Taking a 7yr old to see a 12A film

kookiethekatkookiethekat Posts: 2,867
Forum Member
✭✭✭
What do you think?

My 7yr old son is desperate to see Spiderman 2 and Captain America at the cinema, he is only 7 and the films are a 12A. Would you take your 7yr old to see them?
«1

Comments

  • 2shy20072shy2007 Posts: 52,577
    Forum Member
    Yes I would, both have some violence in them(what doesnt these days) but in the end, good triumphs over evil.
  • Kiko H FanKiko H Fan Posts: 6,546
    Forum Member
    What do you think?

    My 7yr old son is desperate to see Spiderman 2 and Captain America at the cinema, he is only 7 and the films are a 12A. Would you take your 7yr old to see them?

    If he's only 7, I doubt they'll let him in.
  • 2shy20072shy2007 Posts: 52,577
    Forum Member
    Kiko H Fan wrote: »
    If he's only 7, I doubt they'll let him in.

    There is no lower age limit for a 12 a, so long as they are accompanied by an adult.
  • Vast_GirthVast_Girth Posts: 9,793
    Forum Member
    I'd have no problem with my 5 year old seeing either of those tbh..
  • chrisjrchrisjr Posts: 33,282
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Kiko H Fan wrote: »
    If he's only 7, I doubt they'll let him in.

    Only if he went on his own

    http://www.bbfc.co.uk/what-classification/12a-and-12
  • deans6571deans6571 Posts: 6,137
    Forum Member
    What do you think?

    My 7yr old son is desperate to see Spiderman 2 and Captain America at the cinema, he is only 7 and the films are a 12A. Would you take your 7yr old to see them?
    Kiko H Fan wrote: »
    If he's only 7, I doubt they'll let him in.

    ...you are mistaken - if the kids are with an adult, they are allowed.
    2shy2007 wrote: »
    There is no lower age limit for a 12 a, so long as they are accompanied by an adult.

    ...take him - he'll be fine! I took my 2 boys (7 an 11) to watch Spiderman 2 and they both enjoyed it. As long as they are with an adult, they are allowed to watch it. Nobody even checks your tickets anyway (at my local Vue cinema anyway!!)

    Check the official Board Of Classification which states that as long as kids are with an adult, they can watch a 12 or 12A film (at the adult's discretion).

    ;-)

    EDIT - looks like chrisjr above beat me to it with the link....!!!!
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 53
    Forum Member
    I have taken my son who has just turned 8, and they were both suitable for him.

    12A is the same as the old PG rating.
  • c4rvc4rv Posts: 29,538
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Took my 7 year to see spiderman 2 and she was fine. Only problem is the film is nearly 3 hours long and she got bored halfway through.
  • PrincessTTPrincessTT Posts: 4,300
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I took my son to see Captain America for his 5th birthday a couple of weeks ago... He loved it and there was nothing in it that made me think he was too young. The cinema was packed and lots of the kids there were in the 5-8 range.

    I think lots of films that get classified as 12A these days would previously have been a PG.
  • yaristamanyaristaman Posts: 1,840
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    rouseclout wrote: »
    I have taken my son who has just turned 8, and they were both suitable for him.

    12A is the same as the old PG rating.

    The PG certificate is still in use. 12A is a separate certificate.
  • abigail1234abigail1234 Posts: 1,292
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    c4rv wrote: »
    Took my 7 year to see spiderman 2 and she was fine. Only problem is the film is nearly 3 hours long and she got bored halfway through.

    That is my one concern. Even I got bored let alone my son. Guess you need to take a lot of snacks, or take a loo break during the romantic bits...
  • BowmaniBowmani Posts: 188
    Forum Member
    We need to stop kids going to the cinema the only way is to make ALL films 18s. Come on gets start lobbying the government and BBFC to make this happen.
  • c4rvc4rv Posts: 29,538
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    That is my one concern. Even I got bored let alone my son. Guess you need to take a lot of snacks, or take a loo break during the romantic bits...

    My daughter went to see the hobbit which is close on 3 hours and she was fine with that though the spiders scene did have her gripping my hand. its just spiderman does have quite a few scenes which are overly long and don't do much for the film. Could easily have cut out 30 minutes.

    Anyway, if you having a loo break then book an isle seat for the benefit of the other people in the row.
  • JasonJason Posts: 76,557
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    This is why I think 12A is ridiculous because there are clearly some films that aren't appropriate for younger kids, but the 12A means they can still see them.

    Having seen Captain America, I personally wouldn't have a problem with taking a 7 year old to see it, but i've also seen some 12A's where I would have a problem.

    But that's a bugbear i've had for many years and I probably won't change now :)
  • roger_50roger_50 Posts: 6,896
    Forum Member
    Yep. Some 12A's are basically grown-up 15-rated films with a bunch of careful edits done post-production by the film company - allowing the film to sneak into 12A territory. They can often be quite brutal/harrowing/mature/etc.

    Other 12A's are general family fare that, assuming no f-words are present, probably would have easily got the old PG rating pre-1990's.

    In my opinion, there's too much of a wide spectrum of content within the 12A rating. It's become worthless.
  • EmilyJEGEmilyJEG Posts: 539
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I think The Woman In Black is the best example of a 12a rating being ridiculous. That film terrified half the adults in the audience - it should easily have been a 15! The majority of 12a films should be suitable for slightly younger children as long as they are somewhat mature. I'd never take a 3 year old for example, but I know my cousin enjoyed LOTR when she was about 7 :)
  • HypnodiscHypnodisc Posts: 22,728
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    This is why I think 12A is ridiculous because there are clearly some films that aren't appropriate for younger kids, but the 12A means they can still see them.

    Having seen Captain America, I personally wouldn't have a problem with taking a 7 year old to see it, but i've also seen some 12A's where I would have a problem.

    But that's a bugbear i've had for many years and I probably won't change now :)
    roger_50 wrote: »
    Yep. Some 12A's are basically grown-up 15-rated films with a bunch of careful edits done post-production by the film company - allowing the film to sneak into 12A territory. They can often be quite brutal/harrowing/mature/etc.

    Other 12A's are general family fare that, assuming no f-words are present, probably would have easily got the old PG rating pre-1990's.

    In my opinion, there's too much of a wide spectrum of content within the 12A rating. It's become worthless.

    I'd be interested in hearing some examples of 12A films that either of you think would be particularly unsuitable for a child aged say, 7-11?

    Not that I know films and classifications off the back of my hand but just about every film I can think of as unsuitable for children is 15 or 18. All the 12A's I can think of have some mild swearing, fantasy violence and maybe some breasts.. but nothing which they haven't heard or seen either on TV shows elsewhere, from adults or words from other kids in the playground.

    I think we worry about the minor stuff too much and forget about the stuff that actually matters. I've seen a lot of quite violent and/or disturbing films released as a '15' when I think they really should be 18+ for adults only.
  • JasonJason Posts: 76,557
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Hypnodisc wrote: »
    I think we worry about the minor stuff too much and forget about the stuff that actually matters. I've seen a lot of quite violent and/or disturbing films released as a '15' when I think they really should be 18+ for adults only.

    I suppose the problem is that we'll all invariably have different opinions as to what is or isn't suitable for children. To answer your question, one 12A that springs to mind for me recently is Robocop.

    There are a few scenes in that that I certainly wouldn't want a 7 year old watching - the original was an 18 certificate after all. I think my problem ultimately has always been with those parents who don't give a stuff what their child watches.

    Parents like the OP who actually ask questions and take an active interest in what their child watches I don't really have an issue with.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,653
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    With regards to the actual films, Captain not a problem, its a fantasy hero film that will hold his attention.

    As for Spiderman, no! That's not because of the age thing, it is more about the other people there.

    As with Man Of Steel, Spiderman is very dramatic, he is not always in costume, it is a more 'grown up' hero movie and will probably get bored easier.

    I went to see Man Of Steel and the first Spiderman at the cinema and it was ruined by people who had taken their younger kids to see it expecting Spidey and Superman right through and they got bored, started making noise, fidgeting and generally being a pain.

    Not saying your boy will do that but something to take into account. Spidey may be better waiting for the home release (am assuming he has seen the first one?) but Captain America I would say should keep him entertained for the full 2.5 hours and whilst violent, it is nothing too graphic.
  • c4rvc4rv Posts: 29,538
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Pidge wrote: »
    With regards to the actual films, Captain not a problem, its a fantasy hero film that will hold his attention.

    As for Spiderman, no! That's not because of the age thing, it is more about the other people there.

    As with Man Of Steel, Spiderman is very dramatic, he is not always in costume, it is a more 'grown up' hero movie and will probably get bored easier.

    I went to see Man Of Steel and the first Spiderman at the cinema and it was ruined by people who had taken their younger kids to see it expecting Spidey and Superman right through and they got bored, started making noise, fidgeting and generally being a pain.

    Not saying your boy will do that but something to take into account. Spidey may be better waiting for the home release (am assuming he has seen the first one?) but Captain America I would say should keep him entertained for the full 2.5 hours and whilst violent, it is nothing too graphic.

    Ignore this, go an see an early show where there are more families, you will be fine.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,653
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    c4rv wrote: »
    Ignore this, go an see an early show where there are more families, you will be fine.

    No, don't ignore it, consider other people.

    It's not like I am a late teens / 20 something geek! I have kids of my own.

    As I said, Cap, yeah take him, he will enjoy. Spiderman is a completely different kettle of fish. It is not like the Toby Maguire ones that were very comic book. These are more grown up!

    Someone further up in the thread has already pointed out their kid got bored!
  • KidMoeKidMoe Posts: 5,851
    Forum Member
    Hypnodisc wrote: »
    I'd be interested in hearing some examples of 12A films that either of you think would be particularly unsuitable for a child aged say, 7-11?

    Not that I know films and classifications off the back of my hand but just about every film I can think of as unsuitable for children is 15 or 18. All the 12A's I can think of have some mild swearing, fantasy violence and maybe some breasts.. but nothing which they haven't heard or seen either on TV shows elsewhere, from adults or words from other kids in the playground.

    I think we worry about the minor stuff too much and forget about the stuff that actually matters. I've seen a lot of quite violent and/or disturbing films released as a '15' when I think they really should be 18+ for adults only.

    Terminator 3 was a 12A, and featured a pretty gruesome scene that I wouldn't really want many 7 year olds to see.

    Personally I think the 12A certificate is the worst thing to happen to cinema in years, not because I care about kids being in the cinema or not but it's become the sweet spot for film companies to maximise revenue from their films, meaning we end up with films edited down to gain the 12A certificate. It's especially galling with sequels to things like Terminator and Die hard.
  • c4rvc4rv Posts: 29,538
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Pidge wrote: »
    No, don't ignore it, consider other people.

    It's not like I am a late teens / 20 something geek! I have kids of my own.

    As I said, Cap, yeah take him, he will enjoy. Spiderman is a completely different kettle of fish. It is not like the Toby Maguire ones that were very comic book. These are more grown up!

    Someone further up in the thread has already pointed out their kid got bored!

    And if I take my kids to a morning showing then I expect other families to be there. I'm not saying its acceptable to run around in the isles or throw popcorn but kids are going to get up for loo breaks or fidget.
  • c4rvc4rv Posts: 29,538
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    KidMoe wrote: »
    Terminator 3 was a 12A, and featured a pretty gruesome scene that I wouldn't really want many 7 year olds to see.

    Personally I think the 12A certificate is the worst thing to happen to cinema in years, not because I care about kids being in the cinema or not but it's become the sweet spot for film companies to maximise revenue from their films, meaning we end up with films edited down to gain the 12A certificate. It's especially galling with sequels to things like Terminator and Die hard.

    Problem is that without that additional family revenue, films aren't going to be made at all. And its the big money spinners that fund the little films that don't make a lot at the box office.
  • KidMoeKidMoe Posts: 5,851
    Forum Member
    c4rv wrote: »
    Problem is that without that additional family revenue, films aren't going to be made at all. And its the big money spinners that fund the little films that don't make a lot at the box office.

    Perhaps, but plenty of blockbusters in the past did well as 15/18 films and cinema attendance is higher now (certainly in the uk) than the 80's/90's before the 12a certificate existed. This may indeed be partly down to the 12a attracting families, but still doesn't make it any less annoying to sit through an appalling die hard sequel with watered down violence and during which John McClane barely swears.
Sign In or Register to comment.