To the wonerful Father who took his 8 year old son to Blade 3

[eenerms]

What a moron! If anyone has seen ANY of the Blade movies, they are a bit on the violent side don't you think?

So this Father of the Year takes his son to the movie, first the boy TALKS during it, the father is eating popcorn and drinking coke, belching and talking with his mouth full. I can only shudder at what kind of raising this kid is getting.

[Ephemera]

Um. Except for them talking during the film, I don't see the issue here. Why does it matter to you that they saw Blade III?

And so far as the food goes, sure, talking with your mouth full isn't proper manners but unless he was spitting popcorn all over the place because his mouth was stuffed and then followed each drink of coke with an obviously loud belch, I don't see why that even merits mention.

[interface2x]

I'd say something, but my mom took me to see Aliens for my 9th birthday. I liked it so much I made my dad take me again a week or so later. But then again, I was a respectful little one who was quiet and just enjoyed the movie.

[Shagnasty]

The movie choice doesn't seem that bad to me. The talking would be annoying though.

[Nobody]

Um. Except for them talking during the film, I don't see the issue here. Why does it matter to you that they saw Blade III?
Maybe because Blade 3 is an inapropriate movie to be taking an 8 year old to?

And so far as the food goes, sure, talking with your mouth full isn't proper manners but unless he was spitting popcorn all over the place because his mouth was stuffed and then followed each drink of coke with an obviously loud belch, I don't see why that even merits mention.
Maybe because that rude behavior annoyed him and didn't allow him to enjoy the movie?

[Nobody]

I'd say something, but my mom took me to see Aliens for my 9th birthday. I liked it so much I made my dad take me again a week or so later. But then again, I was a respectful little one who was quiet and just enjoyed the movie.
I saw the first Alien movie when it came out in theaters. I must have been about 5 or 6. For a long time afterwards I was afraid of sitting in chairs for fear that tentacles would come out and wrap around my legs and I would be trapped by an alien.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

I saw Blade 3. I didn't think it was all that violent. It's so cartoonish and stylized that it's not really scary. The vampires all just burst into flames. It was no big deal.I was bothered by the couple who brought their three year old to Saw, though.

[Ephemera]

Or maybe he should worry about his own kids if he has any instead of worrying about raising a stranger's. Unless the child is being traumatized, it's none of his business how the parent raises him or her.

And if talking with your mouth full (instead of just talking) and burping, which is a natural bodily function that can be done in polite company, are so annoying that it's going to make him not enjoy the movie, he should just stay home and wait for the DVD.

[Nobody]

Or maybe he should worry about his own kids if he has any instead of worrying about raising a stranger's. Unless the child is being traumatized, it's none of his business how the parent raises him or her.
Where did he say that he did anything about the way he felt? He saw something that he saw as inapropriate, and commented on it here. Is he not allowed to have an opinion? (I hope that eenerms is a guy and I'm not mistakingly using the wrong pronoun)

And if talking with your mouth full (instead of just talking) and burping, which is a natural bodily function that can be done in polite company, are so annoying that it's going to make him not enjoy the movie, he should just stay home and wait for the DVD.
Or, people should be considerate, whisper to each other, or at least talk quietly, and yes, as a matter of fact, unless it sneaks up on you unexpectedly, you can burp somewhat quietly if you hold it in and do it slowly, instead of letting out a big belch.

[Ephemera]

That he thinks he knows enough about the kid and his father to automatically know the movie is inappropiate for him is arrogant and condescending as some eight year olds are emotionally mature enough to handle pretty heavy movies and if Blade III is anything like Blade, I'd never consider its trilogy to be scarring. It's pretty obviously a comic book movie, even moreso than X-Men, Spiderman, Daredevil, et al.

Also, notice that I said in my original reply to him that unless he was spitting food all over the place or belching obviously loud, i.e. acting rudely to the point of disruption, that I didn't see any reason to mention it. Nor did I say that talking was okay.. I even said it wasn't in my very first sentence in this thread.

[BoringDad]

Or maybe he should worry about his own kids if he has any instead of worrying about raising a stranger's. Unless the child is being traumatized, it's none of his business how the parent raises him or her.
Yeah. Because other people in society do not affect us. We all live in our own private bubbles with only our immediate families. :rolleyes:
Fact is, if the parent is doing a crappy job of raising his kid, that messed up kid is going to be interacting with other people throughout society in a messed up way.

And the OP did not turn around in the theater and berate the man. That would have been innappropriate. Venting in the Pit? Perfectly appropriate. Sensitive to this issue Aesiron? Questioning your own choices?

[Ephemera]

Projecting much? I don't have kids and never intend to. Nor do I deign to believe I know what's best for someone else's children, whether they be the man's the person in the OP is ranting about or your's.

I'm sure this kid's going to be the next Jeffrey Dahmer because his dad took him to see a "scary" vampire movie when he was eight.

[BoringDad]

Projecting much? I don't have kids and never intend to. Nor do I deign to believe I know what's best for someone else's children, whether they be the man's the person in the OP is ranting about or your's.
You are unintentionally lying when you state this. Do you not believe: that teaching a child to gut policemen when he is three is a bad way to raise a child, that teaching a child to cut off his own fingers is a bad way to raise a child, that teaching a child to sexually abuse their siblings is a bad way to raise a child? It's just that your absolute bad things list that everyone obviously should follow is smaller than the OP's.

I kind of side with the OP on the movie thing as I have recently seen small children taken to movies beyond their years and been completely terrorized by them. (The kids by the movie. Not me terrorized by the kids.)
I'm sure this kid's going to be the next Jeffrey Dahmer because his dad took him to see a "scary" vampire movie when he was eight.
You forgot the roll eyes smiley. Come on! I gave you a pefect spot for it! And no, I do not think that experience alone will make him a psycho killer. But he might spit in my Big Mac at Burger King some day.

[Voodoochile]

Yeah. Because other people in society do not affect us.


Give some emprical, not theoretical, evidence that an 8 year old seeing a vampire movie is a threat to your freedom. Otherwise, shut the fuck up.

Fact is, if the parent is doing a crappy job of raising his kid, that messed up kid is going to be interacting with other people throughout society in a messed up way.

For a dad to trust the character of his kid enough to take him to a cheap ass vampire flick is not a demonstration of his doing a crappy job.

On the other hand, if he treats his kids like fragile eggshells, doesnt show them any respect for their abilities or intelligence whatsoever, then he is indeed being a crappy parent.

Ah the old What You do Has an Effect On Others So Others Have a Right to Interfere in What Yo Do. What a load of horseshit.

Yes, if a butterfly flaps its wings yadda yadda yadda the Japanese might be in for a hell of a typhoon.

That means the Japanese need to be prepared for typhoons; it doesnt mean its Ok to put the butterfly in a jar.

And the OP did not turn around in the theater and berate the man. That would have been innappropriate. Venting in the Pit? Perfectly appropriate.

Not informing someone about something they are doing that bothers you while running and whining to those whom you are less likely to get into conflict with? Not 'appropriate'; chickenshit. Or did the OP think it would inappropriate for the guys kid to see the OP get his ass kicked in public?

[Nobody]

That he thinks he knows enough about the kid and his father to automatically know the movie is inappropiate for him is arrogant and condescending as some eight year olds are emotionally mature enough to handle pretty heavy movies and if Blade III is anything like Blade, I'd never consider its trilogy to be scarring. It's pretty obviously a comic book movie, even moreso than X-Men, Spiderman, Daredevil, et al.
In general, it's not considered a good thing to take an 8 year old to a movie with lots of blood, guts, violence and strong language.
Even if the 8 year old is more mature for his age, he's still a kid. And just because someone is a parent it doesn't necessarily mean that they know what's best for their kid.

Also, notice that I said in my original reply to him that unless he was spitting food all over the place or belching obviously loud, i.e. acting rudely to the point of disruption, that I didn't see any reason to mention it. Nor did I say that talking was okay.. I even said it wasn't in my very first sentence in this thread.
Yes, you did say that. However, as mentioned by the OP, he apparently was talking and burping loud enough to be distracting or else the OP wouldn't have mentioned it.

[Ephemera]

You are unintentionally lying when you state this. Do you not believe: that teaching a child to gut policemen when he is three is a bad way to raise a child, that teaching a child to cut off his own fingers is a bad way to raise a child, that teaching a child to sexually abuse their siblings is a bad way to raise a child? It's just that your absolute bad things list that everyone obviously should follow is smaller than the OP's.

If it's unintentional, it isn't a lie.

And yes, if there was a fingerless child that molested his siblings, killed cops, and tore tags off mattresses (with his teeth, I assume), I would then think I have a better idea how to raise him but your examples have as much in common with what happened in the OP as statutory rape has to rape forced at knifepoint.



I kind of side with the OP on the movie thing as I have recently seen small children taken to movies beyond their years and been completely terrorized by them. (The kids by the movie. Not me terrorized by the kids.)

At eight, the kid is either in second or third grade and I remember watching actual horror movies while home alone with my older sister at night and it's not left any lasting psychological scars on me. If anything, it got the need for blood and gore out of my system early on and I no longer care for slasher movies.

Blade III isn't Aliens or The Shining though and unless given a reason to believe otherwise, I trust a parent knows more about his child's limitations than a random stranger does.


You forgot the roll eyes smiley. Come on! I gave you a pefect spot for it! And no, I do not think that experience alone will make him a psycho killer. But he might spit in my Big Mac at Burger King some day.

I don't use emoticons that often and don't use that particular one at all.



In general, it's not considered a good thing to take an 8 year old to a movie with lots of blood, guts, violence and strong language. Even if the 8 year old is more mature for his age, he's still a kid. And just because someone is a parent it doesn't necessarily mean that they know what's best for their kid.

While being a parent doesn't automatically imbue you with the answers to how to raise a kid, neither does being an adult and observing behaviour you yourself don't find appropiate.

Ignoring that, the kid obviously wasn't screaming or otherwise showing he was upset he was upset as the OP didn't comment on it and instead focused on their bad manners. I doubt the kid was the least bit harmed by the experience.

[infamousmom]

Um. Except for them talking during the film, I don't see the issue here. Why does it matter to you that they saw Blade III?

Good lord, Aes, you've got to be kidding. There's a reason that movie's not G rated. It's not for kiddies. A parent who takes a kid to a movie like that has shit for brains. If Dad wants to go see it, fine and dandy, but he should cough up for a sitter and leave the kid home.

(One of my kids got so terrorized by a pre-release screening of Flight of the Navigator at the Disney studio, at about the same age, that I realized we'd made a big mistake accepting the invitation to go see it, and that picture wasn't in the same league as the Blade series.)

[infamousmom]

At eight, the kid is either in second or third grade and I remember watching actual horror movies while home alone with my older sister at night and it's not left any lasting psychological scars on me.

BIG difference between being safe in your own home, watching the movie on the TV, where you can tell it's not real and you can get up and leave any time, and being in a movie theater where the scary stuff is not only 20+ feet high but inescapable.

[Larry Mudd]

Whatever.

I was raised on horror movies from the age of about seven. Not comic-book stuff like (I imagine) Blade is, either. Horror/Supernatural/Slasher stuff. Most of it at drive-ins, in the beginning. By the time I started going to theatres, I had been properly socialized to sit quietly and watch the movie. I recall seeing, between the ages of 7 and 11, Carrie, Halloween, The Omen, Piranha, Coma, The Amityville Horror, Jaws, Motel Hell, The Shining, The Fog, Silent Scream, Alien, Outland, Friday the Thirteenth, and a ton of other less memorable splatter/suspense films.

You know, it did me no harm. I was given to understand the concept of "make-believe." I only remember one film that actually stuck with me for a bit: The Swarm. That one hit a nerve, because bees were real, my backyard was full of them, I'd been stung before, and I fully bought into the idea of huge swarms of angry bees. I think I may have heard of "Africanized" bees in real life, too-- either at school (grade 2) or on the news. I had a couple of nightmares about bees after that.

Apart from that, the only effect that a steady diet of horror movies had on me was that by the time I was thirteen or fourteen, I was thoroughly bored of horror movies, and I had to know it was a really good one before I'd watch it.

I think the idea that scary stuff is poison for children is ridiculous. The most treasured bedtime stories of the past three hundred years make Hollywood spook tales seem fluffy-bunny. "'My mother killed me, my father picked my bones, my dear brother buried me under the marble stones.' Good night, dear heart."

[CanvasShoes]

Give some emprical, not theoretical, evidence that an 8 year old seeing a vampire movie is a threat to your freedom. Otherwise, shut the fuck up.Do you have kids? It's not "A" movie, it's a series of ways of incorrect thinking while raising a kid which INCLUDES taking kids to age inappropriate movies.

For a dad to trust the character of his kid enough to take him to a cheap ass vampire flick is not a demonstration of his doing a crappy job.
The idea behind being a parent, a GOOD one anyway, is that you use your judgment to protect them the best you can, you don't just "trust" the judgment of a child, otherwise, three year old everywhere would be ODing on chocolate.

On the other hand, if he treats his kids like fragile eggshells, doesnt show them any respect for their abilities or intelligence whatsoever, then he is indeed being a crappy parent.Oh for God Sake, so, making sure that kids see age appropriate entertainment is "treating them like fragile eggshells"? Obviously you've never dealt with a really heinous bout of night terrors.

Ah the old What You do Has an Effect On Ohers So Others Have a Right to Interfere in What Yo Do. What a load of horseshit.Did you read a different OP than the rest of us did? The OP didn't interfere in anything.

[Shakes]

Good lord, Aes, you've got to be kidding. There's a reason that movie's not G rated. It's not for kiddies. A parent who takes a kid to a movie like that has shit for brains. If Dad wants to go see it, fine and dandy, but he should cough up for a sitter and leave the kid home.

Jeez! what's up with you people living in a Nerftm world.

This isn't "bad" parenting. This looks more to me likeFather/Son bonding.

I remember my Dad taking me to see horror flicks. 90% of the reason I liked going so much is because it was something special me and my dad did alone. In other words: Mom and Sis weren't allowed to come. (Not that they wanted too)

[Silver Fire]

the scary stuff is not only 20+ feet high but inescapable.
I know it's been a while since I've been to a movie theater, but inescapable? What? Two legs, right? Everyone got in there somehow. Unless you're trying to say that a parent, after misjudging their child's ability to handle something (honest mistake), would actually force a child to remain in the theater until the end credits. That's when an honest mistake becomes something awful, and any parent who would do that really sucks.

There's quite a difference between giving into, "Oh, come on, Mom. Please? I'm EIGHT. I'll be okay, I promise! It's just <insert questionable movie title here, with great vocal emphasis and perhaps even a face, possibly feigning disinterest, but more likely telling you that this movie is child's play, he's this big guy now, and you are being totally unfair>", realizing your mistake and getting little Billy out of there right now (what a reasonable person would most likely do) and realizing your mistake but pointing out that it cost you $22 when you add in the price of Mike and Ikes and, hey big man, you said you'd be fine, so now you're going to sit here and watch this movie, and you're going to like it! And, really, who would do that?

I think it depends on the parent(s), the movie and the kid, as well as the direction of the wind and then probably some lunar... stuff. Oh, and the price of tea. In Zimbabwe though, not China.

For example, the people in this thread who are all, "Yeah, who cares? My mom was watching the Texas Chainsaw Massacre while I was being delivered! We've watched it on every birthday since!" and stuff are all okay, probably mostly normal, well adjusted adults. I have extremely early memories of horror movies (I saw "It" before I was 10) and I'm okay.

But then you have kids who are terrified of characters from honest to bob KID'S MOVIES (the opening scene from Finding Nemo was quite traumatic the night my sister saw it in the theater, lots of crying children, I guess). My nephew's afraid of Shrek. He loved the first movie when it came out on DVD, but somehow Shrek became this horrible monster since then, and he runs from the sight of even the movie case.

I'm sure I'll be in this situation eventually, probably more than once, and I can say right now that I will almost certainly trust my child's judgement provided he knows enough about the movie to make an informed decision. I don't see why not. After all, if he likes it, hey, cool movie. If not, oh well. It's not like movie theaters are inescapable or anything.

[VarlosZ]

I'm another one who saw plenty of honest-to-god slasher movies (which the Blade movies are not) when I was young -- the "Nightmare on Elm Street" series was a particular favorite. As an adult, I only go on one, maybe two kill-crazy rampages a year. I turned out fine.

Seriously, though, I do think it all depends on the particular child. Some are smart and mature enough to understand that watching violence can be good for a lark, though partaking in violence is unacceptable. Some are not. Some will be traumatized by graphic violence, others will not. If you've only ever known the latter, it wouldn't be surprising if you thought that all children would be harmed by seeing Blade or something worse.

I've got two little brothers, currently 10 and 8 years old. The older one has always been unusually mature (not to mention very intelligent), and I would have no problem taking him to see Blade, neither now nor two years ago. The younger one has always been unusally immature and sensitive, and I would not take him to such a movie.

In the absemce of any familiarity with the child the OP describes, I would give the father the benefit of the doubt in this case . . . except for the part about talking during the movie. Some people just need to be smacked.

[Silver Fire]

The idea behind being a parent, a GOOD one anyway, is that you use your judgment to protect them the best you can, you don't just "trust" the judgment of a child,
Holy fuck, someone notify CPS, I'm totally unfit!
otherwise, three year old everywhere would be ODing on chocolate.
Okay, be honest now: You're not really that stupid, are you? Seriously, comparing the judgement of a toddler with regards to chocolate consumption to the judgement of an 8 year old boy with regards to his movie choices? Quite a leap there, don't you think?

So, since children are obviously too dumb to trust in these serious matters, how exactly do you decide PG-13 is okay? Ooh, don't tell me; the kid gets to go when he's 13, right? And what happens when your teenager, raised in a GOOD home by the GOOD parents, is too emotionally retarded (or maybe he's just really sensitive and stuff) to handle the movie even then? Are you still a GOOD parent who made an honest mistake by letting him go, or are you a bad parent for not having the foresight to know exactly how your child would respond to this movie?

I must say, I love that you'll trust the judgement of a panel of people you've never even met to tell you which movies are appropriate for your child and which are not, based solely on the child's age, but you won't trust your own child, someone you've known forever and who, with the help of an actual good parent, would be way more qualified to make such a decision, even as just a stupid 8 year old.

That's bleak.

If that's "GOOD" parenting, you can put me on the "BAD" side a hundred times.

[Larry Mudd]

Oh for God Sake, so, making sure that kids see age appropriate entertainment is "treating them like fragile eggshells"? Obviously you've never dealt with a really heinous bout of night terrorsBah. I don't think the best way to avoid night terrors is to simply restrict entertainment -- I think it's probably mostly coddled children that are suceptible to the screaming meemies.

It isn't hard to teach kids that movies are just make-believe. Last year I wanted to take my best friend and her daughter to see Finding Nemo, but my friend had reservations about the intensity of it. Her daughter was four, had never seen a movie, and she knew that Finding Nemo had some scary scenes with sharks, etc. (I don't mean to draw an equivalence between Finding Nemo, and Blade, of course, but bear with me here...) To make sure that she was emotionally and intellectually prepared for the cinematic experience, I spent a couple of hours, split between the day before the movie and the actual day. First, we played "flip book." (At her house.) She learned the magic of apparent motion. I made some simple animated stick people for her, and encouraged her to suggest actions. We did that until she got bored. The next day, at my house, she got to see a reel of film, and grok it was kind of like the flip book. Lots of pictures, each a little different. We cut it up and made slides, and she learned how a little tiny picture could be made to appear big. (It was a trailer reel for Jennifer Lopez' Enough, so I didn't feel too bad about cutting it up. :D)

Then she got to play with a Fisher Price film viewer -- she saw Goofy's Glider, The The Lonesome Ghosts, Flight Into Space, and Mickey's Trailer Ride. She saw that it was just a little strip of film in each cartridge, and how you could make it move as fast or slow as you like. Now, she knew we were going to see Finding Nemo. We talked about how it was made just the same -- lots of little pictures on a strip, except that the movie theatre was going to make it look way bigger, and it would be dark. (I showed her with the slide projector how moving farther back made the picture bigger.) Then we talked about voices. We played at making up things for Mickey and Goofy to say in the haunted house. I asked her if she wanted to see the man who was going to make up the voice of Nemo's daddy in the movie we were going to see, and showed her a little bit of an interview on Late Night With David Letterman, where Albert Brooks was promoting Nemo, plus a clip from the movie. You see where this is leading?

She was four, but when we went into that theatre, she totally understood that what we were going to see was a fancy kind of pretend. We looked at the poster and talked about the shark with the big teeth. She was armed with a magic talisman -- one frame of film, as a reminder that all the big stuff we were going to see was just light shining through an itsy-bitsy piece of plastic. Neat! "It's going to be loud. But we won't be scared, right?" "Right!" "It's going to be dark, but we won't be scared, right?" "Right!"

She sat open-mouthed through the whole picture. (Well, there were a few slow parts where she fidgeted a bit.) But the thing is, Big Scary Bruce did not faze her one bit -- because she knew he wasn't real.

If a four-year-old can grasp that and stare down the image of a twenty-foot-high shark because she knows it's "just a movie," there's no qualitive difference between that and an eight-year-old taking in a gory vampire movie -- assuming the kid understands that there are no such things as vampires, and he's just looking at actors playing dress up, with fifty gallons of fake blood on the side.

And you don't have to go to the obsessive lengths that I did to put a basic concept like that across -- especially if the kid is a couple of years older than four. Night terrors don't come from seeing a movie -- night terrors come from not understanding that there are no boogeymen. If a kid isn't reassured of that, he doesn't need Wesley Snipes with prosthetic orthodontia to put the fear in him -- he'll sit in bed and tremble at shadows.

The only crappy parenting the OP's guy displayed was not teaching his kid how to behave in public.

[Earthworm Jim]

For those of you implying the movie is somehow bad for the kid, can you explain why you think that way?

[asterion]

I'm remembering the movies I got to see in theatres when I was seven or eight. Lessee, that's roughly 1989-1991. I'm pretty sure I got to see Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade. I know I got to see Who Framed Roger Rabbit? (Okay, that was 1988.) At about this age, Mom had no problem with Raiders of the Lost Ark. She wouldn't let me watch Temple of Doom because the Thugee ceremony was too intense for her (so at least she had watched the movie.) Well, that's all I can come up with, but that's because we didn't go to the movies a lot. Plus, we had a VCR. So instead, I would watch movies, either bought or taped off the TV. It would probably be better for a parent to screen a movie like Blade 3 first, but if it's anything like the first Blade movie (which I don't intend to find out), I agree that it's probably cartoony violence.

[Greathouse]

I have a 10 year old son (he just turned 10 in October) who has seen both Blade and Blade II. He has been told that if he does well on his report card then he can choose a movie for us to go enjoy. Well, guess what he chose.

We are going to go see Blade Trinity this weekend. Anyone who thinks that they know my son and what is appropriate for him, better than I do, is invited to fuck right the hell off.

My son knows that vampires are not real. When we watch the films and the fighting starts...the first vampire that gets turned to ash, he turns to me and whispers, "That is an awsome effect". He knows that those effects are done with computers. He knows it is not real. He is able to sit there and enjoy the movie because he is old enough to know what is real and what isn't.

He has known this and understood this for a very long time. We have never had a problem with nightmares.

[kidchameleon]

I saw the original Blade, which was much bloodier and violent than III next to a 4 or 5 year old. That was just weird. Of course, the kid was quiet through the movie, unlike the 2 year olds at the last two movies I've seen, Blade III and National Treasure. I hate the freaking lazy parents who won't take their crying/complaining kids outside, just hushing them louder than the kid. Those people should be forced to see From Justin to Kelly for 48 hours straight.

[SkipMagic]

On the other hand, the movie sucked.

[Hampshire]

For those of you implying the movie is somehow bad for the kid, can you explain why you think that way?

In a related question, why would it be bad to show an eight year old some hardcore porn? Is it really going to affect them in a negative way? Or how about some of those be-headings in Iraq? Maybe I can pull some off the internet and show them to my neices and nephews? They're not going to turn into murderers just cause they see that are they?
Kids need to decide for themselves what they can handle. For instance, If I ask my 7-year old nephew if he'd like to see "Se7en" with Brad Pitt he should be able to tell me "No thank you sir, I don't believe at my age that I'm at the intellectual level to understand the adult themes in that type of film."
Kids know their limits. Just put em in front of a screen with whatever you want. If they don't show a reaction, they're just fine.

[eenerms]

A few things:

1. My problem was that I didn't think the movie was appropriate for that age group. However I did not confront the father about it. I would not presume to know the child in question or the man's ability or lack there of of parenting. Like I stated, my opinion on how appropriate the movie is, ie. violence, language and sexual content.

2. I thought that the behavior of the father, talking, bleching, etc in a theater was an example of boorish behavior to his kid. Even after I turned around and put my finger to my lips and asked the boy to keep it down, the kid chose to ignore my request as did the father.

3. I had already moved to these seats due to a couple of adults chatting way like they hadn't seen each other for years, even after I asked them if they were going to talk during the whole movie. Actually they didn't talk they ended up necking LOUDLY, so that when I moved.

Oh yeah FWIW, I am a female ;)

[don't ask]

This is rich. Now you have to justify it if you want to pit some complete stranger.

[jayjay]

On the other hand, the movie sucked.

But then, so did the characters! *badum-ching*

[Indygrrl]

Oh shit, my daughter and I watched part of the original Blade yesterday on cable. She's nine, so I guess I'm guilty of bad parenting. :rolleyes:

My dad took us to see Hellraiser when that came out, I don't know how old I was, but we loved it and it scared the crap out of us. But, it was all in good fun, and dad still likes to say, "We have such sights to show you!" Good times.

[Earthworm Jim]

Kids know their limits. Just put em in front of a screen with whatever you want. If they don't show a reaction, they're just fine.
Are you, by chance, implying that the parents are a good judge of their childrens limits? Hmm, an interesting thought, indeed.

[Earthworm Jim]

1. My problem was that I didn't think the movie was appropriate for that age group. However I did not confront the father about it. I would not presume to know the child in question or the man's ability or lack there of of parenting. Like I stated, my opinion on how appropriate the movie is, ie. violence, language and sexual content. This makes you far more reasonable than some others who've posted here.

2. I thought that the behavior of the father, talking, bleching, etc in a theater was an example of boorish behavior to his kid. Even after I turned around and put my finger to my lips and asked the boy to keep it down, the kid chose to ignore my request as did the father.I agree whole-heartedly that this deserves a pitting.

FWIW,

Oh, and Hampshire, that should have been "...a better judge..." As in, better than the children themselves. As in, y'know, the parent who allowed the kid to see it in the first place.

[don't ask]

I believe Hampshire is being facetious. Read the rest of the post.

[eenerms]

This is rich. Now you have to justify it if you want to pit some complete stranger.


Looks that way doesn't it? :D

[Unregistered Bull]

Oh shit, my daughter and I watched part of the original Blade yesterday on cable. She's nine, so I guess I'm guilty of bad parenting. :rolleyes:

My dad took us to see Hellraiser when that came out, I don't know how old I was, but we loved it and it scared the crap out of us. But, it was all in good fun, and dad still likes to say, "We have such sights to show you!" Good times.


You did end up working in the sex industry as an exotic dancer. So maybe it affect you negatively.

[Bippy the Beardless]

Well Blade is a borderline type violent film, as the violence is comic book in style and mostly against non-human monsters. Still it would be an unusual 8 year old who could enjoy such a thing without nightmares. I don't think the act of taking such a young child to see Blade III (if it is like Blade I,II) would indecate bad paerenting, perhapse the child has allready seen the earlier Blade films and enjoyed them.

[BoringDad]

Jeebus! Go to sleep and work and fall 57 posts behind!

Give some emprical, not theoretical, evidence that an 8 year old seeing a vampire movie is a threat to your freedom. Otherwise, shut the fuck up.
Try following along in context. Aesiron was making a blanket statement that I am not affected by how others raise their childen. That is obviously false as we all interact in society. I am right now being affected by how your parents failed to teach you reading comprehension. Oh, and nice straw man about how somehow I claimed that it affected my freedom. I'll have to look between the lines to see where I suggested that.
Ah the old What You do Has an Effect On Others So Others Have a Right to Interfere in What Yo Do. What a load of horseshit.
Yes, it sure would be a load of horseshit. Had anyone suggested interfering. But Hmmm. No-one in this thread did.
Not informing someone about something they are doing that bothers you while running and whining to those whom you are less likely to get into conflict with? Not 'appropriate'; chickenshit. Or did the OP think it would inappropriate for the guys kid to see the OP get his ass kicked in public?
Wait. So interfering would be bad. But having an opinion and not making a scene in a public place is chicken shit? Or is it only chicken shit since she vented here? So many rules you have.

[Hostile Dialect]

Wow. It's amazing how many people seem to think that although the child's dad, who lives with him (at least sometimes, I imagine) and raise(s/d) him, doesn't know anything about what's OK for his son, a bunch of people sitting at their computers on a message board know everything about what the kid can and can't watch.

It's clear--from the range of personal stories here, if nothing else--that violent movies have different effects on different children. As we don't know the child in question, we thereby have no way to know whether or not the movie was appropriate for him.

[infamousmom]

This looks more to me likeFather/Son bonding.

Oh sure, quality father/son time, while Dad's chomping and belching his way through the horror movie and the kid's sitting there in the dark.

Parent/child bonding generally involves a bit more in the way of human interaction, not just two zombies occupying adjoining seats.

[Miller]

Oh sure, quality father/son time, while Dad's chomping and belching his way through the horror movie and the kid's sitting there in the dark.

Parent/child bonding generally involves a bit more in the way of human interaction, not just two zombies occupying adjoining seats.

Wow. Is there any aspect of other people's families on which you are not an expert? You know what movies are appropriate for all children, including ones you've never so much as clapped eyes on, and now you're the arbiter of what's "real" family bonding. Would that I were as wise as you.

[Helen's Eidolon]

I won't say what that child should have been doing. I don't know. All I'm saying is that if Blade III is like the first one, no child of mine will ever see it at age 8.

While it sure would have given ME nightmares, that's not really the issue. Nor is it the idea of understanding real from make-believe, I'm pretty sure all 8 year olds get that. I just think they could stand to be a little older before seeing such a dark depiction of the world.

[Weirddave]

Or how about some of those be-headings in Iraq? Maybe I can pull some off the internet and show them to my neices and nephews?
Wow. You aparently can't tell the difference between make believe with actors and special effects and real life with actual people being murdered. That's pretty fucking stupid. That's actually amazingly stupid. Tell me, how many times a week do you have to throw out a pair of pants because the idiot clothing manufacturers put the zipper in the back?

[CanvasShoes]

Holy fuck, someone notify CPS, I'm totally unfit!Did I say anything about YOU? No. Nor did I say everyone who takes their kids to Blade (which as others mentioned is more cartoony than anything else) is unfit. I was answering the statement of "parents should trust the judgment of their children" (paraphrased). PERIOD.

Okay, be honest now: You're not really that stupid, are you? Seriously, comparing the judgement of a toddler with regards to chocolate consumption to the judgement of an 8 year old boy with regards to his movie choices? Quite a leap there, don't you think?You had it right with your first thought. No, of COURSE not, it was merely an example of the fact that parents need to use their OWN, not their children's, judgment.

So, since children are obviously too dumb to trust in these serious matters, how exactly do you decide PG-13 is okay? Ooh, don't tell me; the kid gets to go when he's 13, right? And what happens when your teenager, raised in a GOOD home by the GOOD parents, is too emotionally retarded (or maybe he's just really sensitive and stuff) to handle the movie even then? Are you still a GOOD parent who made an honest mistake by letting him go, or are you a bad parent for not having the foresight to know exactly how your child would respond to this movie?Kids very frequently think THEY are 'ready" for things that we know they're not. It doesn't mean that they're dumb, or any other negative attribute. Calm down, I'm certainly not advocating swaddling them in bubble wrap.

I must say, I love that you'll trust the judgement of a panel of people you've never even met to tell you which movies are appropriate for your child and which are not, based solely on the child's age, but you won't trust your own child, someone you've known forever and who, with the help of an actual good parent, would be way more qualified to make such a decision, even as just a stupid 8 year old.Good God, that is a GUIDELINE, hence the with accompanying adult specification on the warnings. And you can cease and desist with the "stupid/dumb" etc 8 year old crap. Nowhere did I suggest that they're stupid because they might want to see something that they're not quite ready for, or rather that their parents and others feel that they're not quite ready for.

If that's "GOOD" parenting, you can put me on the "BAD" side a hundred times.Answered this above.

[Nobody]

Oh yeah FWIW, I am a female ;)
:o Sorry for saying "he" when reffering to you.

[BoringDad]

What seems strange to me is that people in this thread seem to be arguing that the parent is ALWAYS right. Do they think that there are actually no bad parents in this country? No parents who would actually make poor decisions for their children? You know of course that there is no exam needed to be a parent, no minimum standards, no licensing procedure. Parents throughout time have abused and mistreated children. Parents sometimes deserve to be criticized.

Parents can and do make bad judgements. I am not perfect. I have done things that I regretted. Parents do take children to movies they are not ready for. I have personally seen children leaving in tears from movies. This particular 8 year old at Blade III? May or may not be a good idea. But it would be the height of arrogance for any parent to insist that they are always right and always know what is best for their child.

Now as to the "I went to horror movies and it never hurt me" crowd... Thanks for the useless anecdotal data point. You see, people do actual research on the effects of media violence on children. Things like double blind studies, hormone measurements, brain scans, etc. You know, actual science? And the science clearly shows that violent movies and video games increase symptoms of agressiveness in children. My ex neighbor is a researcher in this field. Whenever someone from his office is interviewed for the news, they have a professor talk about their research and then rebut with some games programmer who says "Never hurt me!" If this thread is still going tomorrow I will get the researcher to send me a good reference page.

No, violent movies are not going to turn a child into a raving murderer. But violent movies are also not benign. A child is the composite of the things he learns. I happen to think that if you are going to teach a child about violence it might as well involve a good lesson too, like killing something to eat it. Not the lesson that "Random beheadings are cool. Nothing gets your blood pumping like a little f the old ultraviolence!"

[Weirddave]

What seems strange to me is that people in this thread seem to be arguing that the parent is ALWAYS right. Do they think that there are actually no bad parents in this country? No parents who would actually make poor decisions for their children? You know of course that there is no exam needed to be a parent, no minimum standards, no licensing procedure. Parents throughout time have abused and mistreated children. Parents sometimes deserve to be criticized.

Fine and dandy, and applicable to individual situations where one knows something of the parties involved, not, you know, knee jerk speculation on an Internet message board about people whom even the OP doesn't know.

This particular 8 year old at Blade III? May or may not be a good idea.
May or may not, I agree. NOBODY in this thread, on either side of the issue, has any clue weather it is or isn't in this particular instance. Baring compelling evidence that a given parent is encouraging or allowing something that is harmful to a specific child, a parent's right to raise their children as they see fit should be unencumbered and everyone else should MYOB.
But it would be the height of arrogance for any parent to insist that they are always right and always know what is best for their child.
It's even more arrogant for someone who knows neither the parent nor the child to insist that they ever know what is right for stranger (baring the obvious like "Don't put your baby in the fire".).

Now as to the "I went to horror movies and it never hurt me" crowd... Thanks for the useless anecdotal data point. You see, people do actual research on the effects of media violence on children. Things like double blind studies, hormone measurements, brain scans, etc. You know, actual science? And the science clearly shows that violent movies and video games increase symptoms of agressiveness in children.

Do you have a cite for this beyond an ex-neighbor? I would be interested in reading these studies.

[SkipMagic]

Do you have a cite for this beyond an ex-neighbor? I would be interested in reading these studies.
Me, too. I grew up with a steady diet of both classic and newer horror movies, and I swear I've never worn a hockey mask and carried a machete at the same time; I don't ever remember demurring at the chance to drink... wine; I shave when there's a full moon (but that's pretty much every day); I knew a guy named Frank who drank beer from giant cups made in Germany, but he ran out of money doing that, so his electricity was cut off; I tried making a glove with knives, but instead, ended up with a mitten and chopsticks; and, finally, I can't carry a note for anything, so the bitch, Christine, dumped me.

See? Normal.

[Miller]

Now as to the "I went to horror movies and it never hurt me" crowd... Thanks for the useless anecdotal data point. You see, people do actual research on the effects of media violence on children. Things like double blind studies, hormone measurements, brain scans, etc. You know, actual science? And the science clearly shows that violent movies and video games increase symptoms of agressiveness in children. My ex neighbor is a researcher in this field. Whenever someone from his office is interviewed for the news, they have a professor talk about their research and then rebut with some games programmer who says "Never hurt me!" If this thread is still going tomorrow I will get the researcher to send me a good reference page.

You know, if you're going to chastise people for "useless anecdotal data points," you'd better have something more substantial to back it up than "my ex-neighbor is a researcher."

[Miller]

Now as to the "I went to horror movies and it never hurt me" crowd... Thanks for the useless anecdotal data point. You see, people do actual research on the effects of media violence on children. Things like double blind studies, hormone measurements, brain scans, etc. You know, actual science? And the science clearly shows that violent movies and video games increase symptoms of agressiveness in children. My ex neighbor is a researcher in this field. Whenever someone from his office is interviewed for the news, they have a professor talk about their research and then rebut with some games programmer who says "Never hurt me!" If this thread is still going tomorrow I will get the researcher to send me a good reference page.

You know, if you're going to chastise people for "useless anecdotal data points," you'd better have something more substantial to back it up than "my ex-neighbor is a researcher."

[Silver Fire]

Did I say anything about YOU? No. Nor did I say everyone who takes their kids to Blade (which as others mentioned is more cartoony than anything else) is unfit. I was answering the statement of "parents should trust the judgment of their children" (paraphrased). PERIOD.
I'm a parent who already trusts my child's judgement, and he's not even two yet. You think peas are icky? Okay, eat some carrots instead. Dinner time and you're not hungry? Fine, you can have a light snack before going to bed. When he thought he was big enough to get onto the couch by himself, I let him try. It took him some time and he fell down once or twice, but he got it. Same with stairs; I was there Just In Case, but he got all the way up on his own. Surprised the shit out of me, too. I really didn't think he'd do it.
No, of COURSE not, it was merely an example of the fact that parents need to use their OWN, not their children's, judgment.
And these two are mutually exclusive?
Kids very frequently think THEY are 'ready" for things that we know they're not.
I do agree that kids are often wrong. In this particular situation though, I don't agree that a parent can simply "know" that their child isn't ready, and I definitely don't think parents should stop their kids from trying new things, either because they are not ready, or because they assume their child isn't ready.

I think that parenting ought to be a collaborative effort between the parent(s) and the child and that, at the age of 8, there is no reason a kid can't be involved in his own entertainment. I'm in no way suggesting that an 8 year old (or a child of any age) should be able to do/see whatever he wants; I'm just not going to be so dismissive about things based on age and the idea that I somehow Just Know. I've got less than 2 years of experience with this whole parenting gig, so I guess I'll have to wait and see how it all works out.

Parenting, like religion and politics, is one of those "agree to disagree" things, so I think we should just do that.

Deal?

[BoringDad]

Me, too. I grew up with a steady diet of both classic and newer horror movies, and I swear I've never worn a hockey mask and carried a machete at the same time;
See? Normal.
Yeah, yeah. Like I said, it doesn't turn you instantly evil. It has been shown to increase agressiveness. Increased agressiveness is not a wonderful desirable quality in a child, but it also does not instantly get them put in jail for life.

Since there is interest I'll send him an e-mail. I'd rather not pick a website myself because, as with most controversial topics, there is a lot of bogus research out there as well as good. I'll have him point out a few bad sites as well as the good ones.

[BoringDad]

It's even more arrogant for someone who knows neither the parent nor the child to insist that they ever know what is right for stranger (baring the obvious like "Don't put your baby in the fire".)
The argument had seemed to me to be expanded beyond the OP slightly. It was annoying to me that people were claiming parental infallibility. Arguing that the parent might actually be wrong does not instantly imply that the casual observer was right.

[SkipMagic]

Yeah, yeah. Like I said, it doesn't turn you instantly evil. It has been shown to increase agressiveness. Increased agressiveness is not a wonderful desirable quality in a child, but it also does not instantly get them put in jail for life.

Since there is interest I'll send him an e-mail. I'd rather not pick a website myself because, as with most controversial topics, there is a lot of bogus research out there as well as good. I'll have him point out a few bad sites as well as the good ones.
You keep making those claims, but I'd first like to see those studies, how they're set up, how they're defining "aggressiveness" and whether I agree with them that it is a bad thing. So, I'll just wait until your friend e-mails back.

I don't need any sites he considers to be bad ones; I just need studies which support your position.

[BoringDad]

You keep making those claims, but I'd first like to see those studies, how they're set up, how they're defining "aggressiveness" and whether I agree with them that it is a bad thing. So, I'll just wait until your friend e-mails back.

Well, this is the Pit. I'm not sure if it is legal to post actual scientific papers here, but, here is what he sent me. A couple of websites with loads of papers, and a few recommended papers.

www.psychology.iastate.edu/faculty/dgentile/publications.htm
http://www.psychology.iastate.edu/faculty/caa/recpub.html

Gentile, D. A., Lynch, P. J., Linder, J. R., & Walsh, D. A. (2004). The effects of violent video game habits on adolescent aggressive attitudes and behaviors. Journal of Adolescence, 27, 5-22.

Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2001). Effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior, aggressive cognition, aggressive affect, physiological arousal, and prosocial aehavior: A meta-analytic review of the scientific literature. Psychological Science, 12, 353-359.

There's a bunch more on these sites. I have not read most of these, but I personally know a couple of the researchers and have great respect for their intelligence. They are also always willing to accept any vaild criticisms, so fire away if you see something fishy.

[Hamlet]

You know, if you're going to chastise people for "useless anecdotal data points," you'd better have something more substantial to back it up than "my ex-neighbor is a researcher."The American Psychiatric Association.
(http://www.psych.org/public_info/media_violence.cfm)
The American Academy of Pediatrics (http://www.aap.org/advocacy/childhealthmonth/media.htm).

A couple good places to start.

[elfkin477]

What a moron! If anyone has seen ANY of the Blade movies, they are a bit on the violent side don't you think?



As others have said, this movie wasn't nearly as bloody or violent as the first two. I took my brother to see Interview With a Vampire - which was rated R instead of PG-13 like this movie - when he was 11, and he hasn't grown up to be a psycho, vamp loving killer, so maybe little kids can handle a few vampire movies and not grow up "badly raised."

[BoringDad]

As others have said, this movie wasn't nearly as bloody or violent as the first two. I took my brother to see Interview With a Vampire - which was rated R instead of PG-13 like this movie - when he was 11, and he hasn't grown up to be a psycho, vamp loving killer, so maybe little kids can handle a few vampire movies and not grow up "badly raised."
Once again, the research does not say that kids exposed to violent images all grow up to be psychos. Claiming that as the yardstick against which to judge the impact of violence is an obvious strawman that you throw up so that you can tear it back fown to "prove your point".
Exposure to violence acts to increase aggression. That is different than turning into a psycho, and in come cases it is useful (ask the Marines.)

I say if you are going to take a young kid to an R movie, make sure it is R rated for lots and lots of nudity instead of violence. When my girls are grown up, I sincerely hope that they will be exposed to naked bodies and even "GASP!" sexual situations. On the other hand, I hope that they will never be exposed to a running gunfight and bodies being chopped in half.

[Ephemera]

As others have said, this movie wasn't nearly as bloody or violent as the first two. I took my brother to see Interview With a Vampire - which was rated R instead of PG-13 like this movie - when he was 11, and he hasn't grown up to be a psycho, vamp loving killer, so maybe little kids can handle a few vampire movies and not grow up "badly raised."

Nitpick: While I agree with your point, Blade: Trinity is rated R, not PG-13.

[mobo85]

And no, I do not think that experience alone will make him a psycho killer. But he might spit in my Big Mac at Burger King some day.

This, of course, after the inevitable McDonalds-Burger King merger.