Reply
Mon 7 Jun, 2004 03:39 pm
Younger teens getting R-rated movie passes
Monday, June 7, 2004 Posted: 1:38 PM EDT (1738 GMT)
BLOOMINGTON, Illinois (AP) -- Still weeks shy of her 16th birthday, Sydni Norris caught the R-rated war epic "Troy" on the big screen last month while her parents stayed home.
The Bloomington teen-ager's way around the rating system's age limit was a parent-approved pass card that has started a debate over convenience vs. parental responsibility and raised fears that the government might jump in to settle the dispute.
Supporters say parents can sign off on movies for their kids without the time and expense of chaperoning them with the new R-card, which Springfield-based GKC Theatres began rolling out last fall in parts of its 22-city chain in Illinois and three other Midwest states. The card only works for the R-rating, which requires children under 17 to be accompanied by a parent or adult guardian.
"I like it because now we don't have to wait until they come out on video," said Norris, a high school junior whose parents had to accompany her and sign for the $2 photo ID.
Critics argue that the cards amount to parents handing the delicate decision about what movies are appropriate to their kids, a shift they say violates the intent of the motion picture industry's voluntary rating system.
"All R-rated films are not alike. It is the parents' responsibility to make specific judgments about R films -- and wrong to give a blanket endorsement to all," said Jack Valenti, president and CEO of the Motion Picture Association of America, which issues movie ratings.
GKC, the nation's 15th largest theater chain, is the only theater network in the nation offering the card, said John Fithian, president of the National Association of Theater Owners.
Some opponents fear that leaving movie choices to kids could taint the ratings system, voluntarily enforced by theaters since 1968. They say that could open the door to government regulation that would stifle creativity and experimentation in film making.
"If parents lose faith in the system, the first thing they'll ask is 'What are our recourses?' Then, we could start hearing from every politician that wants to make a name for himself in the name of family values," said Dann Gire, president of the Chicago Film Critics Association.
GKC has issued about 700 R-cards -- most in central Illinois -- and plans to offer them throughout the chain by the end of the year, said James Whitman, the company's director of operations and marketing.
A convenience factor
Whitman said he came up with the idea after parents complained that they wanted to let their kids see R-rated movies but didn't want to sit through the films themselves. He said GKC encourages parents to give the cards to kids only after approving a movie.
"From what I can tell, the people who have them like them and the parents are trying to use them responsibly. We're not being inundated with kids whose parents are giving them access to everything that comes on the screen," Whitman said.
The motion picture and theater owners associations are pressing GKC to abandon the program, but some parents think the cards are a good idea.
Joyce Needham, of Peoria, said she discusses every movie "before and after" her 16-year-old grandson uses his R-card. With or without a card, she said, kids will find a way to get what they want.
"I just think communication is the answer and trusting the child," Needham said. "If you can discuss what's going on in this world, you're better off than letting them find a way to do it on their own."
What do you think? Is this just another way for parents to abrogate their responsibility?
The government should keep its big nose out of these kind of things. Leave it to the individual theaters or theater chains to issue them if that's what they want to do. Frequently I go to R rated movies and the kids are there anyway. How are they getting in now?
Teleporters Nick, lots and lots of teleporters.
I don't think this part of society needs or even wants to be regulated by the government. It's unnecessary and unethical to push so much when all the children are doing is watching a bit of popular entertainment.
I could understand the need to ban kids from graphic sex scenes but showing children a toned down version of what happens in the real world isn't the worst thing in the world.
Much of what is shown is not real life but becomes so when our youngsters emulate it.
Do young people really copy what is in movies past common sense?
Ok...bad question.
Hmmm...If they emulate it (assuming it's something bad) then their parents obviously haven't done a good job of raising their children.
Were you alive during the 60's?
Individual
Sixties Ha. Try the 30 's . I was a teenager in the 40's and by the sixties had two teenage sons. Have seen and suffered through it all. From Woodstock to communes and etc.
Good times, eh?
My point is that this type of stuff happens all the time, the difference is what we blame it on.
Back when women first started showing their ankles, it was obviously witchcraft. Nowadays, people think that the casual sex is a result of movies.
If anything, this problem stems from the high divorce rates in America. Children are learning
from their parents that relationships don't mean very much. On top of that, these divorces often leave emotional scars which manifest themselves in various sexually centered ways, promiscuity is just one result.
But then we could also blame it on biological urges. Humans, by nature, are noncommittal. We would just have sex with whatever woman we wanted (providing the leader wasn't around) and get on with our lives.
Or we could blame it on the fact that moving pictures are poisoning our children's minds.
I've given you three options. If you could choose one, would it really be movies?
I would blame a good part of today's promiscuity on the entertainment industry. They have trivialized sex.
The same biological urges that youngsters have today were always there. However, there was no media telling us or shouting at us that it was OK to act upon those urges.
People have never needed to be told to act on the urges. They always have. Our parents did, our grandparents did, our great-grandparents did, our great-great-grandparents did ... There wasn't a lot of media coverage of it (there was some - think of Chaucer ... ), but it was happening.
Now, that being said, I do think parents should have to go to R-rated movies with their children. They need to be aware of what their children are watching. Of course, I think more ratings should be given for violence, not sex. I thought it was interesting that Harry Potter 3 had been given a 15+ rating in Australia. It wasn't found suitable for children. Brilliant!
I'm much more worried about kids killing each other, than about kids having sex.
ehBeth
I beg to differ with you. Sure there were always a few. But they were the exception not the rule. And sexually active 13 year olds. Fugedaboutit. You can't equate the sexual morality of the 40's and 50's with that of today.
i think we should adopt the morality code of the british royal family or of movie stars. surely we could all agree that they are setting good examples for all of mankind (including children). since most people are frequenting movie houses, watching "various" kinds of movies, see t.v. shows, i'd think that we are tacitly approving of the lifestyles of our "stars" ? hbg
Re: Younger teens getting R-rated movie passes
au1929 wrote:Younger teens getting R-rated movie passes
Monday, June 7, 2004 Posted: 1:38 PM EDT (1738 GMT)
The Bloomington teen-ager's way around the rating system's age limit was a parent-approved pass card
Whatever happened to sneaking in, or buying a PG ticket then walking into the room showing the R film, or asking the adult person in front of you in line to say you were with him?
I think this pass card idea robs children of creativity, and one of the more memorable things of childhood.
General Tsao
I think much bigger problem is what exactly is rated as unappropriate today. ehBeth has excellent example of Harry Potter in her post.
In some countries (luckily, so far not in Europe) censorship is getting dictatorship proportions.
I am not saying teenagers should see erotic movies or be exposed to sex images or scenes, but having all country screaming in terror because kids saw one tit at SuperBowl is way way too much
by the way, prohibitions and censorships never do any good. I am not saying au does not have some good and important points, I just think that those are not ways to fight problems.
For example, in most european countries (not sure about every single one) teenagers can see "Troy" without problem. Same time, in all european countries together there is lesser number of school shootings then in USA. I am not saying that censorship of all kinds is responsible (although it might be), but it's more then clear that it's pointless.