Why?
Well in.the first 5 min, the lead character says he's watching ” sex and violence”. They say ”jackass”, make references, to porn, a boy leers at a freeze frame of a woman's butt, a hunky guy says he has a ”boyfriend”....there are more but that gives you an idea. I am no prude, and all for progressive films, but I don't need to explain to a 7 yr old wtf that stuff is at a PG film I thought was innocent.
Rock/Paper/Scissors/Lizard/Spock
www.myspace.com/kickasskunoichi
A character mentioning he has a boyfriend makes a movie inappropriate, how?
It was an edgy PG, a VERY edgy PG indeed. But it's still clearly a children's film. And saying, "Sex and violence" is not offensive in and of itself. The freezeframe of the workout video was maybe a bit much, but it's also realistic. Honestly, nothing about this movie's advertising said, "Take the little ones." It's a tween-appropriate film. And a pretty good one, for the most part.
,Said the Shotgun to the Head--
Saul Williams
I love how the OP has just about every other word bleeped out and calls anyone who disagrees with them an "idiot". Really smart move to insult others due to their beliefs and statements. That really makes me want to agree with you.
And for someone who is complaining about objectionable content why don't you try cleaning up yours before you complain about anyone else. Idiot!
Ha ha BUT EVERYONE HERE CLAIMS I'm SO INTOLERANT, and that excessive sex and violence is OK. Just joining in the HATE MOB here!
Might I ADD to all of you "tolerant 'it was a message promoting ALL tolerance including for sexuality" mob mentality" band wagon hoppers.... was Mitch "tolerant" of "that weird kid"???????
No. So STFU about your "message of all tolerance". That just shows how INTOLERANT some people (you *beep* hypocritical idiots slating ME for my "homophobia" smh).
Now go stir your caldrons, I'm sure there is another person you can persecute for their opinions/beliefs.
Rock/Paper/Scissors/Lizard/Spock
www.myspace.com/kickasskunoichi
What excessive sex and violence? All this film had in either area was some PG-level innuendos and general creepiness.
-----
Long live the new flesh.
My Top 25: http://www.imdb.com/list/KPl-XW7orjw/
dea chick, aren't you late for your klan meeting?
shareWait. What do you mean "excessive sex and violence."
I suppose it would help if you were to explain what it was you actually found offensive about this movie. Then people would actually have something to discuss rather than everyone just throwing blanket assumptions and insults around. I'm trying not to do that since obviously everyone is just flaming everyone at this point. I can tell you off hand the only real questionable content in this movie:
One mention of phrase "sex and violence" in relation to Television.
*Note that nothing specifically involving sex or violence is shown nor discussed at any length.
One mention of an "adult video store"
*Note the term: "adult video store" in and of itself is not an offensive or questionable term and in fact IS the tame or censored version. He does not SAY porn, nor is it mentioned in the film. Adult videos are just that. Videos for adults. Unless your child already knows what it is they can't very well question it further can they?
A single mention of the word "Jackass"
Not even a swear word. And also the title of several movies, posters of which could be found on public billboards around the world.
A single mention of the phrase "F Word."
As is the case with the phrase "adult video store," unless a child already knows what the "F Word" is they will either not care about the reference, or, God forbid they become curious and ask what it is, how hard would it be to simply say that it's a bad word. Because most kids are at least aware of "bad words" that they shouldn't say.
A single still image of a work out tape.
Yeah... this also falls under if they're old enough to catch the reference they're old enough not to have any questions about it.
And that's pretty much it. In about 90 minutes of movie. Hardly a call for PG-13. There are tons and tons of PG movies with far worse content, just like there are tons and tons of them with content closer to G. It's movies like this that the PG rating is for. It contains content that certainly warrants higher than G, but saying that it shouldn't be viewed by ANYONE younger than 13 is obviously excessive. So we have the middle ground.
Hands like Houdini.
I couldn't have put this any better. I agree Completely.
Come visit my http://theblackrosecastle.com
".... was Mitch "tolerant" of "that weird kid"???????"
Well, not at first. But by the end of the movie, he learned a bit more tolerance.
Which was the point of the whole movie.
I agree, it should have been PG-13.
____________________
Marlene King's pants are on fire, because she's a liar.
[deleted]
I think you may actually really be a prude. Sorry.
shareCursing at people who have a different point of view than the OP. Really mature....
shareCalling people ”trolls” because they have a different opinion than you: REAL MATURE.
Oh, I forgot. Maturity is not necessary on this board of ”tolerance” aka intolerant of anyone elses opinion.
Hey, my bonus?? Blocking all of the vicious ”trolls” and getting them ALL worked up and spreading their ”tolerance” (hypocracy more like), so win/win for me.
I think if elementary schools wanted to show a film for a Halloween party, they probably should not show this one. I think it's better if they show 'Nightmare Before Christmas' or 'Monster House'.
shareOP, you listed a lot of animated/Pixar movies and pointed out how they were rated PG. Let me point out that those movies also suck for anyone above the age 7.
Maybe one of the reasons ParaNorman was actually a great movie(even among older people), was because it wasn't catering to overprotective conservative parents that are too afraid of their kids seeing that gay people exist, even in movies. Your kids hear worse language in kindergarten; I think I learned every single word there was to know by 1st grade! Your kids hear worse just cruising around the grocery store, listening to foul people on the phone.
The kids that were in my theaters audience were chuckling hard at a lot of that "inappropriate" stuff, and even the lifestyle choice at the end(literally even 5 year olds). Staring at a butt on the tv? C'mon, that's funny, and that's something most parents could probably relate with(they're gonna' catch their boys doing much worse than this soon)
You also stated that a movie "aimed at kids" shouldnt have sex and bad language. Well, it doesnt. There was no sex, and the language was tame and appropriate. The "bad words" weren't used in any negative ways.
I'd also like to point out that it's a PG rated movie, not a G rated movie. Aimed at kids? No, aimed at family's, just like most PG movies are. Aimed at older people like me as well, that love stop-motion.
You can't make a financially successful movie that just caters to 7 year olds. You have to know/expect by now that a lot of these family movies are going to have some more mature stuff in them, as well as some references that only adults may catch on to.
PG is still 'parental guidance'... You should expect to be on your guard, with either rating.
Born when she kissed me, died when she left me, lived whilst she loved me
So this was a fun thread to slog through O_o.
I am planning on bringing the kids out for something fun this afternoon and thought ParaNorman would fit the bill. They are 6 and 9.
I'm pretty sure that if you said "adult video store" to them they would assume that it was a store filled with things like the news, Ghost Adventures, and other boring/scary stuff adults watch when they go to bed. So I'm not worried about that.
I really don't see how a guy having a "boyfriend" is any more risque than a guy having a "girlfriend" and deserving of more caution in the ratings, although I do frown on my kids watching shows where the entire focus is on having boyfriends and girlfriends in general (I know, I'm a crazy strict mom, I actually believe that "High School Musical" should not have an audience of 5 and 6 year olds, what's up with that?). My kids, because they have asked, have heard from me that most often girls like boys and boys like girls, but every so often boys like boys and girls like girls, and that's ok too.
So I'm really not that worried. I guess what I'm most worried about is that there will be all these heady things that littler kids won't understand and they will be bored and restless and embarrass me in public. But we'll see. Maybe I'll even check back in after I see it and give my two cents. Peace out.
What your describing is totally Okay for a PG rated film.
Your thinking of G that's supposed to be perfectly squeeky clean.
PG can have adult content, in moderate supplies.
I did not think that this was a film for younger children and I'm really questioning the PG rating. I think that watching a very little girl be sentenced to death might seem too traumatic for young kids. In all adaptations of 'Alice in Wonderland' that I've seen, the Queen of Hearts orders Alice to be beheaded but she never got away with it. The people who executed Agatha did succeed in doing something like this. The trial in 'Alice' films especially the Disney animated version never seemed scary. I think it was very wise to give films like 'Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith' and 'The Hunger Games' a PG-13 rating because younger people are killed in those films. The monster, zombie, and ghost themes also did not seem as family-friendly compared to other animated films such as 'The Nightmare Before Christmas' or 'Hotel Transylvania'.
Again, where does this notion that PG means "Totally 100 Percent Child safe" come from.
We have these ratings for a reason. LEARN WHAT THEY MEAN.
Parental Guidance is Suggested. You. Parent. Your Guidance is suggested in deciding whether or not this is appropriate. You. Its on your hands. Pay attention. I know you can't monitor every little thing, but you can find out a movies content with a quick internet search.
Too traumatic for young kids? Its not meant for six year olds. Should we implement "PG-7" just because parent's are going to fault the ratings system when it's their fault for not paying attention to what it means?