes. (4th-5th grade, MAYBE 3rd grade)

C'mon...I remember watching Jerry Springer when I was home sick and my parents were at work. My friends who had HBO would watch porn when we were over.

I think they can handle a PG-13 movie.

[bkey]

A girl I know put this on Facebook:

"To everyone: DO NOT SEE THE DARK KNIGHT. It is the most demonic movie I have ever seen and left me depressed and very upset. It is a very emotional movie and crosses the lines on what is decent and what is not. I do NOT recommend it AT ALL. Save your money and go buy a Holy Bible instead of paying for that trash."

I started cracking up when I read it :D

[Spider-Fan]

People may disagree with me, but I'd let my kids watch it. I watched way worse stuff when I was a kid.

[bkey]

People may disagree with me, but I'd let my kids watch it. I watched way worse stuff when I was a kid.

My little brother is 12, and I wouldn't have a problem letting him see it, but my parents won't let him. My mom says she isn't even going to see it because she thinks it will be too dark for her. :whatever:

[Schlosser85]

Definitely not appropriate for small children IMO. It goes well beyond anything in Batman Begins. The Joker is hilarious at times, but he also has moments where he's absolutely freaking scary, and then there's people getting blown up, and a guy getting half his face burned off.

It depends on the maturity level of the kid of course, but it's definitely more adult-oriented, I think.

Not to mention the plot is pretty complicated and twisty-turny and would lose most small kids anyway.

[Spider-Fan]

My little brother is 12, and I wouldn't have a problem letting him see it, but my parents won't let him. My mom says she isn't even going to see it because she thinks it will be too dark for her. :whatever:

Wow. When I was 3 I was watching stuff like the Alien movies, Robocop, Terminator 1 & 2, etc. These were some of my favorites as a youngster.

[Schlosser85]

Heh, I saw Terminator, Alien, and Die Hard when I was really young too, so maybe I'm being hypocritical.

[CaptainClown]

When I was three I was watching Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, Cool Running, Sandlot and the Rocketeer.

[Vile]

I actually saw several parents taking young kids out when Gordon visits Harvey in the Hospital.

[[A]]

I've got an 11 year old son who is dying to see this. So far, a couple reviewers have stated that this film is a PG-13 stretched to the limit and perhaps should even be R rated. One critic even said that kids below 14 should not see it. Period.

My kid is pretty thick-skinned but I'll probably see it on my own first.

What about the rest of you?
In the showing I got back from 30 minutes ago there was this kid who was taken out by someone older and didn't comeback until 20 minutes before the end--in the final Dent's scene.. I don't know when he went out because I wasn't paying attention to people —obviously— but it wouldn't surprise that he left when TwoFace first showed up, heh heh.. I mean, he was like 7! Stupid parents..

[thedarks0ldier]

My 3-year-old (almost four) second cousin went to watch The Dark Knight dressed up as Batman. He tried to convince his father (my cousin-in-law) to dress up as the Joker.

I went dressed up as the Joker, but they live in El Centro and I live in San Diego.

Point is, the kid loved it. That is an amazing accomplishment to entertain a 3-year-old for almost 3 hours. (Believe me, this kid is not known for his patients.)

Part of me thought bad parenting, another thought awesome parenting.

[KillerBat]

My little brother saw this and had no problem. He is 9 years old. He laughed at a lot of the Joker parts.

I'm 13 and definitely had no problem. This movie isn't as dark as I thought.

[chamber-music]

http://i235.photobucket.com/albums/ee145/xzombieunicornx/20080721.gif

[Raiden]

http://i235.photobucket.com/albums/ee145/xzombieunicornx/20080721.gif

:brucebat::up:

[terry78]

I'd pay regular ticket price for that.

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

All I have to say is after seeing this film three times already, it is definitly not for kids, and I saw a parent take his kid our of the theater after the why so serious part with Gambol, it is pretty brutal!

[djchristensen]

All i know is that I was at a 5pm showing on friday at my local AMC. In comes a young mom with two children probably around 5-7. They sat right in front of me. I friendly told the mom that this movie may not be the best to show these children, the themes are too deep and the Joker is frightening. The kids might not be able to keep focussed either. She got all pissy and told me to mind my own business. Well, 20 minutes in, the kids were whining and not paying attention at all. After The Magic trick and Gambols "why so serious" talk, they got scarred, and started to cry and complain that it's scary. So I leaned foward and told her "I told you so" and she walked them out. Justice at it's finest.

[Carusos Shades]

Well here in Ireland its rated 15A. I'm not sure what that means, I think anyone under 15 has to have a guardian or something. Whats the UK rating, 12A?

[phillyboy]

All i know is that I was at a 5pm showing on friday at my local AMC. In comes a young mom with two children probably around 5-7. They sat right in front of me. I friendly told the mom that this movie may not be the best to show these children, the themes are too deep and the Joker is frightening. The kids might not be able to keep focussed either. She got all pissy and told me to mind my own business. Well, 20 minutes in, the kids were whining and not paying attention at all. After The Magic trick and Gambols "why so serious" talk, they got scarred, and started to cry and complain that it's scary. So I leaned foward and told her "I told you so" and she walked them out. Justice at it's finest.

I salute you, sir. Though I would prefer a machine gun mounted on my seat to enforce movie theater edicate.

[sandmjuggalos]

Ok, so we were some of the first people to say that our son was going to see this. In the end, he didn't want to go. So we got someone else to fill his ticket and well...... I am kind of glad we didn't take him. We saw it in IMAX and I was just so immersed in the plot..... WOW. After all the bellyaching some of the people did on here, I thnk we made the right choice. Not so much for the violence, but the way it went down. I talked about this movie for 3 mos. straight and when I left the theatre, I didn't talk about it for a day and a half. I was in awe. This movie schooled anything this year, but I wouldn't take my child unless it was the drive-in, where he could do his thing.

[Dark Knight]

Yeah, my story is that on saturday my wife and I took my two cousins who are 14 and 15. We were in line and the couple in back of us had what looked to be a 5 or 6 year old. She started crying all of a sudden and me and my wife were staring at eachother and I whispered to her that lets avoid these people when we get our seats.

[Webhead38]

I think kids with average exposure to cable television from 12 on up can handle this movie. There is not much gore in this film, just some suggested acts. The film is brilliant and responsible in it's approach. I've seen alot worse and graphic on regular television.

[CaptainClown]

well its not really the "gore" that is disturbing. Hell this movie is not gory at all just implied acts and certain things are just eerie.

[honest george]

Heck yeah it's too dark for kids. Some dunderhead brought in two little girls with him, probably 4 and 10 years old. They sat there silently, being emotionally scarred for life.

[chamber-music]

Well here in Ireland its rated 15A. I'm not sure what that means, I think anyone under 15 has to have a guardian or something. Whats the UK rating, 12A?

Its 12A in the UK. kids over here are pretty much emotially retarded anyway so this film ain't gonna do any damage

[vicariou5]

Its 12A in the UK. kids over here are pretty much emotially retarded anyway so this film ain't gonna do any damage
:lmao:

[Doc Samson]

I actually thought the Joker came off funnier than I thought he would initially from the early reports. However, even I get tense at that Gamble scene everytime I see it, I think that's truly the scariest Heath was in the whole film, his eyes look so chilling.

That being said, for any kid younger than 10, Two-Face is absolutely too much, if nothing else they better get an award for that, because its flawless, and pretty nasty as well. I guess its just the eyeball, it looks like it could drop at any second....

[contemporarydog]

I don't know why people are taking kids to this. It should be pretty obvious that it's not suitable for kids. It was the same with the Burton one...

[Lauryn2000]

All i know is that I was at a 5pm showing on friday at my local AMC. In comes a young mom with two children probably around 5-7. They sat right in front of me. I friendly told the mom that this movie may not be the best to show these children, the themes are too deep and the Joker is frightening. The kids might not be able to keep focussed either. She got all pissy and told me to mind my own business. Well, 20 minutes in, the kids were whining and not paying attention at all. After The Magic trick and Gambols "why so serious" talk, they got scarred, and started to cry and complain that it's scary. So I leaned foward and told her "I told you so" and she walked them out. Justice at it's finest.


Oh well....you tried.....funny story.

[Lauryn2000]

Parents keep thinking this is the "animated,Adam West or the regular comic book version" of Batman.He's call The Dark Knight for a reason,it's why when alot of us saw the first Spider-Man.It was way to colorful and the Goblin's mask was ridiculous cartoony..darn near laughable....and there was a lot of kids with their parents in there...................................:brucebat:

[pancakespwn]

Took my niece and she didnt go out of the movie crying. She thought the joker "was a scary badman" but she said she really wanted to see it and so I took her.

She said she loved it so I would just take a mature kid.

[TomPiltoff]

All i know is that I was at a 5pm showing on friday at my local AMC. In comes a young mom with two children probably around 5-7. They sat right in front of me. I friendly told the mom that this movie may not be the best to show these children, the themes are too deep and the Joker is frightening. The kids might not be able to keep focussed either. She got all pissy and told me to mind my own business.


Good for her, you should.

[adhokk7]

Good for her, you should.

Agreed. Disruptive children (or adults) is one thing, but the lone fact that a parent decides to take their child (or children) to a movie is no one else's business. Handwringing dogooders...

[Octoberist]

Pirates of the Carribean 3 had twin Asian sisters die on screen (one even got a bullet in the head) for no reason. To me, that's worst than the 'pencil trick', which to me was violent but quirky :)

[The_Raganork]

I don't think it's for kids.


They won't understand the themes from the film. It'll take adults some thinking to figure out.

Deep, Dark and very scary in a psychological way; I mean when Brian Douglass comes on screen and Joker starts taunting him; I was scared; if that was me I'd just die

[terry78]

You haven't seen commercials for toys and kids meals on tv for TDK? I'm still curious as to why people are dumbfounded why parents are bringing kids...because the kids know the movie is out and they have all this **** geared to them on tv and in ads.

[dcpuser]

I don't enjoy telling parents how to raise their own kid but I will say at my theater, parents were bringing in their 8-10 year olds. The movie was no more violent than what kids see on TV anyway so whatever.

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

I really do now after seeing the film three times feel its unnecessary for Toys R Us to have a huge TDK display with all of the toys in the front of the store when you walk in, before I thought nothing of it, but its not a film for kids of that age that play with toys at all. Im a collector and Im glad they have TDK related stuff but I think they should check out the film before deciding months back to have a display for the film targeting it at kids.

[Batman137]

When we have to write about bull like this :


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=A1YourView&xml=/opinion/2008/07/26/do2610.xml


~Batman137

[LegendaryCaleb]

just a dumb parent

[Luchastyle]

even nolan says not to take kids to see it. just because it didn't get an R rating (or the UK equivalent) doesn't mean it's for kids. Batman is the only well known superhero who can have an adult movie. Because he is an adult character. So of course the themes and plot can be very adult and not for kids. This guy just has nothing better to "blog" about.

[beyond_death]

Meh, this stuff was expected.

[Eggyman]

It's stupid.

It's the parents' fault. They should do their homework on things like this. Films cater for an audience; it's up to the moviegoers or their parental guardians to decide whether they are a part of that audience or not.

The film is merely a scapegoat for the bad decision these parents made.

[samsnee]

This should go into the 'Too dark for kids' thread and not its own.

[J-Sentius]

No, The Dark Knight, show kids how the world really is.

There's always psycho's that will do anything - to send a message.

There's always heroes that are painted villian.

[Two-Face]

Well look what happened after Batman Returns, we got Batman Forever and Batman & Robin

Maybe kids should stick with Spidey or Harry Potter.

[Superboy-Prime]

stupid parent plus stupid newspaper equals freaking stupid story

SB-P

[J-Sentius]

Exactly, this is not a kids' movie. WALL-E is enough for the youngsters.

["V"]

After the murderous clown heist, things slip downhill. A man’s face is filleted by a knife, and another’s is burned half-off. A man’s eye is slammed into a pencil. A bomb can be seen crudely stitched inside another man’s stomach, which subsequently explodes. A trussed-up man is bound to a chair and set alight atop a pile of banknotes. A plainly terrorised child is threatened at gunpoint by a man with a melted face. It is all intensely realistic. Oh but don’t worry, folks: there isn’t any nudity.


Yeah, this movie was awesome!

Parents have a responsiblity to research a film before they take their child to see it; the rating is 12-A, which means any child under 12 has to have an adult take them to see it... it's ultimately the adult/parent's fault if they take an underaged child (or one who is not mature enough) to see The Dark Knight.

Many of the cast and crew have said it is not for children. The film's title gives a clue that it isn't going to be all sunshine and puppies.

In today's society children are bombarded with themes and images not suitable for them. They see it on the 24 hour news channels; they see it in the newspapers; they see it on the internet. Where do we draw the line?

Ultimately, parents need to accept more responsibility for their children rather than trying to blame the rest of society.

Oh, and regarding WALL-E, I loved it, but I found it even more depressing than The Dark Knight. The themes of lonlieness and looking for somebody who can understand us was really tragic at times.

[ord0g]

I stopped reading after the first paragraph. The author is plain and simply dumb. Another one of those "pass the buck" kinda parents I would assume.

[Commodore Schmidlapp]

People seem to automatically equate comic movies as kids movies. Anyone with eyes who has the ability to watch the trailers would see that the movie is a bit darker than your kiddie comic fare. Part of the inevitable backlash is WB's fault. They are the ones who push all the toys and kids shirts, making it seem more kid friendly to put more asses in the seats.

[jackjack924]

HA! Don't bother to say it's a fake bomb...I stopped reading after that part. Let's just blame everything but yourself for kid's troubles these days.

[JonnyQ]

She doesn't have the best concept of what 12A means really.

It means take kids to see it IF YOU WANT TO. IT'S YOUR CHOICE.

If you think it's too violent then don't let them see it. Go and see it first by yourself to see what you think.

It's simple isn't it?! What's the point of writing a 3 page article about such bull.

Why are people so stupid these days?

[TheDarkKnight08]

She doesn't have the best concept of what 12A means really.

It means take kids to see it IF YOU WANT TO. IT'S YOUR CHOICE.

If you think it's too violent then don't let them see it. Go and see it first by yourself to see what you think.

It's simple isn't it?! What's the point of writing a 3 page article about such bull.

Why are people so stupid these days?

Exactly. It's the parent's choice to take the kid. As soon as they plant the kid down in the seat, it's their doing. I think the trailers definitely showcase this to be a pretty mature film, so why blame them?

[jackjack924]

Honestly, the kids have their batman movie (Batman Forever, Batman and Robin) why can't we have ours?

[Mrs.J]

Yea this is stupid. You take a chance going to see movies today. Its the parents choice whether or not to take them to see it or not. you saw the trailers. Come on. you cant blame anyone esle but yourselfs for going to take them to watch it.
Hell when i was little we went and saw Terminator 2 in theatres. I was 5-6 and my younger brother was 3!!!! My parents explained to us it wasnt real. But we wanted to see it and we did!! We didnt complain or cry--we thought it was f**kin awesome!!!:oldrazz:
Just talk to your kids!!! geez louise. society these days.

on a side note--a little boy about 10 watched it during my 2nd viewing--scared *****less during the joker scenes. nice :woot: lol. jk:oldrazz:

[wwmanman]

The Critics friend has some twisted kids ...

Concernng 007

"Parents and their open-mouthed children found themselves watching a scene in which a bloodied Bond, stripped naked and tied to a chair, is tortured by having his genitals beaten with a length of rope. A friend of mine was somewhat dismayed afterwards to witness his two young boys, aged nine and seven, diligently re-enacting the torture scene with an outsize teddy bear strapped to a chair and a flail constructed from a knotted dressing gown cord."


Definitely keep them away from the pencils after seeing TDK:hoboj:

["V"]

Definitely keep them away from the pencils after seeing TDK:hoboj:

It will be interesting when the kids go back to school. I bet they'll be asking their parents to buy them lots of new pencils : o

[Spider-Fan]

PG-13 means parents are strongly cautioned, so they were warned.

Though if I were a parent, I'd probably let them watch it, since I used to watch way worse stuff as a child myself. If I could handle it back then, I am sure other kids could.

[I Am The Knight]

Took my niece and she didnt go out of the movie crying. She thought the joker "was a scary badman" but she said she really wanted to see it and so I took her.

She said she loved it so I would just take a mature kid.

LOL! I love it! :woot:

Anyways, I'm planning on taking my nephew to see TDK today. He's 10, and a total brat. Think he'll be OK?

[comic_guy04]

Good for her, you should.

No that ***** deserved to have that happen. I'm a firm believer in "If your gonna be dumb, you gotta be tough" I woulda gave her a nice maniacal Joker laugh as she walked out. It's called "The Dark Knight" lady not "The Happy Meal Seller".

[JayCaz]

I watched TDK for the first time on Thursday, and this couple come in & sit directly in front of me with a girl who looked about 3, maybe 4.

Point one, the kid got bored after like 45 mins & started mumbling, singing etc.

Point two, Joker scared the s**t out of her, one scene where he raises his voice made her shreik & cry for about 10 minutes.

The anger is only just subsiding.

[CaptainClown]

The Critics friend has some twisted kids ...

Concernng 007

"Parents and their open-mouthed children found themselves watching a scene in which a bloodied Bond, stripped naked and tied to a chair, is tortured by having his genitals beaten with a length of rope. A friend of mine was somewhat dismayed afterwards to witness his two young boys, aged nine and seven, diligently re-enacting the torture scene with an outsize teddy bear strapped to a chair and a flail constructed from a knotted dressing gown cord."


Definitely keep them away from the pencils after seeing TDK:hoboj:
HAHHAHAA.

At first I would be cracking up but then I would have to discipline my kids.

[Pfeiffer-Pfan]

Well... little kids got into the cinema where I live, with their parents. This one kid had his batman t-shirt and cap on and I just knew this movie wasn't for him. :csad:


Sure enough... no word of a lie, once the credits rolled we could hear faint crying coming up from the back.. I dunno what set the kid of, maybe it was cause batman didn't get a happy ending or something completely unrelated??

I mean this movie was marketed as being dark... no parent should be upset.

[Mrs.J]

yea thats gotta suck though. if you're that little and you dont get it. why are they chasing batman mama!!??!?!?!?

Poor babies.

[BigCityBoy]

As I said before in another thread, I would let my kids watch this movie. I have seen stuff on regular network tv that was worse than this movie. If you let your kid watch Revenge of the Sith (remember when Anakin got burnt, anyone?), then TDK shouldn't be a problem.

[Quinzel]

my 6 year old sister went with me.

She didn't even flinch when

spoiler
the body hit the window.

so, it's not the AGE, it's the KID.

[bonesawmcgraw]

yea thats gotta suck though. if you're that little and you dont get it. why are they chasing batman mama!!??!?!?!?

Poor babies.

"Because they have to... Because he's the hero that Gotham needs but doesn't deserve... A watchful protector... A Dark knight."

[Retroman]

TDK was given an R Rating here!! And that's pretty shocking for such a liberal country where all the Batman movies so far have been given a 12 (Dutch equivalent of PG-13).

Like many i too was shocked when i read the ratings news but after seeing the movie myself i kind of understand their reasons for doing it. Unlike most movies based on superhero comics TDK is a at times very violent and intense film and i think many parents will have reservations about taking their (younger) kids to see this.

I'm sort of glad with the rating. It may mean less box office revenue but at least you're spared restless kids getting up every 5 minutes in the theater.That's can be pretty annoying just the people who refuse to turn off their mobiles despite the warnings beforehand.:cmad:

[Ace of Knaves]

i would of prefered if they added a little gore or swearing, not because im sick and i like that **** though! i mean it would of added to the realism. its like this programme over here in england called eastenders, its full of all these cockney hardmen and gangsters and the worst things they say is flippin hell and things like that. i just cant take it seriously

[danoyse]

You haven't seen commercials for toys and kids meals on tv for TDK? I'm still curious as to why people are dumbfounded why parents are bringing kids...because the kids know the movie is out and they have all this **** geared to them on tv and in ads.

The marketing is the only thing that annoys my friends with small kids about TDK. None of them are planning to take the kids to see the movie, but they really wish there weren't so many toys and other kid-related stuff since the kids can't see the movie. It just makes it harder for them to explain why they can't see it.

They're not annoyed at the movie at all...but they definitely wished they'd used smarter marketing.

[jed.exodus.89]

wen i went 2 c tdk on weds some couple had a baby less than 1 yrs old and it started pukin at 1 point. this couple obviously assumed tdk should b fine 4 all ages. just thought i would chuck that out there

[I Am The Knight]

yea thats gotta suck though. if you're that little and you dont get it. why are they chasing batman mama!!??!?!?!?

Poor babies.

:hehe:

[regwec]

It was too dark for kids. That's not a bad thing from my perspective, but it does make a bit of a mockery of the ratings system.

The most harrowing moment of the whole film, I thought, was the hand-held camera footage of The Joker humiliating (and implicitly murdering, offscreen) Brian the fake Batman. It looked far too real, and far too unpleasant, for an impressionable mind.

[bullets]

i would of prefered if they added a little gore or swearing, not because im sick and i like that **** though! i mean it would of added to the realism. its like this programme over here in england called eastenders, its full of all these cockney hardmen and gangsters and the worst things they say is flippin hell and things like that. i just cant take it seriously





they do convey what they need to in the movie without actually showing gore or even swearing . the emotion is there and it doesnt seem corny or watered down . at times i would forget this was a pg13 movie .

[Spider-Fan]

This movie didn't need blood/gore. It got the desired effect from all of its violence without it.

[bullets]

It was too dark for kids. That's not a bad thing from my perspective, but it does make a bit of a mockery of the ratings system.

The most harrowing moment of the whole film, I thought, was the hand-held camera footage of The Joker humiliating (and implicitly murdering, offscreen) Brian the fake Batman. It looked far too real, and far too unpleasant, for an impressionable mind.


yeah the joker does get creepy and i thought the pencil trick was violent enough . i still think a ten year old could handle it though.

[danoyse]

It depends on the kids. I know a 9-year-old that would be too scared...but his twin brother would probably be fine with it.

[Retroman]

The marketing is the only thing that annoys my friends with small kids about TDK. None of them are planning to take the kids to see the movie, but they really wish there weren't so many toys and other kid-related stuff since the kids can't see the movie. It just makes it harder for them to explain why they can't see it.

They're not annoyed at the movie at all...but they definitely wished they'd used smarter marketing.
Yeah that's what makes it so much harder. They've got a tie-in deal with Burger King over here where you get free TDK toys with the kids meal. Many of the small kids who buy this will want to see the film but they can't.:o

Jon Favreau said a while back that he had reservations about taking his young ones to see it too.

[terry78]

As semi-raunchy as Iron Man got, it was still pretty family friendly.

[Slain]

Age doesn't matter. It depends on what kind of kid he is, my 8 year old brother went with us, and he loves Batman... He was nearly speechless after the movie because he loved it so much, and thought the joker was a cool villian. It all depends. I also know 12 year olds who would be scared to death by this movie as well.

[terry78]

I'm 30, and the only thing that really made me jump was the Batman slam against the window. That **** would get anybody, though. :p

[regwec]

It made me jump, and it gave the nasty humiliation/murder footage that followed an even more disturbing psychological ambience.

Very effective dramatically, but too effective for most little-uns, to my mind.

[danoyse]

Yeah that's what makes it so much harder. They've got a tie-in deal with Burger King over here where you get free TDK toys with the kids meal. Many of the small kids who buy this will want to see the film but they can't.:o

Jon Favreau said a while back that he had reservations about taking his young ones to see it too.

We have those promos here too. I was at Kmart and they had a TDK display at the front of the store with all the candy and cereal Batman appeared on, along with school supplies and beach toys.

Luckily my friend's son is 4 and doesn't really understand that there is a new movie out. He just loves getting anything with Batman on it, and they can get away with it for now. But my other friends' kids are between 6-9 and they know all about the new movie, and that makes it harder for them.

[Slain]

We have those promos here too. I was at Kmart and they had a TDK display at the front of the store with all the candy and cereal Batman appeared on, along with school supplies and beach toys.

Luckily my friend's son is 4 and doesn't really understand that there is a new movie out. He just loves getting anything with Batman on it, and they can get away with it for now. But my other friends' kids are between 6-9 and they know all about the new movie, and that makes it harder for them.

It really surprises me that Parents haven't b*tched about this one yet. I mean, for Batman Returns, the Burger King toys were pulled, and just about all of the marketing for kids was, because parents thought it was too dark with too many sexual themes as well. I mean, this one is pretty dark too, why aren't the parents complaining? :whatever:

[regwec]

An evil clown torturing and murdering someone whilst filming the fun is obviously less troubling to a young boy than an attractive (clothed) woman sitting on a man's pelvis.

[danoyse]

It really surprises me that Parents haven't b*tched about this one yet. I mean, for Batman Returns, the Burger King toys were pulled, and just about all of the marketing for kids was, because parents thought it was too dark with too many sexual themes as well. I mean, this one is pretty dark too, why aren't the parents complaining? :whatever:

Well, I think they kind of know the drill by now what to expect from the Batman movies that they don't get as worked up over it. Even with all the TDK stuff, there's a ton of age-appropriate Batman stuff for younger kids that they can still get their Batman fix without worrying as TDK as their only Batman outlet.

[Bat-Mite]

An evil clown torturing and murdering someone whilst filming the fun is obviously less troubling to a young boy than an attractive (clothed) woman sitting on a man's pelvis.Sadly, that's very true to the mindset of many parents these days, especially here in America. I saw parents taking little children to the Passion of the Christ when that was in theaters, but the same parents would probably consider the Rocky Horror Picture Show to be one of the most evil movies ever made.

[Aethea]

There was this young lady at Target lining up to pay infront of me and her little 5 year old was sitting in the cart deciding between two Batman figures. I asked the lady if she had taken her little one to see the movie and said yes and smiled. I do not think this movie is too dark for kids. I mean come on, I saw exorcist at the theater when I was a kid! I think if adults are attracted to the film and they just so happen to have kids, the whole family will go. I think Batman creates a nice balance between the older crowd and the kids. Keeping things from children will only want to make them want the forbidden even more.

[regwec]

There's a difference between prohibiting someone from doing something and actively endorsing it. I do not contend that every child would be disturbed by the film, but the film in general clearly wasn't angled at them, and certain sequences are clearly intended to be disturbing.

[Paste Pot Pete]

It was definitely the least kid-friendly of the Batfilms.

Returns was dark and somewhat violent, but it was done in a more cartoonish fashion. The Penguin was scary, but the kind of scary that kids like (i.e. oozing black goo scary). He was lewd and crude but all of that stuff went over kids' heads.

TDK is just rough. I loved it obviously, but it's rough for kids. Would I take my kids to see it (if I had any)? A ten year old, of course. A six year old? Probably not.

[danoyse]

There was this young lady at Target lining up to pay infront of me and her little 5 year old was sitting in the cart deciding between two Batman figures. I asked the lady if she had taken her little one to see the movie and said yes and smiled. I do not think this movie is too dark for kids. I mean come on, I saw exorcist at the theater when I was a kid! I think if adults are attracted to the film and they just so happen to have kids, the whole family will go. I think Batman creates a nice balance between the older crowd and the kids. Keeping things from children will only want to make them want the forbidden even more.

I would definitely not consider this a whole family-type film. There's a lot of intense scary stuff in this movie, and if you have a kid that's going to get scared, I wouldn't take them. It's not worth them waking up with nightmares in the middle of the night.

It's not a matter of banning it, it's just a matter of waiting until they're a little older and can handle the intensity of it better--or at the very least just waiting until DVD when you just turn it off if they get too scared.

[Paste Pot Pete]

One has to admit though, kids/families are sent very mixed messages when it comes to these movies.

It's fine to make a Batman movie targeted to adults, especially when you don't use deceptive marketing (the trailers/tv spots made the tone of the film very clear).

But it's all the supplemental marketing that throws the wrench in. How can we tell our kids they can't see the Batman movie when there's hundreds of toys, candy, cereal boxes, backpacks and kids clothing out there stamped with the DK logo?

It's like dangling a steak in front of a dog.

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

With all of the very dark tones in TDK and the amount of gritty violence, are you surprised that there havent been any parent protests or anything of the kind so far (other than the PETA thing I posted about Batman beating dogs).

Im just really curious cause I myself have seen during the viewing of TDK people take their kids out of the theater because it was too violent, and they made the mistake to take their kids to see it.

I know we have a "Too Violent for Kids" thread, and if merging is necessary so be it, I just thought its kind of weird that we havent seen any backlash so far on the violence of the film, from parent groups or anyone so far.

We cant say the film wasnt targeted to kids at all in any way, cause if you walk into Toys R Us there is a HUGE TDK display, the same for Wal-Mart, Kay bee, K-Mart etc. Basically the places kids will be, so they see it and it makes them want to see the film.

Thoughts, ideas, comments?

-DV

[The Chris]

honestly yes, but the fact that the film is great may help, unlike most complaints of darkness and violence in movies.

[Paradyme]

This is funny to me because I can't believe these parents would do this but while watching the movie it got to the scene in the hospital with Joker and Two-Face a little 1-year old started crying. I felt bad but just couldn't help but laugh at it.

In my opinion it's not that violent. I've seen worse things plus there is a reason it's rated PG-13.

[Ace of Knaves]

yea to be honest with all the hoopla before hand i was sorta underwhelmed with the violence, i thought there would be much more. like revenge of the sith we see people getting there heads and limbs cut of, people melting from electrocution and someone burning half to death. it could be said star wars is more fantasy but to me violence is violence and i would of like to see more in TDK. not because i'm sick but for realism sake, when joker shoots the banks manager at the start right in the gut there is no blood atall and i think at least a little bit of blood is necsesary there.

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

TDK violence was very realistic and had a dark feel to it, the violence in ROTS was very very cartoony, and mostly CG garbage.

[Anita18]

I know we have a "Too Violent for Kids" thread, and if merging is necessary so be it, I just thought its kind of weird that we havent seen any backlash so far on the violence of the film, from parent groups or anyone so far.
I think it's mostly because it isn't really all that violent. There are explosions and guns and knives and such, but not a lot of actual violence is shown on screen. The Joker likes to talk about using knives, but we never actually get to see a knife make injurious contact with anyone on screen.

What makes it dark and frightening is mostly the tension, and the fact you care about what happens to the characters.

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

So putting a gun to a kids head isnt violent then?

[Ace of Knaves]

TDK violence was very realistic and had a dark feel to it, the violence in ROTS was very very cartoony, and mostly CG garbage.


yea i do sorta agree with that. but even if it is cgi you still see people getting decapatated, melted and burned to a cinder. i just thought that to add to the realism there should of been a bit more blood. like the scene i mentioned, a shot to the gut would bleed prefusely, im not saying show gallons of blood but there has to be some at least.

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

yea i do sorta agree with that. but even if it is cgi you still see people getting decapatated, melted and burned to a cinder. i just thought that to add to the realism there should of been a bit more blood. like the scene i mentioned, a shot to the gut would bleed prefusely, im not saying show gallons of blood but there has to be some at least.

I dont think they were allowed to show any blood because of how far they pushed the violence as it was, and blood is crossing into R territory for the most part.

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

yea i do sorta agree with that. but even if it is cgi you still see people getting decapatated, melted and burned to a cinder. i just thought that to add to the realism there should of been a bit more blood. like the scene i mentioned, a shot to the gut would bleed prefusely, im not saying show gallons of blood but there has to be some at least.

Dude the CGI in ROTS is so fake and cheesy any kid can tell its fake, I can definitly tell Lucas' people at ILM dropped the ball on that one.

[Anita18]

So putting a gun to a kids head isnt violent then?
No. Scary, yes, but not violent.

Considering how much violence DID happen in the story, they didn't show a lot of it on screen.

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

No. Scary, yes, but not violent.

Considering how much violence DID happen in the story, they didn't show a lot of it on screen.

Come on, seriously a gun to anyones head is considered violence, scary ya that too, but especially to a kid, threatening someones life is more violent than alot of things we see in movies.

[adhokk7]

Come on, seriously a gun to anyones head is considered violence, scary ya that too, but especially to a kid, threatening someones life is more violent than alot of things we see in movies.

No, Anita's right.

Main Entry:vi·o·lent http://www.merriam-webster.com/images/audio.gif (javascript:popWin('/cgi-bin/audio.pl?violen02.wav=violent'))Pronunciation: \-lənt\ Function:adjective Etymology:Middle English, from Anglo-French, from Latin violentus; akin to Latin vis strength — more at vim (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/vim)Date:14th century 1: marked by extreme force or sudden intense activity <a violent attack>2 a: notably furious or vehement <a violent denunciation> b: extreme (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/extreme), intense (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/intense) <violent pain> <violent colors>3: caused by force : not natural <a violent death>4 a: emotionally agitated to the point of loss of self-control <became violent after an insult> b: prone to commit acts of violence (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/violence) <violent prison inmates>
— vi·o·lent·ly adverb


It wasn't violent.

[Anita18]

Come on, seriously a gun to anyones head is considered violence, scary ya that too, but especially to a kid, threatening someones life is more violent than alot of things we see in movies.
I dunno, I consider violence to be more physically forceful. :oldrazz:

Merriam-Webster says: "the use of brute strength to cause harm to a person or property."

So yeah, unless Two-Face had actually shot or hit the kid instead of just threatening him with the gun, it isn't violence.

The most violent piece of film I've seen in recent memory is the Punisher footage from Comic Con, and that was like, 2 minutes long. :oldrazz:

[Ace of Knaves]

why what happens in that? the only reason i'll even consider seeing the new punisher is because its got that legend out of the wire as jigsaw. hes da fooking man!!!

[Anita18]

why what happens in that? the only reason i'll even consider seeing the new punisher is because its got that legend out of the wire as jigsaw. hes da fooking man!!!
See for yourself. :cwink: I actually didn't go to the panel at SDCC, but IGN put up the footage.

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/37630

It's pretty much a redband trailer (which is why you have to enter your birthdate), and there's a lot of blood and violence. Some guy gets a table leg through the eye.

[Ace of Knaves]

oh man that actually looks absolutly bad ass!! jig-saw looks sickening, you could never tell that was dominic west.

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

Well I still consider it a violent act personally, If I did that in real life to a kid, put a gun to his head and threatened him, it would be considered violent in some way or another, and I would be put in jail for it, for a VIOLENT crime.

[Anita18]

oh man that actually looks absolutly bad ass!! jig-saw looks sickening, you could never tell that was dominic west.
I thought it was overdone, and I was sorta bracing myself for the next clip of sickeningly violent footage. :oldrazz:

It seems like a collection of R-rated moments from the film, than anything else.

[Anita18]

Well I still consider it a violent act personally, If I did that in real life to a kid, put a gun to his head and threatened him, it would be considered violent in some way or another, and I would be put in jail for it, for a VIOLENT crime.
By definition, just threatening someone isn't violence unless you actually end up DOING something to them, but in legal terms, I'm not so sure. It gets complicated then, because you have to factor in intent and what-would-have-happened-if-Batman-hadn't-stopped-him etc etc etc. :oldrazz:

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

By definition, just threatening someone isn't violence unless you actually end up DOING something to them, but in legal terms, I'm not so sure. It gets complicated then, because you have to factor in intent and what-would-have-happened-if-Batman-hadn't-stopped-him etc etc etc. :oldrazz:

Im not saying your wrong Anita and I usually 100% agree with everything you post, but some things to me are just crossing the line, ya know?

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

I thought it was overdone, and I was sorta bracing myself for the next clip of sickeningly violent footage. :oldrazz:

It seems like a collection of R-rated moments from the film, than anything else.

Not to turn this into a Punisher thread, but so far Ive liked what ive seen though a little too over the top, Im just curious as to why they would show so much of the violent footage so early before the films release.

[obiwan]

TDK joker and BR penguin are the stuff nightmares are made of.


but i still think BRn is the darkest batman film to date, even with all the weird joker stuff in TDK. that catwoman revival scene, creepy as heck with the cats bites off her fingers, UGH! and penguin at the end with all the blood and ooze coming from him, and the crispy max shreck at the end, and little things like that. for example, a scene that always creeped me out for sme reason as a kid was when max shreck comes up the stairs to see penguin and the camera slowly moves over so you can see penguin from the side, it was the little things. i also hated when he bit the guys nose, and the severed hand of shrecks partner. that was a great movie as an ADULT, but that sh** scared me as a kid. there was none of that kind of imagery in TDK, save for some creepy joker scenes.

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

^
I guess I could agree with that to a point.

[DACrowe]

I'd say it is too violent for under 10. In general 10 and up should be able to handle it as there is no gore or lingering shots of violence, but the movie is very intense and never lets up its tension and there is a plethora of "PG-13" violence that feels more real than violence in a lot of R-rated films. Plus the themes of the movie, like what Joker says about humanity, people trying to kill like animals for Mr. Reese and the entire Harvey Dent storyline may be too dark and grim for some.

But parents know their kids best and know if they are the kind that frighten easily or not. But something tells me that 10 and up can handle this movie.

[Anita18]

but i still think BRn is the darkest batman film to date, even with all the weird joker stuff in TDK. that catwoman revival scene, creepy as heck with the cats bites off her fingers, UGH! and penguin at the end with all the blood and ooze coming from him, and the crispy max shreck at the end, and little things like that. for example, a scene that always creeped me out for sme reason as a kid was when max shreck comes up the stairs to see penguin and the camera slowly moves over so you can see penguin from the side, it was the little things. i also hated when he bit the guys nose, and the severed hand of shrecks partner. that was a great movie as an ADULT, but that sh** scared me as a kid.
Crispy Max Shreck still gives me the willies. :o

TDK Two-Face was easier to stomach than lots of things Burton did in BR.

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

Penguin's black goo probably made it pretty hard to eat a bag of popcorn in the theater when BR was released lol.

[Nepenthes]

I still believe the black goo was the main reason we got the Schumacher movies :whatever:. Seriously, that was the tipping point.

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

I still believe the black goo was the main reason we got the Schumacher movies :whatever:. Seriously, that was the tipping point.

It was definitly one of them, but there were ALOT of reasons why WB chose to lighten up the franchise.

[DACrowe]

The ending with the tragic tone that featured Batman losing as Catwoman refuses him and leaves him in sorrow and loneliness after she cuts his face, kills Schreck which Batman tried to stop. He then witnesses a tragic death to the most repulsive monster in a Batman movie yet (Burton's Penguin) and it is very sad and poingant and then the noir-ish ending with Batman alone on Christmas Eve doubting the concept of heroes.

That ending is bleaker than even TDK's. Combine that with black goo, the ugliness of Penguin and yet pathetic sympathy he received (even after biting peoplee's noses off), hs scheme to murder children and the black humor of finding dead body parts in sewers and Catwoman going crazy with no redemption and Batman getting framed with the murder of the Ice Queen and again no redemption....

that was one ****ing dark movie.

[Ace of Knaves]

yea not a lot of people liked returns but i loved it. i understand people saying its just a tim burton film with batman in it, but before that i dont think burton ever went that dark and twisted. the whole plot of him kidnapping the children and drowning them was really quite disturbing.

[Bat-Mite]

I love Returns, but think it's kind of pointless to try to say it's darker than TDK. For one thing, Returns was a lot more cartoony than TDK, even in its darkest moments (the Shreck corpse was a cartoon-like corpse just like the one of the electrocuted guy from '89).

In TDK, we have Joker shoving a pencil through a man's eye, slicing a guy's mouth open and killing him. We see a fake Batman murdered and his corpse hanged against the side of a building then are exposed to the humiliation that he experienced prior to being possibly tortured and murdered. Then we see a judge blown up in a car bomb and the commissioner of police drinking acid. Then this is followed by the love of Bruce's life getting blown to bits, and the guy who is his one hope for Gotham's future becoming deformed and turning into a homicidal maniac, to such lengths that he threatens to kill an innocent child. And then, of course, Batman knocks him off the edge of the building to his implied death. And at the end of the day, our hero is on the run from the police, while he'd been presumably forgiven by them in Returns after exposing the Penguin for what he was.

I guess it ultimately comes down as to what you consider dark as to which film is darker, but even Returns had a tiny ray of hope by revealing at the end that Catwoman was still alive and mentally whole now (at least, if we are to judge by the condition of her costume). TDK had no such ray of hope, unless you count Gordon's speech about Dent. But even that was told as a lie to the public.

[terry78]

There's a difference betweeen morbid campy dark and gritty real world dark. The former was more of a fun type of morbid, like dark humor.

[obiwan]

in some ways Returns was even more of a satire at times, with that whole political thing with the penguin. the movie had alot to say about society, which is why i consider Returns to be a deep film as well as being a VERY dark movie. but there is no denying that both BR and TDK are the darkest chapters of both interpretations.

[El Payaso]

I still believe the black goo was the main reason we got the Schumacher movies :whatever:. Seriously, that was the tipping point.

Actually it was execs' bad decisions.

[Fenrir]

The ending with the tragic tone that featured Batman losing as Catwoman refuses him and leaves him in sorrow and loneliness after she cuts his face, kills Schreck which Batman tried to stop. He then witnesses a tragic death to the most repulsive monster in a Batman movie yet (Burton's Penguin) and it is very sad and poingant and then the noir-ish ending with Batman alone on Christmas Eve doubting the concept of heroes.

That ending is bleaker than even TDK's. Combine that with black goo, the ugliness of Penguin and yet pathetic sympathy he received (even after biting peoplee's noses off), hs scheme to murder children and the black humor of finding dead body parts in sewers and Catwoman going crazy with no redemption and Batman getting framed with the murder of the Ice Queen and again no redemption....

that was one ****ing dark movie.

Yup, and that's why I absolutely love Batman Returns. It was the one to break the mold just when people were starting to get used to formulaic comic book movies. I just wish the film's camp and silliness (a.k.a Burton) factor was down a few notches. That would've easily made it the superhero film to beat for years.

[Kryptongurl84]

As long as your kid is well behaved and knows to be quiet when there is a movie playing, then I would say they are more than welcome! Depending on the age they may not get a lot of it. I remember Christian Bale saying the appropriate age being like 9 or 10.

:hq:

[mrardente]

I had promised my niece along time ago that I would take her to see it. She is 6. She loved the movie. Of course with her parents permission. she might have issues later in life because of it. You gotta break these kids early

[tuffenoughtoroc]

I have been watching Batman Returns since I was like, 4. It did scare the crap out of me the first couple times I watched it, but it all worked out and I turned out just fine *twitch twitch*:woot:

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

I still love BR, its still one of my favs, not as close as TDK or BB but still up there, yes and I admit it has to do with nostalgic value to a point.

[tuffenoughtoroc]

^I'm gonna go watch it right now!

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

^
Enjoy it my friend! This is the Summer of the Bat!

[Keymaker]

So putting a gun to a kids head isnt violent then?
Wtf? That's like saying it's a rape because I have a boner while seeing some hot babes at the beach or something :woot:

[theShape]

I'd say 10 and up for TDK, unless your kid's a pansy and can't handle a film like this. I know I could have at that age, even younger.

[ForestAflame]

For some reason, all the kids I know actually found TDK less disturbing than BR.

[DACrowe]

I love Returns, but think it's kind of pointless to try to say it's darker than TDK. For one thing, Returns was a lot more cartoony than TDK, even in its darkest moments (the Shreck corpse was a cartoon-like corpse just like the one of the electrocuted guy from '89).

In TDK, we have Joker shoving a pencil through a man's eye, slicing a guy's mouth open and killing him. We see a fake Batman murdered and his corpse hanged against the side of a building then are exposed to the humiliation that he experienced prior to being possibly tortured and murdered. Then we see a judge blown up in a car bomb and the commissioner of police drinking acid. Then this is followed by the love of Bruce's life getting blown to bits, and the guy who is his one hope for Gotham's future becoming deformed and turning into a homicidal maniac, to such lengths that he threatens to kill an innocent child. And then, of course, Batman knocks him off the edge of the building to his implied death. And at the end of the day, our hero is on the run from the police, while he'd been presumably forgiven by them in Returns after exposing the Penguin for what he was.

I guess it ultimately comes down as to what you consider dark as to which film is darker, but even Returns had a tiny ray of hope by revealing at the end that Catwoman was still alive and mentally whole now (at least, if we are to judge by the condition of her costume). TDK had no such ray of hope, unless you count Gordon's speech about Dent. But even that was told as a lie to the public.

I never said BR as a whole was darker. I think TDK was. But I think BR ends on a much more depressing note and a real downer. And the movie is very nightmarish which may speak to kids just as well as realism. Kids don't see the world as we do and the Penguin and the evil **** he does can seem very real.

But I stand by BR has the bleakest ending to a superhero movie to date and that is the clencher as to why Burton did not come back. Also, I'll say the pencil trick is so fast it is just really "Holy crap I can't believe he did that" than really disturbing. I'll grant you his other killings but I think his murder with a pen on City Hall in B'89 as well as the guy getting electrocuted into a skeleton though "cartoony" (I'd say comic booky as he does that **** all the time in the comics) is still pretty grim and it lingers on the violence far more. It can do so as it is over-the-top and can dwell on the evil the Joker does without getting an R as opposed to what Nolan did, but again to a child that is pretty scary stuff because they cannot distinguish between realistic and unrealistic. My sister when she was seven had nightmares for two weeks after watching B'89 as a kid because of the electrocution scene.

[terry78]

I would think the earlier Burton killings would be even more disturbing for kids because the way the people are killed are done in such a humorous fashion. You don't expect things like that to kill people.

[baerrtt]

I would think the earlier Burton killings would be even more disturbing for kids because the way the people are killed are done in such a humorous fashion. You don't expect things like that to kill people.

People being killed humorously onscreen is not more disturbing than the playing death seriously without any camp or sense of surrealism (Burton's movies). Only very little children would find BR more disturbing than TDK simply because it's more visually dark than the latter film.

The exaggerated sets, the mere presence of the penguins and despite what one poster has noted the fact that Catwoman is still alive at the end (if she was definitively killed off it the claim that BR has a bleaker ending than TDK would actually be justified) takes the edge of the alleged 'darkness' parents in 92 claimed they saw.

[Max Newlander]

I personally think TDK is by far the darkest movie in the Franchise. The violence is tangible and plausible, it all feels real. BR feels anything other than real. Plus the inclusion of the Joker and his Knife play was extremely dark, especially with knife/youth crime being such a hot potato subject at the moment (I live in th UK)

TDK plays it straight rather than the "silly" almost feel to BR, which to me makes it much darker. IMO.....

[Ace of Knaves]

i think it would be appropriate for 4 year olds.

[ultimatefan]

I think parents just need to be a little discerning, I mean, know your own frikking kids. There are ten year-olds who won´t mind the more intense content, there are thirteen year-old ones who´ll have nightmares.

I know that, after TDK - and 300 too -, I don´t wanna hear ANYMORE of that soccer mom-obsessed talk that "that movie is too dark, too adult to be really huge at the box office". Movies don´t have to be totally neutered and wussed out to appeal to larger audiences.

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

Either way guys, Im glad this film wasnt targeted to kids at all.

[Ace of Knaves]

yea i GLAD theres even a debate on this really, i mean im glad nolan and co didnt pussy foot around the source material. this is the best interpritation they could do and it makes me happy that they didnt feel the need to make it a little softer, it takes balls to make a movie like this and boy has their gamble paid off.

[regwec]

I agree with that, but I don't think there is any doubt that the studio has strained every fibre in the rulebook in order to keep the movie's rating down. What you see on screen is not enough to edge the rating up, but the subject matter is more adult than practically any thriller or horror movie you care to mention.

[terry78]

People being killed humorously onscreen is not more disturbing than the playing death seriously without any camp or sense of surrealism (Burton's movies). Only very little children would find BR more disturbing than TDK simply because it's more visually dark than the latter film.

The exaggerated sets, the mere presence of the penguins and despite what one poster has noted the fact that Catwoman is still alive at the end (if she was definitively killed off it the claim that BR has a bleaker ending than TDK would actually be justified) takes the edge of the alleged 'darkness' parents in 92 claimed they saw.

Depends on the kid, man.

[Franklin Richards]

No kid should watch the Sophie's Choice scene. It's barely suitable for adults.


Don't take your kids to see Dark Knight please.


:doom: :doom: :doom:

[obiwan]

i think the fact that burtons movies made all that killing in a humourous fashion made it more dark. its like, the pencil scene in TDK i would put on par with the scene in BR when penguin shoots the clown after he doesnt want to kill sleeping children. its dark humour in the killings. in fact, alot of moments while watching ledgers joker, i was reminded of devito's gruesome penguin. the way he killed, in that weird gross fashion, it was very smiliar. but while TDK had a more adult-themed feel to it, BR i think is just an all around darker movie, because it isnt some realistic crime drama. not that TDK wasnt dark, but it was more "serious" then dark. BR wasnt as serious with the dialogue and the story, but at the same time it WAS serious, it just didnt take the subject matter extremly seriously like nolan did. it had some fun with the material, which is why i love that movie.

ppl like to say burtons movies werent serious, but i mean look at the schumacher movies. THOSE movies werent serious at all! they were so light and kiddie, it made the burton films look like citizen kane in comparison, despite Forevers bruce wayne flashback stuff.

[adhokk7]

Don't take your kids to see Dark Knight please.



Can I just take your kids instead? :hehe:

[Anita18]

BBC article on the rating and some complaints from parents:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7540292.stm

Apparently even though the content was dark, the clever editing managed to snag a lower rating. Bwahahahaha. :hehe:

[Banquet]

yea i GLAD theres even a debate on this really, i mean im glad nolan and co didnt pussy foot around the source material. this is the best interpritation they could do and it makes me happy that they didnt feel the need to make it a little softer, it takes balls to make a movie like this and boy has their gamble paid off.

The first thing I thought when I saw some of the scenes is "where is the blood? there should have been blood!" Later I read in the shooting script that there was blood... the Joker was even supposed to spit a tooth out during the interrogation scene. So to say Nolan wasn't pussy footing around with the content doesn't seem entirely true. heh.

[CaptainClown]

The first thing I thought when I saw some of the scenes is "where is the blood? there should have been blood!" Later I read in the shooting script that there was blood... the Joker was even supposed to spit a tooth out during the interrogation scene. So to say Nolan wasn't pussy footing around with the content doesn't seem entirely true. heh.
i hope they shot that and are going to put it in sometime.

[Ace of Knaves]

I agree with that, but I don't think there is any doubt that the studio has strained every fibre in the rulebook in order to keep the movie's rating down. What you see on screen is not enough to edge the rating up, but the subject matter is more adult than practically any thriller or horror movie you care to mention.

yea reg i agree with this, to a certain extent at least. i dont think Nolan is the sorta director who would let studios interfeer too much. IMO Nolan would of maybe been happy with a 15 or at least didnt set out to aim for a 12 from the begining. i just dont think hes the type of guy who would sacrifice art or what he really wants to do by watering it down for extra revenue.

[Ace of Knaves]

The first thing I thought when I saw some of the scenes is "where is the blood? there should have been blood!" Later I read in the shooting script that there was blood... the Joker was even supposed to spit a tooth out during the interrogation scene. So to say Nolan wasn't pussy footing around with the content doesn't seem entirely true. heh.

is this for real? where did you read the shooting script? if it is true its blown my whole theory on Nolan getting influenced out the water!! lol

[Lots o lafs]

10 and up. not that bad. cept for the magic trick.

[ForestAflame]

Personally, I think a lot of people are looking at things from an adult perspective and how much TDK affected them due to the intensity in comparison to BR which seemed campy and over-the-top.

I don't think kids would really think "Oh, the Penguin looks cartoonish when he bites the guy's nose off and blood squirts everywhere so that's fine, but when the Joker kills someone with a pencil bloodlessly in a fraction of a second, it's too realistic for me to handle!"

Tone means a lot, but it's always the end result. When I was a kid, I got freaked out by Catwoman scratching a guy's face because of all the blood. If that wasn't there, tone or not, I wouldn't have been too scared. I mean, look at TDK. It's making money, and besides a few whiny complaints over in the UK, it's not really under the scrutiny of overprotective parents.

I think people are overestimating how kids would react to the darkness in TDK. Most little kids seem to love it because it enthralls them instead of disturbing them.

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

BBC article on the rating and some complaints from parents:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7540292.stm

Apparently even though the content was dark, the clever editing managed to snag a lower rating. Bwahahahaha. :hehe:

cool find Anita!

[Anita18]

The first thing I thought when I saw some of the scenes is "where is the blood? there should have been blood!" Later I read in the shooting script that there was blood... the Joker was even supposed to spit a tooth out during the interrogation scene. So to say Nolan wasn't pussy footing around with the content doesn't seem entirely true. heh.
LOL, that would have made it an R, I think!

Not surprised that they wrote in violence and then dialed it back. Easier to take out stuff than to add in stuff.

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

Well I know some of us heard Nolan say that Heath was pushing for more violence but he had it tone it down for them, that he wanted The Joker to be as violent and sinister as possible.

[adhokk7]

Personally, I think a lot of people are looking at things from an adult perspective and how much TDK affected them due to the intensity in comparison to BR which seemed campy and over-the-top.

I don't think kids would really think "Oh, the Penguin looks cartoonish when he bites the guy's nose off and blood squirts everywhere so that's fine, but when the Joker kills someone with a pencil bloodlessly in a fraction of a second, it's too realistic for me to handle!"

Tone means a lot, but it's always the end result. When I was a kid, I got freaked out by Catwoman scratching a guy's face because of all the blood. If that wasn't there, tone or not, I wouldn't have been too scared. I mean, look at TDK. It's making money, and besides a few whiny complaints over in the UK, it's not really under the scrutiny of overprotective parents.

I think people are overestimating how kids would react to the darkness in TDK. Most little kids seem to love it because it enthralls them instead of disturbing them.

I completely agree with this, especially the last two sentences. What's especially funny to me about the "too dark for kids" crowd is how they seem to universally and absolutely know what's "good" for kids and have no problems whatsoever sharing their vapidly authoritarian opinion with every parent in the world. A parent who knows the movie is too dark for their own kid(s) is fine, but the whole "too dark for kids" crowd is both amusing and kind of frightening. :whatever:

[bobguy64]

For once, Batman fans got a movie that wasn't a two hour toy commercial.

It's about time.








.

[TheBat812]

I would think the earlier Burton killings would be even more disturbing for kids because the way the people are killed are done in such a humorous fashion. You don't expect things like that to kill people.
Burton scared me as a child because of how creepily unrealistic everybody was and my imagination ran wild. TDK would scare me because it felt so real.

[regwec]

10 and up. not that bad. cept for the magic trick.
I don't think that the pencil trick is that disturbing. It happens so quickly that you can barely work out what happened, and both The Joker and his audience seem fairly unphased by it. Much more harrowing is the video-cam footage shown on the news programme, after the shock of the appearance of the dead Batman, in which The Joker mocks, humiliates, tortures and seemingly murders his victim, shouting and giggling all the while. It's incredibly forboding, very convincing, and you know full well that perverse murders have occured in that very fashion.

[the GRIN Reaper]

The pencil scene is fairly disturbing, not on the level of the "call out of Batman" video on the news, but very disturbing none the less. After that scene the girl I was with was SCARED to open her eyes in any scene with the Joker and she's a grown ass woman. This movie is definetely not for kids 13 / 14 and under.

[the GRIN Reaper]

For once, Batman fans got a movie that wasn't a two hour toy commercial.
Neither was Batman Begins, B89, or Batman Returns. Really ...

[Crook]

The pencil scene is fairly disturbing, not on the level of the "call out of Batman" video on the news, but very disturbing none the less. After that scene the girl I was with was SCARED to open her eyes in any scene with the Joker and she's a grown ass woman.
Apparently not grown enough. :funny:

This movie is definetely not for kids 13 / 14 and under.
Completely disagreed. My little sis who's 11 is the biggest pussy I know and she thoroughly enjoyed the movie without being left jarred or terrified. Ditto for other 10 year olds I know that went to see it, and some 12 and 13 year olds that were with my sis.

[the GRIN Reaper]

Apparently not grown enough. :funny:

Uhhh ... :huh:

There were plenty of adults left disturbed by various visuals, and certainly jarred by the themes. Your dumb ass sister probably didn't understand the implications, meanings, and relevance to the world she lives in ... especially being a snot nosed New Yorker.

[Crook]

You're so lucky you're an only child. :dry:

[the GRIN Reaper]

Ditto for other 10 year olds I know that went to see it, and some 12 and 13 year olds that were with my sis.
Also ... you literally sat and asked them if they were disturbed? You're full of ****, Crook. haha

As if they would admit it to someone older or even at all? When I saw a scary movie at that age or younger, I'd never admit to being scared, especially to someone older who you know wasn't scared. That doesn't mean they actually weren't jarred by anything. I remember seeing the Exorcist for the 1st time and acting around friends like everything was cool, it was awesome, etc. Told my parents I wasn't scared a lick and all that. And I was lying my ass off if I didn't think about it scared ****less for several nights.

You and your 11, 12, and 13 year old friends are probably full of ****.

It's either the 1st option I presented, or more than likely this one ...

[the GRIN Reaper]

You're so lucky you're an only child. :dry:
I'm not.

[Crook]

Also ... you literally sat and asked them if they were disturbed? You're full of ****, Crook. haha
When they were all smiles, constantly talking about the film afterwards, quoting lines, and generally excited... you'd be a moron to ask them if they were disturbed.


As if they would admit it to someone older or even at all? When I saw a scary movie at that age or younger, I'd never admit to being scared, especially to someone older who you know wasn't scared. That doesn't mean they actually weren't jarred by anything. I remember seeing the Exorcist for the 1st time and acting around friends like everything was cool, it was awesome, etc. Told my parents I wasn't scared a lick and all that. And I was lying my ass off if I didn't think about it scared ****less for several nights.
You're comparing one of cinema's most revered horror films and affected millions who watched it....to a comic book film? Please. There was absolutely nothing in TDK that would even come close to affecting children as much as Exorcist did.

You and your 11, 12, and 13 year old friends are probably full of ****.

I'm sorry if none of us were as soft-hearted as your "girl". I realize this is your time to be defensive, but I really don't care. I have no reason to lie or make anything up, especially on an internet board.

[the GRIN Reaper]

Are you saying people didn't or couldn't have found TDK frightening?

[Crook]

No, that's not what I said at all. Of course there will always be those select few that go against the norm.

My original point of contention was that this film is "most definitely not" for anyone under 13/14. I find that absolutely false. Hell, even Bale said he thinks 10 is probably the minimum age for viewing this movie, and I agree.

[the GRIN Reaper]

Either way this film isn't for kids. Yes all kids handle things differently but as a whole this is not a "kid friendly" movie. Chris Nolan / and Jonah Nolan the creators of the property said this wasn't for children. And it isn't ...

[Crook]

A movie doesn't have to be kid-friendly nor made exclusively for children....for children to watch it. Unless it is extremely disturbing or a detriment to their mental state of mind, there should be no problem.

As for Nolan, he's already been quoted as saying that he feels Batman should be viewed by all ages, and he tries not to exclude any specific audience. He even noted that he hated not being able to see certain movies as a kid, and he doesn't wanna do that here, especially for a hero that many kids look up to.

[the GRIN Reaper]

No, that's not what I said at all. Of course there will always be those select few that go against the norm.
Many grown adults who reviewed this film said it jarred them, and that was the norm with most responses. It's not a happy picture. It was meant to be unsettling. And it's adult material, concept, and images are most certainly not for kids.

[the GRIN Reaper]

As for Nolan, he's already been quoted as saying that he feels Batman should be viewed by all ages, and he tries not to exclude any specific audience. He even noted that he hated not being able to see certain movies as a kid, and he doesn't wanna do that here, especially for a hero that many kids look up to.
Yeah he said that as well as saying the movie as a whole wasn't even meant for children. You are arguing semantics. He said he would show bits and pieces of the movie to his children, but would not let them see the entire thing because it is not a kid friendly movie.

[Crook]

Jarred them in what way? If you mean haunting or general sense of gloom, then I cannot agree with that all. To realize the adult themes and imagery is one thing, to be severely affected by it is another.

After seeing it 4 times in packed theaters full of adults, I'm not even gonna acknowledge the notion that the general reaction towards this film was anything close to being jarred. From what I saw, it was a sense of excitement and fulfillment.

[the GRIN Reaper]

See what I mean ... you're arguing points of being "severely" affected ... the point was the movie affected them at some level. The grown ass critics said this. Yeah but you have a different skewed out look ... after seeing the film you're hating ass said and I quote "that was it?"

[Crook]

See this is your problem. You pick-and-choose words that I say and present them in such a skewed manner that it ceases to be what was originally intended.

Nevermind the fact that I TOLD YOU that I saw it again and loved it. No, of course not. Let's just leave that little detail out and call me a hater of this film. No problem. This is precisely the third time you've labeled me as such despite me naming this as the best comic book film made to date. But ok. Act like an idiot, no biggie.

But you can't even put a statement in context. As an adult, that's one of the most basic things you should be aware of when conversing with other people. "That was it?" doesn't mean "omg that was crap, why did I spend money?", it meant "wow, that was a sensory overload I don't know how to make of this experience".

I've tried to be patient with your ass despite the glaring snobbish attitude towards me. It's apparent you can't hold any sort of discussion (at least with me) without resorting to personal insults and blatant lies. So this'll be my last time I'll address you. I'll save my time for people that are worth arguing with. Peace.

[the GRIN Reaper]

I get on you because you love to pick **** apart. Whether it be Bale's voice, this, that and a 3rd. This movie no matter how much you argue otherwise, or how much your 10, 12, 13 year old kids friends told you ... the material and the presentation of this film was not MEANT for kids. 12/13 straddle that PG=13 guidline. But as in CHILDREN, and superhero films, these two don't go hand in hand.

[The Sage]

The pencil scene is fairly disturbing, not on the level of the "call out of Batman" video on the news, but very disturbing none the less. After that scene the girl I was with was SCARED to open her eyes in any scene with the Joker and she's a grown ass woman. This movie is definetely not for kids 13 / 14 and under.

Pencil trick disturbing? Really? :huh: I thought it was more along the lines of sudden and lethal.

[terry78]

Before I saw it, from what I heard from people I thought the pencil thing was going to be somewhat gory and disturbing, like he would basically insert it into his skull upright. That slam on the table was so fast it was almost funny.

[batman11]

Hehehe, this all started cause Crook made an innocent joke about the girl not being grown up enough. :woot: :hehe:

[the GRIN Reaper]

Pencil trick disturbing? Really? :huh: I thought it was more along the lines of sudden and lethal.
Better description, J. But yeah it still could be considering disturbing. He physically jamed a pencil in someone's eyes as a means to a joke. Yeah it was sudden and lethal, and on reflection it could be considered disturbing.

[The Sage]

Before I saw it, from what I heard from people I thought the pencil thing was going to be somewhat gory and disturbing, like he would basically insert it into his skull upright. That slam on the table was so fast it was almost funny.

Right. I think it would've been disturbing if they zoomed in on the pencil being rammed up the eye socket. That would've been sick...









And part of me wishes they would've done that. :csad:

[Ace of Knaves]

yea i dont see why a film should be watered down just because of some kids. i understand that they want to get the full potential from the box office but there should be no comprimises.

[d.k.]

The pencil scene is fairly disturbing, not on the level of the "call out of Batman" video on the news, but very disturbing none the less. After that scene the girl I was with was SCARED to open her eyes in any scene with the Joker and she's a grown ass woman. This movie is definetely not for kids 13 / 14 and under.

Speak for yourself, i'm 14 (almost 15) but really there\s not stuff in this movie the average person my age can't understand or handle

[Manosman]

Every kid is different, so I think it's up to the parents to know what your kid can handle and take if from there, with that said I still don't think a kid under 10 would even follow what was going on in the film story-wise, I mean there are grown adults out there that couldn't follow what was going on (not saying anyone in particular, I mean the senior citzens who sat next to me in one of the screening i went to kept asking eachother what just happened). for a kid it might not be as enjoyable because they might get confused.

[Ace of Knaves]

i've just read a article in the sun by a journalist called Kelvin McKenzie, and he is the definition of media people i hate. He starts going on about TDK not being suitable for kids and what not, then he starts saying its dangerous for young impressionable youths. He also mentions that GTA incident in China and that they were right to pull the game off shelves. Its attitudes like this that let bad parents off the hook, if a kid watches a violent film or plays a violent game (even though GTA has a massive 18 cert on it!) and thinks its ok to copy that, thats the parents problem not the maker of the media. Like i've said before it is a COP OUT.

[Nepenthes]

^ I think they're the kind of people who were never allowed to watch bad stuff when they were little, and never dared to on their own, and now they think they're somehow more moral and refined than the kids who ruined their minds with such garbage. They're also probably partly jealous. And they think that blockading children from such material is SO HARD in this day and age that to do so successfully is some kind of achievement to be proud of. Like it's a high score in playing Space Invaders to the nasty media that's homing in on your kids. When actually it's pointless and depending on who you ask (me), it's detrimental.

Remember the kids you knew in your school who weren't allowed to watch stuff? Or were too scared or thought that it was wrong? They were always friggin retards :o

.

[Ace of Knaves]

^yea man i completely agree. yea and the kids who were over-protected from the world around them are more likely to be phychos IMO. they are the ones who have been living in fantasy lands all their lives.

[Lots o lafs]

**** an 11 year old wont even flinch watching that movie. 14 you must be a pu**y.

MADD are hipocrits, most of em drank when they were teens and then the chicks blog about how it's immoral and how teens shouldn't watch movies that they can legitly go see. I freakin hate over the top parents. OMG you let little jake who's 14 play GTA IV, you know can have sex in it. AAAAaaahhh (faints).

Earlier I said kids protected to a degree will rebel much worse than any kid with FREEDOM.

[Ace of Knaves]

yea i aint against kids under the age of 18 playing GTA, but when their parents start complaining saying "oh i just thought it was a game" i dont think they should be allowed to play it.

[Lots o lafs]

Theyre hipocrits. And you only have to be 17 to buy.

Parents shouldn't care about violence. As soon as I went into 9th my mom didn't even care if I watched **** with nudity, but before that she got all pissy. You are like don't play GTA to your kids when theyre 14 and if theyre are a boy, just check theyre comp. lots o porn huh?

[Nepenthes]

if a parent is gonna blame a movie or videogame for their childrens behaviour (or express concern for their future behaviour), I think that says enough about kind of parent they are. generally speaking

[Ace of Knaves]

I've just re-watched Batman Begins and i dont know if anyone noticed this but the scene where the fear toxin is released into the Narrows you can see a man eating someones head!!! I never noticed that before!! That didnt get loads of complaints did it? It was proppa quick though like a blink and you'll miss it moment.

[I Am The Knight]

Speak for yourself, i'm 14 (almost 15) but really there\s not stuff in this movie the average person my age can't understand or handle

Awwwww, isn't that cute? :oldrazz:

[tekken]

i'd say the dark knight is 11 and up.

but really...i think most of all kids will enjoy it. none of the scenes are gross or anything. the idea was, but nothing too graphic. the most graphic thing was bruce trying to stitch himself up, and that wasn't even that bad.

[terry78]

Shouldn't you ****ers be in school? 14 and 15 year olds on here this early? :o

[TomPiltoff]

It depends.

Personally I can't comprehend the damage that taking an 8 year old kid to a violent or dark movie would cause. I've always been exposed to things like that and it's never made me think that violence is OK or anything like that.

So I wouldn't take the kind of kid that is stupid enough to see something in a film and think it's OK or good.

I think a bigger concern is whether or not a kid would be able to follow the storyline.

[regwec]

i've just read a article in the sun by a journalist called Kelvin McKenzie, and he is the definition of media people i hate. He starts going on about TDK not being suitable for kids and what not, then he starts saying its dangerous for young impressionable youths. He also mentions that GTA incident in China and that they were right to pull the game off shelves. Its attitudes like this that let bad parents off the hook, if a kid watches a violent film or plays a violent game (even though GTA has a massive 18 cert on it!) and thinks its ok to copy that, thats the parents problem not the maker of the media. Like i've said before it is a COP OUT.
Let's face it, we glance at The Sun only to catch up on sports results and to admire Keeley's boobs.

Nobody cares what its "journalists" or "corrospondents" think.

[regwec]

By the way, I would like to suggest that, those of you who don't think any of the scenes in TDK are unsettling, probably don't really understand them. Thanks.

[Sawyer]

By the way, I would like to suggest that, those of you who don't think any of the scenes in TDK are unsettling, probably don't really understand them. Thanks.

Unsettling? Yes.
Too dark or disturbing for kids? No.

Anyway, i wouldnt say that its too dark for kids. I'd say its too smart for kids. Kids these days are stupid as hell. TDK isnt Spider-Man or anything like that. It's a very adult movie.

[TheDarkKnight08]

Shouldn't you ****ers be in school? 14 and 15 year olds on here this early? :o

I'm 15.:o

[ForestAflame]

By the way, I would like to suggest that, those of you who don't think any of the scenes in TDK are unsettling, probably don't really understand them. Thanks.

I understand them and they were a little unsettling, but not so bad a kid can't watch it.

[Mrs.J]

LOL just because we dont see certain scenes as unsettling does not mean that we dont know what they mean!! I did not find ANY of the scenes unsettling. I was SMILING through out ALL my viewings at the parts that many find unsettling--those parts were VERY well played and VERY convincing. Im an ADULT and KNOW that its NOT REAL. Just because I wasnt SCARED doesnt mean that I dont understand what was happening. Its NOT REAL. I know that peoples lives werent actualy at stake. its a MOVIE.

Jesus christ.

[adhokk7]

By the way, I would like to suggest that, those of you who don't think any of the scenes in TDK are unsettling, probably don't really understand them. Thanks.

:pal:

[Die Laughing]

^ I think they're the kind of people who were never allowed to watch bad stuff when they were little, and never dared to on their own, and now they think they're somehow more moral and refined than the kids who ruined their minds with such garbage.

Lmao. Generalize much? Just because a person has a different way of life doesn't mean they have this "I am better than you" attitude, lol.

I am sure you can find a few in any type of group with a superiority complex, but to generalize for all the rest that don't who are brought up the same just doesn't make a strong point.

They're also probably partly jealous. And they think that blockading children from such material is SO HARD in this day and age that to do so successfully is some kind of achievement to be proud of. Like it's a high score in playing Space Invaders to the nasty media that's homing in on your kids. When actually it's pointless and depending on who you ask (me), it's detrimental. Remember the kids you knew in your school who weren't allowed to watch stuff? Or were too scared or thought that it was wrong? They were always friggin retards :o.

Trash talking doesn't support a point either.

:hoboj: - Ahahahahahaha!

[the GRIN Reaper]

It wasn't too dark for kids, so much so ... check out the new Happy Meal mascot

http://www.motifake.com/motivational_posters/cf918fb3b5.jpg

[Mrs.J]

^^^ LOL thats great. :D

[batman11]

Let's face it, we glance at The Sun only to catch up on sports results and to admire Keeley's boobs.

Now we're talkin! :hoboj:

[Die Laughing]

That Joker/Ronald poster is BRILLIANCE! :wow:

:hoboj: - Ahahahahahaha!

[returntovoid]

Yet another article with someone complaining about the violence. What's the big fuss, I mean most of the ****ing violence happens off screen.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/09/children

[Dark Knight]

Yet another article with someone complaining about the violence. What's the big fuss, I mean most of the ****ing violence happens off screen.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/09/children



What a wu$$ this person is I swear.....

[batman11]

Iain Duncan Smith described himself as astonished. Melinda Messenger was really worried. Keith Vaz announced that he certainly wouldn't be taking his 11-year-old daughter. And a doctor, writing in the Daily Mail, warned of the possibility of brain damage for an entire generation.

:lmao:

[regwec]

Laugh as much as you like; could you imagine better publicity?

[Figs]

Laugh as much as you like; could you imagine better publicity?


Exactly!

What's that saying in Hollywood, "There's no such thing as bad press".:woot:

[batman11]

Yup. Publicity is publicity any way you look at it.

I'm personally hoping that next, we get some crazy news story about Bale beating his dog, causing the media to think that he's taken his dog fighting actions in TDK too far. :funny:

[regwec]

To be honest, I'm surprised that we haven't seen any unpleasant "copycat" stuff referring to The Joker.

[ArkhamAsylum]

To be honest, I'm surprised that we haven't seen any unpleasant "copycat" stuff referring to The Joker.
uh...you sure about that? :)

http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r186/questionsleep6969/Joker/lolbatman/0728082joker2.jpg

...and just recently in the news....
http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r186/questionsleep6969/Joker/lolbatman/whysoseriousvandle-439x330.jpg

[terry78]

Get outta here.

[regwec]

I'm not counting that silly little girl. :)

[I Am The Knight]

Love that Joker...

[Ace of Knaves]

yea i know what you mean regwec, i started a post just before TDK came out over here about the knife crime. basically i dont think someone will completely copy the joker but with people getting stabbed up over here in the dozens anyway im really suprised the media hasnt run a story like "teenager copies joker". and i could really imagen a bunch of tossers who carry knives goin to see TDK and when joker starts saying he prefers knives they'll be like yea jokers my idol hes a badman

[CaptainClown]

and who said that people won't copy the joker.