Harry Potter: COS Movie too scary for kids?

Baby Kate adores the first Harry Potter movie. She watches it every chance she gets. She would watch it all day long if we let her.

So we’re thinking of taking her to see Chamber of Secrets this weekend. But I’m hearing that the final fight scene is pretty damn scary and might be too much for her.

The facts:

Baby Kate is 2 1/2 years old.

Her favorite movies are:

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone
George of the Jungle
Shrek
Monsters, Inc (though there was some thumb-sucking when Randall was on the scene)
The Santa Clause
Stewart Little

She didn’t like Spider Man. She got pretty scared during the final fight scene and VERY freaked out during the scene where Mary Ann’s dad was yelling at her.

So I know some of you have seen CoS. Can anyone give me any opinions? If you need more info from me I’ll post it.

Even without seeing it, I’d say ‘no’. Dude, she’s 2 1/2. I would think that there would be G movies that would be out of her league.

Spider-Man was PG-13. I’m surprised that you would even let her see it. Way inappropriate for a 2 year old.

Rule of thumb: when she can read it, she can see it.

It’s rated here as ‘PG (parental guidence) some scenes may not be suitable for under eights.’

I don’t think I’d take my 2 1/2 y.old to see it. If I had one that is.

I took my 12 year old to see it last week. There were plenty of much samller children there, including ones are around your daughters age. I didn’t hear any get upset (I heard plenty of cheering), and none were taken out 'cos they got upset (I was near the doors, so I would have seen).

Without giving anything away, there was some blood in the fight scene, but little sense that Harry was in danger (he got some help). Personnaly, I thought the spiders were more creepy!

I haven’t seen it yet, but I have a couple of suggestions anyway. You could go see it without her and decide if she could handle it or not. If you think she can (you know your kid better then any of us do) then take her to see it. You could also wait until it comes out on video and rent it. This has too advantages. The first being that she will be a little older, the second being that if she does get scared you can turn it off, and not have to worry about disturbing other movie goers with her screams.

I haven’t seen either of the Harry Potter movies so I can’t comment on them specifically. However, I do want to mention that just because something doesn’t seem to scare a young child at one point doesn’t mean it will never scare them. A 2 1/2 year old may not be frighted by something that would scare a 4 or 5 year old just because they don’t yet have enough knowledge about the world to put it in context. So don’t be surprise if her tolerance for scary stuff actually decreases temporarily as she gets older.

Interesting book for parents: Mommy, I’m Scared: How TV and Movies Frighten Children and What We Can Do to Protect Them
by Joanne Cantor.

I was surprised to learn that scenes of transformation bother most kids more than anything else. A large number of Dr. Cantor’s correspondents reported that their children were seriously spooked by watching old episodes of The Incredible Hulk, where nice Bill Bixby suddenly changes into big mean green Lou Ferrigno, like Daddy after a few double Scotches.

My son is nearly seven and also loves the first Harry Potter video, although he always asks someone to come into the living room and sit with him during the final scene, where Voldemort’s face comes out of the back of Professor Quirrell’s head.

I’m in the same boat as you, Jonathan Chance. My two-year-old daughter absolutely loves the first Harry Potter movie. She asks to watch it just about every night. Often, when it’s over, she asks to watch it again (which is hard to resist when you see the cute way she tries to pronounce “Potter” – the T’s get left out somewhere). She raises her hand when Hermione raises her hand in the Potions class, and she claps and laughs when Harry wins the Quidditch game and when Gryffindor wins the house cup at the end. It’s her favorite film by far – next down the list is Monsters Inc.. She also likes Fellowship of the Ring, though it doesn’t hold her interest as Harry Potter does. Oh, and she like Teletubbies. Go figure. :slight_smile:

When she sees commercials on TV for Chamber of Secrets, she gets a big smile on her face and exclaims “Po-er!” and points. You’d better bet we’re taking her to see the second one. We already have our tickets for a Saturday afternoon showing, and the whole family’s going. If she gets scared, I’ll take her out of the theatre (and go back to see the whole movie later!). However, I seriously doubt she’ll get scared. My prediction is that she’ll sit entranced pretty much the whole time, quite happy. I think she’ll be more excited about than the rest of us (and we’re looking forward to it)! I’ll let you know how it goes, but if your daughter is like mine, I doubt you’ve anything to worry about.

That’s a good point, cher3. My eldest daughter used to be quite fearless, but now she has fears of flushing toilets and elevators. I’m not sure where those fears came from, but they are there. We take the stairs a lot. She also likes some pretty scary movies, though. I was worried that Fellowship of the Ring would freak her out pretty bad, so I waited until the DVD release to show it to her. She was fine with it, though. She’s 9, by the way.

My 7-year-old is unpredictable… she’s actually afraid of very little, and a voracious reader with a great imagination. However, some surprising things scare her. And more have developed, it seems, as she’s gotten older. So yes, I think your point about tolerance levels sometimes going down as kids age is pretty good.

The director Chris Columbus came right out and said the movie is probably too much for kids younger than 7.

I just got back from a midnight showing. Here are some of the creepier/scarier things from the movie:

There’s a dead cat (turns out to be just “petrified” but for all intents and purposes it’s dead.) Blood writing on the walls. Lots and lots and LOTS of spiders. A giant serpent monster with some pretty nasty teeth. A few ghosts of course, one of them being “Nearly Headless” :wink: Ummm, I think that might be it for the creepy stuff but I may be leaving out a thing or two.

I’d say it might just scare a kid but I doubt it’s going to do any permanent damage. Like someone else said, you know your kid best. Hell, I remember watching Scarface before kindergarten and look at me, I turned out fine!

Wow, I can’t imagine taking a kid under 3 to any movie at all, let alone one that is rated P-G, and is almost 3 hours long.
However, it is probably true that no permanent damage would occur.
I do agree that a 2 1/2 year old would not yet have the perspective to be scared of the same things which may frighten a 4 or 5 year old. I sat next to what appeared to be a 4 and a half year old at LOTR. For the entire movie, that poor kid was either squirming in his seat or covering his face.

We haven’t shown her TFOTR yet. I think it might be a bit too much for her.

I was hoping the Family Filmgoer in today’s Washington Post would have a kid-oriented review but I can’t find it online.

I started softening up Kate this morning while I was dressing her. Telling her that the movie (which she brought up) had a BIG SNAKE that tried to eat Harry and he fought it with a big sword (she knows swords from mine, I guess). She seemed amused by the whole thing (‘Siwwy Snake!’). I didn’t mention the spiders so maybe I’ll take care of that tonight.

I appreciate all the input, folks. Keep it coming.

Try looking at screenit.com (sorry, don’t know how to do links yet), for reviews based on how kids might handle a particular movie.

I brought my 2 year , 10 month old daughter to it. Nothing particularly bothered her, she enjoyed some of the funny bits.

My daughter (who is 5 now) saw Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone 3 times in the theatre with different family members, Spiderman 2 times with different family members and Lord of the Rings FOTR once, and handled them all JUST FINE. I don’t think that just because a movie is PG or PG13 means that it’s inappropriate. Use your judgement. If YOU think your child can handle it, based on other things, then take them to see it. You know your kid better than anyone on this message board or any book.

I’m with you on this – I was appalled when I found out that my nine-year-old cousins went to see FOTR. There’s no way I’d take a young kid to see an even slightly scary movie, both for the kid’s sake and the sake of the other people in the theater.

Daniel

OH MY GOD. I was TERRIFIED of the Hulk as a child. It all makes sense now.

She’s 2 and she enjoyed Fellowship of the Ring?! Bloody hell, I’m 24 and the fighting scenes in this movie made me feel uncomfortable!

Regardless, I do have to question the appropriateness of parents taking their very very young children to see scary movies. It’s interesting to note that some parents have no hesitation in taking their kids to movies with a lot of graphic violence and scary-ness but baulk at the thought of taking their kids to a movie with lots of swearing.

Dude, the kids are nine years old! You’d probably do them more lasting damage by not letting them see it.

The following is one of the more even-handed reviews I’ve seen, and is geared towards parents who are taking their children.
WARNING: Long, and a small spoiler -

They’ve grown taller. Their voices have begun to change. And they’re ready to take on the next big boarding school mystery. J.K. Rowling’s popular young wizard and his friends are back for their second year at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry in Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets.

Harry has passed a predictably miserable summer with his awful adoptive family—a holiday made all the worse by the interception of all correspondence from his school friends Ron and Hermione. To top it off, he receives an ominous visit from a house elf named Dobby. This digitally animated ascetic begs Harry not to return to school, warning that there is a plot afoot to harm or even kill the famous young wizard. But return Harry does, and discovers right away that evil is indeed lurking at Hogwarts. He repeatedly hears a sinister voice hissing, “Kill. Kill! I want blood!” Meanwhile, the new Defense against the Dark Arts teacher seems more interested in his perfect hairdo than in battling corruption. Threatening messages are being written on the school walls in blood. Students are turning up literally petrified, and many think Harry’s to blame. On top of that, his life is once again endangered by strange magic at a Quidditch match. And finally, Ron’s sister Ginny (who has a huge crush on Harry) winds up in the clutches of a nasty, conniving villain.

True to form, Ron, Harry and Hermione strive to stamp out the Dark Magic in their midst. They discover that centuries before, one of the school’s founders, Salazar Slytherin, had taken a racist vow that all prospective witches and wizards who didn’t possess “pure blood” would be banished from Hogwarts. To accomplish his vendetta, Slytherin endowed the school with a secret chamber and placed in it a monster that would violently eliminate “mudbloods,” or wizards of Muggle (non-magical) lineage. Not able to carry out his holocaust himself, he ensured that his heir would one day come to Hogwarts, open the chamber and finish destroying the mudbloods. From all the nasty business going on this term, it’s clear that the time has come and the chamber has been reopened. But even Harry and his mystery-solving pals are unprepared for what they find there.

• positive elements: Vanity is decried when Defense against the Dark Arts teacher Gilderoy Lockhart is exposed for a fraud. Prejudice is likewise put down with the defeat of the chamber’s monster and its racist mission. Even though he’s a famous wizard, Harry acts with humility and kindness toward lowly house elf Dobby. Friendship and loyalty are praised as the relationship between Harry, Hermione and Ron grows. Harry’s loyalty to wise professor Dumbledore proves to be a key factor in his battle with the chamber’s monster.

Harry once again doubts his own character, upset by the fact that he has several skills in common with the Dark Lord Voldemort, who tried to kill him as a baby. But when he questions Dumbledore about almost having been placed in the dark-leaning Slytherin House, Dumbledore reminds him that the main reason he wasn’t is that he asked not to be. “It is not our abilities that show what we truly are. It is our choices.” A good lesson about the rightful use of any talent, and how one’s character is not predetermined, but forged on a daily basis.

• spiritual content: Magic, used for good or for evil, is the cornerstone of this movie. Ron and his brothers ride in a flying car. The Weasley family travels using magic dust called “floo powder.” Harry and his friends take classes in Potions, Herbology and Defense Against the Dark Arts. Professors Snape and Lockhart lead their pupils in a Dueling Club, teaching them to disarm enemies with magic spells. Ron’s broken wand continually causes his spells to backfire on him. Harry hones his skills as a Parseltongue (one who can speak to snakes). In a game of Quidditch, someone curses a ball so it will chase and injure Harry. Harry and his friends spend lots of time conversing with Moaning Myrtle, the whiny ghost of a student who was murdered in the girls’ restroom. They also transform themselves temporarily into the likenesses of other students with a “polyjuice potion.” Dumbledore’s pet, Fawkes the phoenix, has healing power in his tears. [Plot spoilers ahead.] Ginny is put into a trance by a villain because she has been pouring her heart out in a magical diary. Later, Harry defeats the villain because his loyalty to Dumbledore magically calls help to his side.

• sexual content: None

• violent content: Far too much for a movie that will be seen by children as young as 6 or 7. Uncle Vernon falls from a second-story window. A “whomping willow” tree tries to whomp Harry and Ron to death. Harry, traveling by floo powder for the first time, accidentally winds up in a dark room with piles of shrunken heads. Harry and Ron are almost run down by a train. Filch, the school’s caretaker, threatens to kill Harry. A Quidditch match turns violent (several players are knocked from their flying brooms and Harry’s arm is badly broken). Dobby often “punishes” himself as a reminder of his subservient position. Punishments include beating himself in the head (shown) and ironing his hands (not shown). Myrtle punches Ron (of course, it doesn’t hurt him because she’s a ghost). An enormous nasty spider grabs Ron by the neck. Many smaller but equally nasty spiders menace Ron and Harry, and threaten to eat them. Ron and Harry are nearly buried in a rockslide. Ron knocks out a professor with a stone.

Most disturbing are Harry’s encounters with the chamber’s monster. First, he merely hears the beast chanting, “Kill. Kill. It’s time to kill,” and “Let me rip you. Let me tear you!” Later, he meets it (and its master) face to face. [Plot spoilers ahead.] In the ensuing battle, the monster’s eyes are gouged out and Harry attacks it with a sword, only to have one of its giant fangs implanted in his forearm. The monster’s master is destroyed when Harry repeatedly stabs the magic diary that is the source of his power. Blood bubbles out of the diary as if Harry were stabbing the villain himself.

• crude or profane language: Ron takes a liking to the phrase, “bloody hell!” He uses it a handful of times. Harry’s Uncle Vernon utters a muffled, “What the hell was that?”

• drug and alcohol content: none

• other negative elements: Some gross-out elements are included, the most difficult to watch being an extended scene in which one of Ron’s spells backfires and he ends up vomiting live slugs into a bucket. Also, Ron’s father works for the Ministry of Magic, and his job is to ensure that wizards don’t misuse “Muggle artifacts.” In spite of that, Mr. Weasley is fascinated with Muggles and himself illegally uses many of their inventions.

A disturbing theme carried over from the first movie is disregard for rules. It could be argued that Harry and his friends are simply taking extraordinary risks justified by extraordinary danger. But the film’s dialog once or twice makes it seem that Harry and company are being rewarded because they broke the rules rather than in spite of their disobedience.

• conclusion: The success of the first Harry Potter movie—and the expected success of this sequel—lies in their extreme faithfulness to the books. Of course, some details are omitted so as not to make a 2-hour movie even longer. But Chris Columbus knew that the artistic license usually taken with movies based on books would be a recipe for disaster in the case of Harry Potter, which has made avid readers out of millions. That said, it’s no surprise that there are really no surprises here. And nothing that will change many minds. The battle lines have already been drawn regarding Harry Potter’s treatment of magic. Those who thought it was hocus pocus before will likely continue to think so. The same goes for those already convinced that it’s an instructive depiction of occult magic. What will be easy for both sides to agree on is that the violence and fear-factors in this movie are quite inappropriate for the younger portion of Harry’s intended audience. Moms and dads who wish to ward off the curse of nightmares should keep their kids out of The Chamber of Secrets.