Watchmen (film)

[Baron Samedi]

One of the most breathtaking films I have ever witnessed.

Simply put, I think this is up there with American Beauty, Citizen Kane, and other classic films.

Rorschach and Comedian are such a haunting characters it is unbelievable.

GO SEE THIS FILM NOW!

And when you are done, read the graphic novel that came many many many years before this film by Englishman Alan Moore (League of Extraordinary Gentleman, V for Vendetta)

[Psychonaut]

It's certainly a faithful adaption, even more so than V for Vendetta was. The casting was spot on, the acting was great, the music was terribly appropriate (especially the Dylan song in the opening credits/flashback scene), the deviations from the novel were necessary, the violence was gorgeous and everything tied together in a way that the movie (even though it clocks in at about 2:45) wasn't tedious in the least. Do yourself a favor and go see it now!


League of Extraordinary Gentleman

If you guys have only seen the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen film, please don't judge Moore's work by that film alone, it was terrible. :(

[Birka]

Speaking of League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, I read an interview that when Sean Connery accepted to do that film, he chose that over the Matrix. Could you imagine all of Morpheus' classic lines played by Sean Connery? Galloglaich and I are always trying to reenact Morpheus' lines in that great Connery brogue. "Do you think you are breathing air, here, in this place?"
As for the Watchman, we are planning to see it next week. It looks to be one of those movies that needs to be seen on the big screen.

[Beorn]

I'm sticking two fingers up to Hollywood and watching it illegally right now.

Back with my opinions of the movie in 2 hours 43 mins.

[Aemma]

I'm sticking two fingers up to Hollywood and watching it illegally right now.

Back with my opinions of the movie in 2 hours 43 mins.


Ya but I saw it on the big screen last night. Hubby and I went on a date! Ner-ner BWW! :D

Will respond to this thread in a little while. Have to eat supper now. :)

:D...Aemma

[SPQR]

Damn I want to see this so bad! My girlfriend owes me a good movie after I put up with "My Best Friends Girl" a little while ago

I loved the graphic novel

[Solwyn]

My son is begging me to see this. He is trying to convince me that I want to see this on my birthday next week. He's putting a lot of effort into it, so maybe I'll relent and take him, as I wasn't terribly interested in it.

[Psychonaut]

My son is begging me to see this. He is trying to convince me that I want to see this on my birthday next week. He's putting a lot of effort into it, so maybe I'll relent and take him, as I wasn't terribly interested in it.

If he's young you might want to reconsider taking him. There are two sex scenes (one of which is an attempted rape), both of which are pretty explicit. The violence is also very graphic.

[Aemma]

If he's young you might want to reconsider taking him. There are two sex scenes (one of which is an attempted rape), both of which are pretty explicit. The violence is also very graphic.

Yep. It's rated 18A in Ontario anyway and it's a fair call I think. The sexual scenes are quite explicit. And the violence is very very graphic...that axe severing the guy's head was as graphic as it comes.

Cheers!...Aemma

[Aemma]

Speaking of League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, I read an interview that when Sean Connery accepted to do that film, he chose that over the Matrix. Could you imagine all of Morpheus' classic lines played by Sean Connery? Galloglaich and I are always trying to reenact Morpheus' lines in that great Connery brogue. "Do you think you are breathing air, here, in this place?"
As for the Watchman, we are planning to see it next week. It looks to be one of those movies that needs to be seen on the big screen.

Indeed it is Birka. You and Galloglaich will not be disappointed. :)

Cheers!...Aemma

[Beorn]

Thought I'd take a little breather. Still an hour to go, but WOW! Great film so far.

Loving that Rorschach character. "You don't seem to understand. I'm not locked up in here with you, you are locked up in here with ME!"

:laugh:

Funny that this character has clicked with me. I had such a great Baader Meinhof (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1616&highlight=meinhof) moment as I had been reading an article in Scientific American discussing the very validity of the Rorschach test today.

Well, here goes for the second half. See you in an hour.

[Birka]

Thought I'd take a little breather. Still an hour to go, but WOW! Great film so far.

Loving that Rorschach character. "You don't seem to understand. I'm not locked up in here with you, you are locked up in here with ME!"

:laugh:

Funny that this character has clicked with me. I had such a great Baader Meinhof (http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1616&highlight=meinhof) moment as I had been reading an article in Scientific American discussing the very validity of the Rorschach test today.

Well, here goes for the second half. See you in an hour.

My 18 yr. old son loved the movie and talks about the Rorschach character all the time. He bought the graphic novel and finished it already. He and his pals saw it on the midnight opening Friday am.

Let me know if you will still go out and see it on the big screen to get the full effects, or is it just OK to see it on the tube or screen.

[Baron Samedi]

My 18 yr. old son loved the movie and talks about the Rorschach character all the time. He bought the graphic novel and finished it already. He and his pals saw it on the midnight opening Friday am.

Let me know if you will still go out and see it on the big screen to get the full effects, or is it just OK to see it on the tube or screen.

:eek: BIG SCREEN! BIG SCREEN! :eek:

[Beorn]

Let me know if you will still go out and see it on the big screen to get the full effects, or is it just OK to see it on the tube or screen.


I will be the first to say that a film like this should be seen on a big screen with surround sound stereo, but then a film isn't enjoyed by its graphics and its effects, at least not by me.
It is the storyline and the plot, the character development and the sheer fantasy of immersing yourself into a whole new world.

I could probably go and see the film on the big screen. Pay my £7 entrance fee, but I would only be watching it for the effects and not the story being told.

And anyway, I have a good enough PC screen with surround sound :p


The Watchmen part one (http://www.supernovatube.com/play.php?viewkey=c6eb4253c989f40f8b61) The Watchmen part two (http://www.supernovatube.com/play.php?viewkey=47a33ca14e8b84fc432f)


Out of a possible ten points, I give this film 10.

[Tolleson]

...that axe severing the guy's head was as graphic as it comes.

Cheers!...Aemma

My Love, it was a meat cleaver and he was just lobe seperating!:eek:

Aemma doesn't get in the kitchen much.:D

Runs and hides beside the stove...she'll never find me here!:p

[Absinthe]

We have been waiting impatiently to see it, and it's going to be released next week....finally!! :D

[Baron Samedi]

I saw it again last night.

Honestly, I think the film was meant to be a social stratification tool.... Two of my friends thought it was a silly, boring movie that had no depth to it.....

wtf mate.....

[Absinthe]

social stratification tool

:lol:

[Treffie]

It's not out here yet, but I'll be first in line when it does. :thumb001:

[Birka]

I saw the Watchman with Galloglaich last night. WOW. What eye candy. I loved it. Great story. I want to see it again, and I have never read the graphic novel. I will soon though.

I liked that most of the actors were not big name celebrities.

[Beorn]

I liked that most of the actors were not big name celebrities.


In most cases that is what "makes" the film for me.

[Birka]

That is probably why so many "Indie" movies are so interesting. You do not have to get caught up in the movie star thing. Like "Oceans 11" was all about the number of name movie stars, more than the plot.

[Absinthe]

^ Nevertheless that was a highly entertaining movie :D

[lei.talk]

I will be the first to say that a film like this should be seen on a big screen with surround sound stereo, but then...I have a good enough PC screen with surround sound :p


The Watchmen part one (http://www.supernovatube.com/play.php?viewkey=c6eb4253c989f40f8b61) The Watchmen part two (http://www.supernovatube.com/play.php?viewkey=47a33ca14e8b84fc432f)


Out of a possible ten points, I give this film 10.
http://i41.tinypic.com/dexk3s.jpg

[Treffie]

Loving that Rorschach character. "You don't seem to understand. I'm not locked up in here with you, you are locked up in here with ME!"

:laugh:



Best line in the film IMO. ;)

Boy was it gruesome - I loved it!

[Beorn]

The "Watchmen" Lie: Hollywood Sends More Depravity Your Kids' Way Costumed as "Superhero" Flick (http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2009/03/the_watchmen_li.html)

If you take your kids to see "Watchmen (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0409459/)," you're a moron.
If you see it yourself, you're also probably a moron and a vapid, indecent human being. The movie arrives in theaters at Midnight, Thursday Night. It's rated "R"--which should kinda sorta be a hint--but it really deserves an "NC-17," at the very least. And plenty of clueless parents brought their young kids and kept them there for the entire almost three hour "experience" at the screening I attended.
Yes, I know, it's being heavily marketed as a superhero movie, with action figures (http://www.watchmencomicmovie.com/watchmen-action-figures-toys.php) for your kids. But that--and the heroic-looking movie trailer--are a big, fat lie. And that's where real parenting comes in . . . like actually investigating the movie before you take or send your kids to see this garbage.
In fact, as a movie critic who sees most new releases, I haven't seen a more violent, depraved movie in years (not to mention a longer, more boring movie with a more preposterous and silly plot). This movie makes the graphic bloodshed of the recently released "Friday the 13th" look like "Cinderella."

This really isn't a superhero movie at all. In fact, there was little "superheroing" until after the second hour of this nearly three-hour exercise on defining deviancy down. Some on the right are claiming this is a conservative movie because it's made by some of the same people as "300" (read my review) (http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2007/03/weekend_box_off_43.html). But this is no "300." (And that wasn't for kids either, but this is far much less so.) A few lines of dialogue by the character "Rorschach" deriding "liberals and intellectuals" doesn't excuse the nearly three hours of poison here. In fact, the movie kind of has a peacenik-themed ending and "message" regarding nuclear weapons. If this move is "conservative," who the heck needs liberal?
There were so many disgusting, violent, morbid, grisly scenes and acts of killing, I had to start writing them down, lest I forget. And that's in addition to the rape scene between superheroes (complete with violent beating of a female superhero) and an explicit sex scene between two other superheroes. Oh, and don't forget another superhero's swinging computer-generated penis frequently in your face on-screen.
In just the opening credits of this mindless celluloid claptrap, there's a lesbian take-off on the famous photo of a woman kissing a sailor in Manhattan who is returning victorious from World War II. The lesbian make-out scene, featuring a "superhero," is bad enough. But then, we see cops looking over their naked, bloodied, dead bodies on a bed, with the words "LESBIAN WHORES," written in blood on the wall.
Mommy, mommy, what's a lesbian? What's a whore? And remember, this is just the opening credits.

The "plot" of this movie--if you can call it a plot--is that there were costumed superheroes in the '40s and beyond. They grew old, but some of them didn't. Then a new crop of costumed superheroes with special powers cropped up, some of whom were related to the older ones and some who still remained from the older group. But they all retired. Now, a superhero known as "The Comedian"--who is also a rapist and shot a Vietnamese woman who was pregnant with his kid (all of which we see depicted on-screen)--is murdered, and some of the superheroes, the "Watchmen," get back together to find out who did it.
At the same time, the Soviets are about to nuke America. It's 1985 and Nixon is President. We've won in Vietnam. Oh, and Henry Kissinger has a Russian accent. And Ronald Reagan is thinking of running for President in 1988. Wow, isn't that cool that they got it wrong on purpose? I'm so amazed at this "high-brow art" of deliberately getting dates and timelines wrong, you know, just to be "artistic," and get the drooling of the critics. That is sooooo genius. Like way totally cool.

Maybe if I make a movie about how Eisenhower was President in 1972, we "lost" World War II, and Bin Laden was gonna bomb the World Trade Center then, I'll be cool, too. . . so long as it's "dark" and I include a bunch of rape, torture, explicit sex scenes, and extremely graphic killings, and oh, write a "graphic novel" a/k/a comic book about it, first.
In the midst of this stupid story, we're treated to the following:

* Dogs fighting over, tearing apart, and eating a six-year-old girl--we're shown them chowing down on and tearing apart the remaining leg and leg bone, with the sock and shoe still on the bone as the dogs wrestle over it;

* A close up of man repeatedly getting an axe-blade driven through his skull while he's being butchered;

* At least two very graphic scenes of naked superhero "Dr. Manhattan" vaporizing people to just blood, limbs, and guts hanging from the ceiling or spread in the snow;

* Many scenes of Dr. Manhattan's computer generated penis swinging about;

* A kid biting a giant, bloody chunk of flesh out of another kid's face--he grows up to be "Rorschach," one of the superheroes' compatriots;

* A man's hands and arms being sawed off with an electric saw--we're shown the bloody stumps and the bloody sawed off limbs in close up shots;

* A man with vat of hot french fry oil deliberately thrown over his head--we literally see him fry, and he ultimately dies, we're told (no kidding);

* Many, many scenes of people's hands, arms, fingers being broken in half or crunched by the "superheroes";

* Cops being set on fire and burning to death by superhero compatriot "Rorschach;"

* Superhero "The Comedian" (a bad Robert Downey, Jr. look-alike) brutally beating and raping another superhero--tis movie concludes that the rape was a good thing b/c the slutty superhero had a slutty superhero daughter from him;

* Superhero "The Comedian" shooting and killing a Vietnamese woman because she's pregnant with his kid;

* Superhero "The Comedian" being thrown off a roof of a tall building--we see his body hit the ground and the blood flow out;

* Two superheroes have an explicit sex scene in a spaceship--she's on top, then he's on top, awesome--you can teach your young kids multiple sexual positions before they even reach puberty, by taking them to see this (there's a less explicit sex scene between the slutty superheroine and another superhero not long before that).
And these are just the highlights, plus superheroes hurling obscenities--great for the kiddies. There's so much more--along with horrible make-up, bad acting, and terrible computer generated images (including the penis). Not to mention, a bad, extremely slow, and boring script.

Yup, this is the garbage that Rupert Murdoch's Fox and Warner Brothers and Paramount are marketing toward your kids. All of these studios have a piece in this movie. And even thought the budget was just $100 to $125 million, because of a long legal battler between WB and Fox, the legal fees and pay-out make it such that they must recoup at least $200 or 300 million and make a profit. To do so, they are pimping the movie to all niches, especially your young kids.
But just because shameless whores and crack dealers of Hollywood deal this stuff out, doesn't mean you have to buy it and poison your kids' minds with it.

Remember the morons I told you about who took their kids to see the latest "Friday the 13th (http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2009/02/the_end_of_pare.html)," last month? Well, they were back with their kids at a Monday Night screening of this horribly depraved, whacked out movie.
Remember the White single mother who told me her ten-year-old son could see it because "he knows it's not real and he knows the difference between right and wrong"? Well, she was back with her ten-year-old, and they waited in line for at least two hours with their free pass to get in to this screening, I'm told. I saw them walking out at the end.
Her son is going to grow up to be messed up. Don't do the same to your kid.

And do yourself a favor, too. Save the ten bucks and the three hours of your life you'll never get back. And the nightmares of some guy's bloody, sawed-off arms and hands still clinging to the doors of a jail cell.
I don't just worry that this is the new superhero movie being marketed to your kids today. I worry about the ones that will be even more depraved a decade from now.
G-d help this country (minus Hollywood).
Debbie Schulssel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debbie_Schlussel#Early_life_and_political_career) Here's what I think of you (http://ohnoits.ytmnd.com/)

[Beorn]

Ye Gods! I just noticed this from the article


FOUR MARXES PLUS
http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/karlmarxmovies.jpghttp://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/karlmarxmovies.jpghttp://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/karlmarxmovies.jpghttp://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/karlmarxmovies.jpghttp://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/plus.jpg

:eek:

[Psychonaut]

I'm with you Beorn, most "film critics" wouldn't know a good flick if it hit them upside the head. So many of my favorite films end up with only 50% or so positive ratings due to self-righteous asshats like these.

[Aemma]

I think that this woman totally missed the point of the movie. (Big surprise! :rolleyes:) The movie itself is meant to be a commentary on our views of the superhero. The various storylines paint the image of the 'superhero' as an entity that is more of an antihero than anything else. Indeed the Watchmen themselves, each and everyone, are at the very least flawed heroes and at their worst villains themselves within certain life contexts. The graphic 'depravity' (as this woman likes to call it) effectively highlights the utter irony of it all: the superhero is as powerless in matters relating to his/her own life as any typical human being may be. They may fight crime but cannot fight their own inner demons. And this, in the end, is what made the movie the brilliant commentary on our fixation with the notion of superhero. It cannot but make us ponder the ultimate question: if this is a portrayal of the superhero in toto, then what do we really mean by the term superhero?

And the biggest twist for me **** major spoiler here**** is the fact that the 'evil villain' is indeed the one that saves the humans from some cataclysmic end. It was a brilliant end to a brilliant movie that required us to rethink the notion of the superhero.

Cheers!...Aemma

[Osweo]

Debbie Schulssel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debbie_Schlussel#Early_life_and_political_career) Here's what I think of you (http://ohnoits.ytmnd.com/)

Hmmm. I'm actually glad I read her article. I haven't seen it, but from her list, the film seems pretty sick to me. The main point is that it seems to have been wrongly rated in America. Is 'R' like our 'PG' (Parental Guidance) or '12'? From all your descriptions it sounds like it should definitely be an '18'. I'd seriously consider starting up a '21' classification for films with rape and torture. Gratuitous scenes of which I'd rather ban altogether.

I am not impressed by the selfishness and vanity of those who think that because they can find the clever meanings and subplots and whatever in such productions, that the general populace should be free to watch whatever scenes of violence, and especially sexual violence, that filmmakers can dream up. Just because you believe you can handle and intellectualise something, doesn't mean everyone can. If we can't restrict access to those who can't, we'd better eliminate the dangerous thing in question, and do without ourselves. :(

There's far too much torture and brutal murder in films today. It disgusts me, and I dread to think what it's doing to our youth.

As Dostoyevsky said of books, we should only be sponsoring those films "which produce beautiful impressions or give rise to lofty thoughts."

[Psychonaut]

Is 'R' like our 'PG' (Parental Guidance) or '12'? From all your descriptions it sounds like it should definitely be an '18'.

With R movies you have to be seventeen to buy a ticket. However, parents can buy tickets and accompany their children to R movies. It's lamentable, but there were quite a few small children in the audience when I went to see the movie. I can't understand those kinds of "parents." We're even picky about the kinds of PG-13 movies that our 11 year old watches.

[Osweo]

With R movies you have to be seventeen to buy a ticket. However, parents can buy tickets and accompany their children to R movies. It's lamentable, but there were quite a few small children in the audience when I went to see the movie. I can't understand those kinds of "parents."
That's awful, and should prompt the scrapping of a rating that relies on parental 'disgression'. :(

I've seen similar myself, going to the pictures. There was one thing, an animated thing of some description, which was probably 'Parental Guidance' I saw when 15 or so, and I wouldn't have been comfortable watching it in the presence of my mother (quite a good test!), and some old granny had come along with two ten year old boys. Some guardians are just irresponsible, but this old woman was probably from the other section - older people who have little concept of what filth the 'mainstream' film industry is plumbing the depths for these days. I so despair of the trusting attitude many have - "oh, the authorities approved it, it must be okay".

[Aemma]

Hmmm. I'm actually glad I read her article. I haven't seen it, but from her list, the film seems pretty sick to me. The main point is that it seems to have been wrongly rated in America. Is 'R' like our 'PG' (Parental Guidance) or '12'? From all your descriptions it sounds like it should definitely be an '18'. I'd seriously consider starting up a '21' classification for films with rape and torture. Gratuitous scenes of which I'd rather ban altogether.

I am not impressed by the selfishness and vanity of those who think that because they can find the clever meanings and subplots and whatever in such productions, that the general populace should be free to watch whatever scenes of violence, and especially sexual violence, that filmmakers can dream up. Just because you believe you can handle and intellectualise something, doesn't mean everyone can. If we can't restrict access to those who can't, we'd better eliminate the dangerous thing in question, and do without ourselves. :(

There's far too much torture and brutal murder in films today. It disgusts me, and I dread to think what it's doing to our youth.

As Dostoyevsky said of books, we should only be sponsoring those films "which produce beautiful impressions or give rise to lofty thoughts."

Guilty as charged Ossie, but can we as adults not have general access to films that are geared, well, to adults only? These days choices are limited for adults: either one is bombarded with Disney/Pixar family movies (which I do enjoy by the way) or bombarded with drivel such as all of those will Farrell movies. Is there not room for a true adult movie in this world without it being a pornographic one as the only qualifier in the genre of 'adult movie'? For the record, there was nothing pornographic in this movie; the sexual scenes weren't any worse than what you'd see in any other 18/rated 'R' movie. The same could be said for the violence as well imo.

The fact that the marketing machine may be peddling these characters as play figures is disturbing I grant you inasmuch as they are supposedly targeting children. But a couple of points to consider please. Firstly, who says that the parent has to buy such for their child? My hubby and I saw this movie when it first came out last Friday and I assure you never in the world would I be letting my 12 year old child watch this. It is not an appropriate movie in the least. But is it not the responsibility of the parent to be strong and put his/her foot down and tell his/her child, "NO! This is not a movie for a child! End of story!" To this end, as said parent I also wouldn't be buying the action figures either. In the end, it is the parents' responsibility to parent.

Secondly, as you well know, not only children collect action figures. It seems that it is a healthy enough hobby for men, young and old alike.

In the end, this movie should not at all be viewed in any way, shape, or form as one that is in the least child appropriate. But can we not, as adults, have some kind of sensible movies that are just that, adult in theme and nature? I think that this is one such movie and one which I can intellectualise about until the cows do come home, Ossie. But that's just what I do, eh? :D

Cheers!...Aemma

[Osweo]

Guilty as charged Ossie, but can we as adults not have general access to films that are geared, well, to adults only?
With regard to certain sorts of content, I would actually say no! Stuff WILL get into the wrong hands. 'Hostel' and 'Saw' have probably been seen by millions of 10 year old children, and younger. Far better that mainstream cinemas and video shops never have shown or stocked them in the first place.

For the record, there was nothing pornographic in this movie; the sexual scenes weren't any worse than what you'd see in any other 18/rated 'R' movie. The same could be said for the violence as well imo.
That is probably more to do with how you've become accustommed to it, like the frog who doesn't jump out of the gradually heating up saucepan of water. You're probably comparing it to the contemporary serial killer genre, which I find generally unacceptable as approved entertainment in a civilised society. :(

Firstly, who says that the parent has to buy such for their child?
Parents shouldn't be put in the position of having to daily struggle against "But Johnny's Mam lets him do this!", "Everyone in my class has seen it!". It's emotional blackmail. Earn your kids' grudge and have him mocked at school, or give in for the easy life. That's the hard choice many are faced with, and society should be helping responsible parenting, not making it a headache.

But is it not the responsibility of the parent to be strong and put his/her foot down and tell his/her child, "NO! This is not a movie for a child! End of story!" To this end, as said parent I also wouldn't be buying the action figures either. In the end, it is the parents' responsibility to parent.
Probably the vast majority of parents in our countries are ignorant fools, totally irresponsible in guiding their children's moral development. It is for their sakes that I propose my Draconian measures. And for ours - we have to live and grow old among their children, all brought up on a diet of cinematic torture and rape, thinking it to be humour and entertainment. :mad:

Secondly, as you well know, not only children collect action figures. It seems that it is a healthy enough hobby for men, young and old alike.
I have a rather different opinion on this worrying tendency for childish behaviour to be sanctioned as fine and dandy among grown men. Including computer games... :p

In the end, this movie should not at all be viewed in any way, shape, or form as one that is in the least child appropriate. But can we not, as adults, have some kind of sensible movies that are just that, adult in theme and nature? I think that this is one such movie and one which I can intellectualise about until the cows do come home, Ossie. But that's just what I do, eh? :D
Millions of kids will see this, not a few six year olds among them. I don't think it's a price worth paying for a few hours intellectual stimulation for the educated few. :(

[Aemma]

Well we obviously differ on these points Os. Tis what it is I suppose. I don't consider myself a monster though for being able to appreciate the finer points of use of technique in a movie, no matter what it is. Sorry. :(

Cheers!...Aemma


With regard to certain sorts of content, I would actually say no! Stuff WILL get into the wrong hands. 'Hostel' and 'Saw' have probably been seen by millions of 10 year old children, and younger. Far better that mainstream cinemas and video shops never have shown or stocked them in the first place.

That is probably more to do with how you've become accustommed to it, like the frog who doesn't jump out of the gradually heating up saucepan of water. You're probably comparing it to the contemporary serial killer genre, which I find generally unacceptable as approved entertainment in a civilised society. :(

Parents shouldn't be put in the position of having to daily struggle against "But Johnny's Mam lets him do this!", "Everyone in my class has seen it!". It's emotional blackmail. Earn your kids' grudge and have him mocked at school, or give in for the easy life. That's the hard choice many are faced with, and society should be helping responsible parenting, not making it a headache.

Probably the vast majority of parents in our countries are ignorant fools, totally irresponsible in guiding their children's moral development. It is for their sakes that I propose my Draconian measures. And for ours - we have to live and grow old among their children, all brought up on a diet of cinematic torture and rape, thinking it to be humour and entertainment. :mad:

I have a rather different opinion on this worrying tendency for childish behaviour to be sanctioned as fine and dandy among grown men. Including computer games... :p

Millions of kids will see this, not a few six year olds among them. I don't think it's a price worth paying for a few hours intellectual stimulation for the educated few. :(

[Beorn]

The ironic thing is the films that have scarred me mentally are films like Watership Down.

[lei.talk]

if the film had any of the horrific moments
from the book (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watership_Down),
that is understandable - not for children.

regarding impressionable young minds,
i have found this advice
most rewarding:

In reply to a letter from a concerned father asking Dostoevskii (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fyodor_Dostoyevsky) what books he would recommend for his young son to read, Fyodor writes: “Only those books which produce beautiful impressions or give rise to lofty thoughts.”

[Osweo]

The ironic thing is the films that have scarred me mentally are films like Watership Down.
Yer big Jesse! :p
I should dig out and scan some of the drawings me and my brother and sister did when we were little, inspired by such films! If some bloody social worker had seen them, then... :eek::D

Nature, and historical drama are rather different in the nature of the violence, to my mind. I would even promote their viewing, provided it was done in a realistic unglorified way.

if the film had any of the horrific moments
from the book (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watership_Down),
that is understandable - not for children.
You've never seen it? You really should. Genius, so it is. The music and artwork are excellent.

Me and my Mam were driving through the Chilterns from the north the other day, and when I saw the land rising as it did, looking a bit like the southern English Downs in the film (shame on me, I haven't seen them in real life yet!), I started to sing the tune from the film. My Mam instantly recognised it and joined in. Soaring and majestic...

regarding impressionable young minds,
i have found this advice
most rewarding:
I think he was recommending to a friend what books to give his kids. :thumbs up
I think the statement holds true for adults, too.