I liked it -- it had great scenery, great action sequences, decent acting, and a decent storyline. I never read the book so I can't really argue about what they did or didn't put in the movie. But overall, it was a very good sequel.
But I do have one major issue with it ------ it was a little too violent to have a PG rating. There is a scene where the Narnians are literally being slaughtered as their escape route is cut off and one of the main characters has to make a decision whether to flee or go back and face certain death. It was a very, very intense scene.
Of course there was a lot of battle violence throughout the movie anyway. Granted they really didn't show any blood, but I don't think you really need to show blood in a battle for children to have a lot of misunderstandings as to what is going on, for them to have a lot of questions, or for them to get scared.
There were so many children under the age of seven or eight in that movie theater that I couldn't count them all. There were many toddlers and even a few infants. Personally, I think toddlers and infants shouldn't be brought to the movies period -- not only because of potential emotional or psychological impact from the movie but because a movie theater is just not a place for a child that young. Children that young are hard enough for their parents to keep up with anyway, but they tend to be distracting to other moviegoers. Especially crying babies.
Personally, I would never take a young child to a movie, let alone let them watch it on TV, without thoroughly researching it. If it is something that I think I would still be wary about even after researching it, I would have to see it first before I were to make a decision to let them see it.
I think the MPAA has made a lot of strides in recent years in its rating methodology. Movies with violent battles, extreme cursing, or inappropriate subject matter for children are having a much harder time getting a lesser rating. Granted in some cases, I know there are movie directors/producers/writers/studios that want that higher MPAA rating because they know it will mean more $$ in their pockets and will draw a larger crowd that is interested in coming out just to see why the movie received the rating it has.
Should Prince Caspian have received a PG rating? I don't think so. It should have received a PG-13 rating. Should the MPAA revise its rating system even further? Yes. Every rating shoud be tightened down.
So I think the MPAA ratings need to be changed from top to bottom in the following fashion:
- G: All audiences admitted, parents encouraged to attend with children
- PG: Children younger than the age of 13 must have a parent with them during the movie
- PG-T(EEN): Children younger than 13 are not allowed in the theater. Period. Children between the ages of 13 and 18 must have a parent with them
- R: Children younger than 18 are not allowed in the theater. Period
- NC-18: Just have this take the place of any X, XX or XXX ratings. Nobody younger than 18 admitted.
There are a lot of bad things in this world that children are being exposed to more and more. Drugs, sex, nudity, language, adult content, violence of any form -----
Popular culture and the media are innundating our society with these things and children are experiencing things because of that at a much younger age than they should be (and many things that they should never have to experience).
We as a society should become more responsible in regard to this and give our children more of a chance to retain their innocence and let them be kids longer.
I remember seeing Star Wars in the the theater when I was little; I remember Raiders of the Lost Ark being the first movie my Dad and I saw in the theater without my mom. I thought the action in both was cool. Han Solo and Indiana Jones (aka Harrison Ford) made both of those movies hits. But I never turned to violence because of what I saw in the movies or TV.
I think my parents did a very good job raising me and my sister. They taught us good morals, instilled a strong belief system in us, taught us right from wrong, and always remained concerned about what we watched and listened to. I admire them for their parenting.
But there are a lot of parents out there that just don't seem to care about what their children are exposed to; who don't talk to their children about the things they see or hear; or who don't monitor what their children are doing. Yes children need their freedom to be children, but they don't need so much freedom that they do things in the real world that they think won't have consquences to them or other people just because they saw someone do that on TV or in the movies.
Parents need to be more accountable for the actions of their children. There are too many parents nowadays that are too lenient with their children, too ignorant of what their children are doing, and too into themselves and not their children. We can't just blame only the children for what they do anymore. Negative actions of children are not always entirely their own fault --- those actions often can be attributed to parents not being good parents.
It doesn't take much to become a mother or father. That math is pretty simple. But it takes alot to be a parent.
Children need good role models. They need their parents to be good role models who make decisions for them that will guide those children to become role models themselves when they get older. So to help those role models develop, society needs to jump in and help steer the wheel. We all need to be a part of that --- and so does the MPAA.
No comments:
Post a Comment