The Dark Knight TDK too violent says British MP

We got the same as the Danish.
 
I'd love to compare the crime, suicide and murder rates of all of these countries and compare them to their sense of moral outrage. my bet is that they don't correlate in the way you'd like them to. america has a lot of guns and t*ts, but there is a lot of conservatism and backlash, general town/country BS even though its all Town now and some just dont realize it or cant afford to. as a result theres always some sort of media frenzy or mob-esque backlash...GTA for example. Marylin Manson (good god they think THATS subversive I wonder what they'd do if every little kid on the block was reading f-ing bataille), all of that BS. And for all of the labeling and pop psychological campaigning, we have a really high murder rate. Countries that have laxer policies for these things at times will have lower crime rates!
 
I think one of the major causes for concern with the movie's rating in Britain is that we have a huge youth-based knife crime problem here, and The Joker makes knife crime look pretty cool and mysterious.
 
regwec said:
I think one of the major causes for concern with the movie's rating in Britain is that we have a huge youth-based knife crime problem here, and The Joker makes knife crime look pretty cool and mysterious.
Click to expand...

Then gun power, gasoline and dynamite are as well:o, surely you can't blame TDK for that and there is a lot of movies that are worse.
 
The stupid thing is that knife crime is yet another case of British tabloid fear-mongering.
 
TheFuture said:
In one scene, Batman repeatedly beats the Joker.
Click to expand...

Because the protagonist has never beaten up the antagonist in an action movie before... :huh:

This is one of the worst examples of TDK being too violent or inappropriate for kids, and even if it was, it's worded terribly.
 
^
Exactly

Its because its a Batman movie and these old parents expect Batman to be like the 60s show or the Nipples and Neon of BF & B&R.

Casion Royale and Die Hard 4 had the same rating and neither where more violent than TDK.
 
Unbelievable the amount of wu$$ people that are out there.....
 
chamber-music said:
^
Exactly

Its because its a Batman movie and these old parents expect Batman to be like the 60s show or the Nipples and Neon of BF & B&R.

Casion Royale and Die Hard 4 had the same rating and neither where more violent than TDK.
Click to expand...

I take it you mean UK ratings but actually in the UK Die Hard 4 was rated 15 not 12, which I thought was pretty stupid since honestly it wasn't that more violent than TDK or Terminator 3 & only had one minor piece of strong language which is normally fine in a 12.
 
Dark Knight said:
Unbelievable the amount of wu$$ people that are out there.....
Click to expand...

Indeed, and again he has a clear lack of understanding of the BBFC's parameters for a 12A film. There can be no dwelling on violence/ blood/ injuries. And as far as I'm concerned, there was no dwelling.....
 
Batmania said:
I don't think this has been posted? Someone else weighting in with their opinion on this 'issue':

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/columnists/kelvin_mackenzie/article1524223.ece
Click to expand...

I am not in favour of Heath Ledger receiving a posthumous Oscar for this performance. His face was made up like a clown and therefore you can’t tell what expressions he was using.
Click to expand...

I like this seemingly random addendum to the article. What a load of nonsense.
 
^ i actually thought the guy was joking till I realized it was a tabloid newspaper.
 
In fairness, all the under the article slated him for saying that.
 
I'll say that it probably qualifies for the 15 rating y'all have over there. But as I feel that 11 and up can handle it in reality, I think 12A is fine.
 
TheFuture said:
Labour MP Keith Vaz won't be taking his 11-year-old daughter to see the movie that has a 12A certificate, which means kids under 12 must be with an adult. He said: "There are scenes of gratuitous violence."
Click to expand...

It's good to see that there is one parent that takes note of the rating system! This gets on my nerves because it is irresponsible parenting. Every 12A film has a disclaimer in front of it warning that it may not be suitable for anyone under the age of 12 and that it is at the parents discretion. I once saw a couple bring their 5 year old to a 10pm screening of Casino Royale (Another film that I thought pushed the boundaries of the 12A certificate). I mean come on! One day one, showing one of Indy 4 I saw parents ushering in sall children in large groups. Now we all know not one of those parents bothered to watch the film before it's release to see if it was suitable for the kids to be brought to, and that is why it makes a mockery of the system. I can also remember parents bringing in their kids on Spider-Man's opening day, before the 12A certificate was even created!

Now when I was a kid, I was allowed to watch 15 certificated movies that we rented, but everyone was looked at and approved that I could handle watching it. I didn't always get to see everything I wanted (Terminator 2 springs to mind) and that's what parents today aren't doing. There is no excuse, if they can't watch the film before then there are enough websites for parents warning them of unsuitable content. Now we have the media being the voice of disgruntled parents everywhere, blaming the BBFC, the studio, the film makers and whoever else. Maybe they should all shut up, look a little closer to home and place the blame on the adult that took a child to a film before finding out if the film was suitable for them!......
 
~†~§iX~†~;15456655 said:
It's good to see that there is one parent that takes note of the rating system! This gets on my nerves because it is irresponsible parenting. Every 12A film has a disclaimer in front of it warning that it may not be suitable for anyone under the age of 12 and that it is at the parents discretion. I once saw a couple bring their 5 year old to a 10pm screening of Casino Royale (Another film that I thought pushed the boundaries of the 12A certificate). I mean come on! One day one, showing one of Indy 4 I saw parents ushering in sall children in large groups. Now we all know not one of those parents bothered to watch the film before it's release to see if it was suitable for the kids to be brought to, and that is why it makes a mockery of the system. I can also remember parents bringing in their kids on Spider-Man's opening day, before the 12A certificate was even created!

Now when I was a kid, I was allowed to watch 15 certificated movies that we rented, but everyone was looked at and approved that I could handle watching it. I didn't always get to see everything I wanted (Terminator 2 springs to mind) and that's what parents today aren't doing. There is no excuse, if they can't watch the film before then there are enough websites for parents warning them of unsuitable content. Now we have the media being the voice of disgruntled parents everywhere, blaming the BBFC, the studio, the film makers and whoever else. Maybe they should all shut up, look a little closer to home and place the blame on the adult that took a child to a film before finding out if the film was suitable for them!......
Click to expand...

Spot on. It's just lazy parenting from people who just want to wash their hands of any blame as to how their children are exposed to certain aspects of this world.
 
Two-Face said:
Then gun power, gasoline and dynamite are as well:o, surely you can't blame TDK for that and there is a lot of movies that are worse.
Click to expand...
You have failed to understand that point; that knife crime is a big, pre-existing problem in the UK, and TDK could be seen to glamourise that spiking trend. That is not the fault of the movie itself- it is unfortunate coincidence, but I can see why people are sensitive about it.
 
I thought the Brits were supposed to be all hardcore, you know, dropping the f-bomb on television and stuff...whats up with this?
 
TheFuture said:
Children under 15 should be barred from cinema screenings of new Batman movie The Dark Knight, a former Home Office minister demanded yesterday.


Labour MP Keith Vaz won't be taking his 11-year-old daughter to see the movie that has a 12A certificate, which means kids under 12 must be with an adult. He said: "There are scenes of gratuitous violence."

In one scene, Batman repeatedly beats the Joker. But the British Board of Film Classification, which has received 80 complaints about the movie, said its 12A decision was justified.

:pal:This is ridiculous, jesus, even S-M1 had more risque scenes with violence.
Click to expand...

In Star Wars 4 they chop ObiWans head off with a lightsaber.
 
Here's where I stand on the subject.

The film is rated 12A. This basically means that any adult must exercise their god given common sense, and do the responsible thing - before taking a child to see the movie, find out what happens in it. Speak to the cinema staff, look online for discussions such as this one. The MPAA have given them a guideline - and I'm willing to bet that the majority of the people who complain about it being unsuitable for their kids AFTER seeing it, didn't bother to look into the film in the slightest.

I don't see anything wrong with the 12A rating. It didn't need to be a 15, as long as the parents take responsibility for their own children. They just seem to want everyone else to do it these days. I have an 11 year old brother, he didn't have a problem with the movie (mainly cause he's been brought up to know the difference between reality and fantasy). But I still checked the film out before taking him to see it.

Why? Cause I had a chance to see the film before anyone else in the family, and my parents asked me to let them know what I thought about him seeing it.

I understand many people may not be able to waste money seeing a film a couple of times, once without and once with the kids - but there's plenty of information available through many sources.

My local cinema (where I now work) is actually issuing a warning with anyone coming in with kids of a certain age, stating it may not be suitable, and for what reasons. Most of the time these parents dismiss us - then end up leaving early or complaining about their kids been let in.

A huge number of parents are unwilling to take any responsibility these days. That's the real problem, not a 12A rating.
 
yea that basically the main problem, its parents not taking full responsibilty for their children. thats a massive problem over here in the UK anyway. the other night after a bit of a smoke session ;) ;) i was rudely awoken at 3am but loadz of kids making noise outside my block!! 3am!!! and they must of been making loadz of noise because i was in a deep deep stoner sleep!! the question is.........where were their fooking parents!!! how can they just let their kids go out in a dodgy area at 3 in the morning?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

U
Da Vinci Code Score: "Too scary for kids."
Replies
21
Views
1K
terry78
terry78

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)

Staff online

Members online

Total: 1,334 (members: 33, guests: 1,301)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,577
Messages
21,765,383
Members
45,598
Latest member
paulsantiagoolg

Share this page

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"