Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 

Age restrictions and films.


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 22-02-2008, 16:36
SimplyObsessed
Banned User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,954

Have these become almost pointless?

Nobody takes any notice of them anymore. Many 15/16/17 year olds can pass for 18, and many are also mature enough to watch them.

Also, Some 15 rated films are worse than many 18 rated films (In my opinion)

On TV many 12/15/18 films are availiable for people of any age to watch. And people can watch them online whenever they want.
SimplyObsessed is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 22-02-2008, 16:40
нℓєs
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,833
i agree, they're pretty pointless, i get into 18's all the time (not porn ) and i'm only 15--no way do i look 18.
нℓєs is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 22-02-2008, 22:57
ayrshireman
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,096
No.

People have always got into films they shouldnt (my own dad snuck into an 18 in the early 60's when he was 15), but the ratings are there for a purpose. Dangerous if we start letting 12 year olds into 18's or 10 year olds into 15's.

Certificates reflect the maturity of the adult content in a film and the ages therefore that are mature enough to watch and understand it.

Even Matt Damon admitted he thought 12A was too lax a certificate for the Bourne films. As for TV, then parents shouldnt be allowing 12 year old Johnny to watch an 18 cert. That simple. Just because people do something dosent make it right...
ayrshireman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-02-2008, 23:02
pault2006
Banned User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 7,634
I've noticed that shops are quite hot on making sure kids don't buy films/games that are too old for them (e.g. 12 year-old trying to buy an 18-rated game).
pault2006 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-02-2008, 23:19
Redrose01
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,200
IMHO, I don't think the ratings are effective/as effective in this day ang age purely because if a person wants to see a film for example of a higher age certificate than they are, there are many ways to do it including the internet where age can't really be verified.

In the case of games, my experience has been that if a child is refused sale of game of higher certificate e.g. 15, 18 than they will just get their parents or older friends to buy it for them.
Redrose01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-02-2008, 23:21
cooler
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 8,619
Their definatly not pointless. Would you want your 11 yr old child to able to walk into a cinema and watch a film on a huge screen with graphic violence and explicit sex.
cooler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22-02-2008, 23:45
Cornucopia
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 15,568
I think they probably are pointless the way they are configured at the moment. For me, the main point of the certs is the protection of children. Anyone may see a 12A certificate film - which allows considerable non-gory violence, moderate sexuality and one use of the F-word. At the same time, I agree that there is little practical difference between 15 and 18.

The main considerations of the BBFC should be (a) to protect children and (b) to inform adults about the likely content of films. This cannot be achieved whilst films with moderately adult content are available for all to view.

I would be happier with a strict 12 certificate - only for people 12 and over, and a 16 or 18. This (for me) is a simple updating of the old AA and X certificates. If the studios want cartoon violence in films for children they should cut them down to meet the requirements of the PG cert.

I can't help feeling that the UK authorities bowed to pressure to make our old 12 certificate the same as the US PG-13.
Cornucopia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-02-2008, 00:28
njguy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Stoke - On - Trent
Posts: 2,889
im 14 and got in for an 18 no probs, imo i dont see the point i mean its nothing i haven seen before, if i get scared its my fault. but i wont lol
njguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-02-2008, 00:30
Geeg
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Scotland
Posts: 19,969
This is of course an entirely new phenomenon and I never ever ever went to the cinema in the 1970s passing myself off as 18.
Geeg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-02-2008, 00:34
njguy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Stoke - On - Trent
Posts: 2,889
i mean kids can have sex when their 16 so why cant they see it unil there 18 it doesnt make any sense.
njguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-02-2008, 09:23
Cornucopia
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 15,568
The way the film industry & certification work these days, it is unusual for a film to be given an 18 certificate based solely on sexual content. Lust, Caution is one of the few that springs to mind, and that was verging on pornographic.

Mostly, the 18 cert is used for films with extreme, gory violence including torture and other sadistic elements.

In fact, it's worth a little run-down of the the certs & the way I see them working in practice:

U - true family films, and things like documentaries.
PG - typically films with slightly more action including incidental violence.
12A - films include non-gory violence, implied sex, innuendo and non-sexual nudity, language up to F*** and drug references, in moderation.
15 - films include realistic violence, moderate sex, nudity in a sexual context, unlimited language.
18 - generally films with extremes of sex, violence and/or drug-taking.

I don't really have much of an issue with any of the certs except 12A. It concerns me that the BBFC believe that certain content in certain films is suitable for children - the sex references in "It's a Boy/Girl thing", the drug taking in "St. Trinians", the nudity in "Mrs. Henderson presents". Interestingly, all three are British productions, so perhaps my theory about alignment to the US PG-13 certificate is wrong.
Cornucopia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-02-2008, 09:27
AaronG
 
Posts: n/a
To be honest the age limit for any film should be 13. When you're above that age violence, horror, porn or whatever isn't going to have any psychological effect. The difference between a 14 year old and a 24 year old seeing a slasher movie is that the next morning the 14 year old will tell his mates at school and the 24 year old will tell his collegues at work.

Ratings should be used as a guidance not as an enforcement.
  Reply With Quote
Old 23-02-2008, 09:32
Tumbleflumps
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,541
I've noticed that shops are quite hot on making sure kids don't buy films/games that are too old for them (e.g. 12 year-old trying to buy an 18-rated game).
I once saw a young boy take Grand Theft Auto to the till in Woolworths and they let him buy it because he was with his Dad. I only noticed the game he bought because he pushed in front of me in the queue.
Tumbleflumps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-02-2008, 09:37
Cornucopia
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 15,568
I think that's a prime example of the rating system for games breaking down. There would have been no point in Woolworths refusing the sale, because the Dad would have simply completed it instead. With a DVD, it may have been different. There's still a popular view that "it's just a game, how bad can it be?"
Cornucopia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-02-2008, 09:41
stud u like
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Sunny Side Of The Street
Posts: 37,976
I think that's a prime example of the rating system for games breaking down. There would have been no point in Woolworths refusing the sale, because the Dad would have simply completed it instead. With a DVD, it may have been different. There's still a popular view that "it's just a game, how bad can it be?"
Thats what irritates me. Parents having no conscience over unsuitable material for their children.

My mother was very strict over video nasties.

I saw a mother in HMV yesterday buy her kid "The Mighty Boosh". She did not even look at the certificate or consider its material to be unsuitable.

The child's voice had not even broken and he was a midget.

No way was that child 15.
stud u like is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-02-2008, 09:55
zx50
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Next to Consett.
Posts: 64,277
Have these become almost pointless?

Nobody takes any notice of them anymore. Many 15/16/17 year olds can pass for 18, and many are also mature enough to watch them.

Also, Some 15 rated films are worse than many 18 rated films (In my opinion)

On TV many 12/15/18 films are availiable for people of any age to watch. And people can watch them online whenever they want.
I was watching the James Bond film with Daniel Craig in it, and, couldn't beleive that they had passed this for a 12 year old. Especially the part where they were in the toilet fighting, something which I definitely wouldn't want my 12 year old watching, if I had children. This was a very bad judgement made by the censors or whoever they are, very bad. I think that as the years get on, they are going to start making violence in films available to early teenagers all the more, and this is wrong. I realise that they might get to see violence, but, this doesn't mean to say that the censors should be encouraging them to watch. This would NEVER have been allowed past the age of 18 when I was an early teenager........oh how times have changed........for the worse. But, I really can see them relaxing the restrictions even more over the coming years, because this Bond rating of 12A says it all really.
zx50 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 23-02-2008, 10:15
Biffo the Bear
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Nottinghamceistershire
Posts: 23,614
I quite like the American system (if it's still the same as it used to be).

Most 18s over there are rated R (for 'restricted' I think).

If you're over 12, and you're accompanied by an adult, then you're allowed to go in to watch the film. This let me go and see Shocker when I was 13, and it was great!
Biffo the Bear is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-02-2008, 20:22
Cornucopia
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 15,568
Thats what irritates me. Parents having no conscience over unsuitable material for their children.

My mother was very strict over video nasties.

I saw a mother in HMV yesterday buy her kid "The Mighty Boosh". She did not even look at the certificate or consider its material to be unsuitable.

The child's voice had not even broken and he was a midget.

No way was that child 15.
To be honest - the DVD certification of material shown on TV perplexes me the other way round. Something like Morse, that will be shown on ITV3 tomorrow at 5:25pm, has a 15 certificate on DVD. Perhaps that episode is "lighter" than others on the disc, or perhaps they'll cut bits out. Or perhaps ex-TV material just isn't as "strong" as other material deemed worthy of a 15 certificate.
Cornucopia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-02-2008, 20:35
Cornucopia
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 15,568
I quite like the American system (if it's still the same as it used to be).
Yes, it's here.

An example of it's odd approach - Rambo is rated R in the US, but deemed violent enough to warrant an 18 in the UK. Can't comment, I haven't seen it. But it does seem strange that something deemed appropriate only for adults in the UK can be watched by anyone in the US.
Cornucopia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-02-2008, 21:50
pink sparkle
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,705
Most people ignore the the age restrictions.

In english last year we had a class of 15/16 year olds and had to watch kill bill, which if im correct is an 18 isnt it??

We had to do it for coursework, but the teacher could have picked any film and picked kill bill, clearly knowing the age we were.
pink sparkle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-02-2008, 23:13
ayrshireman
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,096
Why the hell are you watching Kill Bill for an English class?...
ayrshireman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-02-2008, 23:16
pink sparkle
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,705
Why the hell are you watching Kill Bill for an English class?...
It was coursework. We had to compare that with Gladiator. The camera angles, techniques etc.

I didnt like it tho, too much blood for me!
pink sparkle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-02-2008, 23:29
MacLovin
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Scotland
Posts: 485
Age restrictions on films have changed over the years mainly due to television and the introduction of sky tv....what appears on tv now would never have been tolerated 20 years ago.
I work as a projectionist in a cinema and it is taken very seriously although the floor staff must use their common sense in determining age. Good thing for me is that any school visits to tour the cinema are not allowed in projection due to 18 cert films playing
MacLovin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-02-2008, 00:25
Turquoise
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,833
Thats what irritates me. Parents having no conscience over unsuitable material for their children.

My mother was very strict over video nasties.

I saw a mother in HMV yesterday buy her kid "The Mighty Boosh". She did not even look at the certificate or consider its material to be unsuitable.

The child's voice had not even broken and he was a midget.

No way was that child 15.
I wouldn't worry about that- there isn't much wrong with the Mighty Boosh. It's a light haerted comedy at the end of the day. And it's on TV so it's liely the child has seen it before. I'm not 15 yet, and I watch it, as do many people in my year.

My Mum agred to buy an 18 rated Shameless box set on my behalf (she bought it, I paid her back for it) an the basis that I'd seen most of the fourth series on TV.
I do consider myself mature enough to watch it, and I think she does as well.

I have never understood the whole 'protecting children's innocence' thing. Surely by allowing them to see sex and violence we are teaching them about it? Not all of us are naive enough to think that just because somebody does something on TV it makes it OK.

If I had my way, I'd scrap age rating and just put a list of material in the DVD/film that could be offensive/problematic on the back, and let people decide for themsleves if it was OK.

eg: 'Contains some strong language, a brief sexual scene, some comedy violence and material related to an adult lifestyle (ie the film might not be enjoyable to children).
Turquoise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24-02-2008, 10:19
scoobyju1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,717
Where I work, we are required by law to ID people who we think are under age. If we get it wrong & it turns out to be trading standards the shop & the person responsible could be hit with a huge fine. I for one can't afford to pay fine of at least five grand.

What I do find odd is that people get asked for id in supermarkets all the time, I know I do & i'm 28. I don't mind it, however, when we ask for id, people look at us as though they've just stepped in $hit. Generally, it's the people who are underage who kick up a fuss.

I remember when I was young, my mum wouldn't let me watch the Lost Boys because I wasn't old enough. When I did manage to watch it I couldn't undersand what all the fuss was about, it didn't scare me etc. However, I do believe different people perceive things differently.
scoobyju1 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 17:06.