The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
It has been revealed latley that age ratings for films in the UK might become more flexable.
This has already happened in the US of A and look what it's done to them! Kids of 12 years old have guns, paedophiles roam country. Obviously not all of this can be credited to films but I'm pretty sure of it's down to the relaxation of the age laws.
Twelve rated films nowadays either have quite a bit of swearing in them,(Nutty Professor 2 proves my case) maybe some sex, and more often than not, violence. Should we let underage kids see this? Thats for you to decide and reply here.
If a child is in some way mentally unstable then he/she is going to be warped by a film. (maybe maybe not) Yesterday I watched the program Cannibal. A documentry about real life Hannibal Lectors, a pattern has been found linking cannabilism to frontal brain damage. What if theres a link between violence and brain damage?
I'll let you lot decide before I state my opinion.
This has already happened in the US of A and look what it's done to them! Kids of 12 years old have guns, paedophiles roam country. Obviously not all of this can be credited to films but I'm pretty sure of it's down to the relaxation of the age laws.
Twelve rated films nowadays either have quite a bit of swearing in them,(Nutty Professor 2 proves my case) maybe some sex, and more often than not, violence. Should we let underage kids see this? Thats for you to decide and reply here.
If a child is in some way mentally unstable then he/she is going to be warped by a film. (maybe maybe not) Yesterday I watched the program Cannibal. A documentry about real life Hannibal Lectors, a pattern has been found linking cannabilism to frontal brain damage. What if theres a link between violence and brain damage?
I'll let you lot decide before I state my opinion.
azzido wrote:
> It has been revealed latley that age ratings for films in the UK
> might become more flexable.
About time too...
This has already happened in the US
> of A and look what it's done to them! Kids of 12 years old have
> guns,
??? ... So if you go to the Pkemon movie you get a Pokemon card... if you go to Rambo4 you get an Uzi? ... Films dont make children shoot other children...
I'll bet the number of children wh have watched violent movies/TV programs Vs. the number of children shooting classmates doesnt balace quite out?
> paedophiles roam country.
Its true of the 10,000 registered paedophiles in the UK all of them are that way because of movies...
> credited to films but I'm pretty sure of it's down to the relaxation
> of the age laws.
and 8 year old paedophile... wow!
Twelve rated films nowadays either have quite a
> bit of swearing in them,(Nutty Professor 2 proves my case) maybe
> some sex, and more often than not, violence. Should we let underage
> kids see this? Thats for you to decide and reply here.
If a child
> is in some way mentally unstable then he/she is going to be warped
> by a film.
If his/her mental illness can be made violently active as a result of watching a movie, then, even without movies there are going to be innumours other triggers throughout her average day to spark her off?
(maybe maybe not) Yesterday I watched the program
> Cannibal. A documentry about real life Hannibal Lectors, a pattern
> has been found linking cannabilism to frontal brain damage. What if
> theres a link between violence and brain damage?
By that logic we should ban the use of knives since people have been known to use them for purposes other than cuting food...
Glas bottles have been used as weapons... better ban them too?
> It has been revealed latley that age ratings for films in the UK
> might become more flexable.
About time too...
This has already happened in the US
> of A and look what it's done to them! Kids of 12 years old have
> guns,
??? ... So if you go to the Pkemon movie you get a Pokemon card... if you go to Rambo4 you get an Uzi? ... Films dont make children shoot other children...
I'll bet the number of children wh have watched violent movies/TV programs Vs. the number of children shooting classmates doesnt balace quite out?
> paedophiles roam country.
Its true of the 10,000 registered paedophiles in the UK all of them are that way because of movies...
> credited to films but I'm pretty sure of it's down to the relaxation
> of the age laws.
and 8 year old paedophile... wow!
Twelve rated films nowadays either have quite a
> bit of swearing in them,(Nutty Professor 2 proves my case) maybe
> some sex, and more often than not, violence. Should we let underage
> kids see this? Thats for you to decide and reply here.
If a child
> is in some way mentally unstable then he/she is going to be warped
> by a film.
If his/her mental illness can be made violently active as a result of watching a movie, then, even without movies there are going to be innumours other triggers throughout her average day to spark her off?
(maybe maybe not) Yesterday I watched the program
> Cannibal. A documentry about real life Hannibal Lectors, a pattern
> has been found linking cannabilism to frontal brain damage. What if
> theres a link between violence and brain damage?
By that logic we should ban the use of knives since people have been known to use them for purposes other than cuting food...
Glas bottles have been used as weapons... better ban them too?
There is an element of nature and nurture in letting children watch adult films. Some children are more apt to copy or be influenced by the actions of films than others. These same children will have equal problems determining that a computer game isn't real either.
Sometimes children who watch too many films and are perhaps immersed in them for too long could be affected by them. Either way it's not a good idea to let young children watch too much violence on TV, but the lines do get blurred when children become teenagers, as some will be highly impressionable and others will have already grown up enough to have a better sense of morality.
Age restrictons in this country are stricter than in other countries, although this does not reflect on the values of the country. Spain, for example, has films of a sexual nature on TV during the day and age restrictions are generally not as inforced as they are here, but the country has a much lower rate of teenage pregnancy and violent crime. I believe this is partly because of the morality of the country and how authority is viewed in the country.
The bad thing about having a strict censorship law, apart from the obvious lack of choice, is that you have to wait a lot longer for films to arrive in this country.
Sometimes children who watch too many films and are perhaps immersed in them for too long could be affected by them. Either way it's not a good idea to let young children watch too much violence on TV, but the lines do get blurred when children become teenagers, as some will be highly impressionable and others will have already grown up enough to have a better sense of morality.
Age restrictons in this country are stricter than in other countries, although this does not reflect on the values of the country. Spain, for example, has films of a sexual nature on TV during the day and age restrictions are generally not as inforced as they are here, but the country has a much lower rate of teenage pregnancy and violent crime. I believe this is partly because of the morality of the country and how authority is viewed in the country.
The bad thing about having a strict censorship law, apart from the obvious lack of choice, is that you have to wait a lot longer for films to arrive in this country.
FantasyMeister wrote:
Parents on the whole should take responsibility for
> what their children watch, because what children watch and see can
> have a great impact on their developing personalities.
Hoorah! PG stands for parental guidance, but how many parents will watch one of these films before showing it to their kids?
I find the little catergory ratings that they put on the videos handy, eg
Sex: Some mild references
Bad Language: Frequent,
Violence: None
etc.
That way, my 7 year old nephew could watch Gladiator with
> me, and I could point out to him that all that blood and stuff isn't
> real, but that it is based on real events that happened many years
> ago, and educate him as to why it no longer happens. As it stands
> at present, all his mates have seen it and he hasn't, so he finds it
> difficult to converse with them at school on the subject.
I think Gladiator would be okay, other films with the same classification may be completely unsuitable.
I blame
> the parents myself.
Me too. If you're going to let your child watch teenagers be disemboweled, decapitated, raped, and eaten before they're old enough to understand that it isn't real, then they're probably going to grow up with a few problems.
Parents on the whole should take responsibility for
> what their children watch, because what children watch and see can
> have a great impact on their developing personalities.
Hoorah! PG stands for parental guidance, but how many parents will watch one of these films before showing it to their kids?
I find the little catergory ratings that they put on the videos handy, eg
Sex: Some mild references
Bad Language: Frequent,
Violence: None
etc.
That way, my 7 year old nephew could watch Gladiator with
> me, and I could point out to him that all that blood and stuff isn't
> real, but that it is based on real events that happened many years
> ago, and educate him as to why it no longer happens. As it stands
> at present, all his mates have seen it and he hasn't, so he finds it
> difficult to converse with them at school on the subject.
I think Gladiator would be okay, other films with the same classification may be completely unsuitable.
I blame
> the parents myself.
Me too. If you're going to let your child watch teenagers be disemboweled, decapitated, raped, and eaten before they're old enough to understand that it isn't real, then they're probably going to grow up with a few problems.
Depends what they mean by 'more flexible'.
At present we have, (I think)
U = Universal, anyone can see it
PG = Parental Guidance, some scenes may be unsuitable for young children
15 = 15 or over only
18 = 18 or over only
Usually, when you apply the term 'flexible' to a bureaucracy it means they will just change the U to a zero and the PG to a 12, which will make them 'less flexible', but that's the BFCC for you.
In this case, I think it means that will start to allow more content to creep into the PG and 15 categories, maybe even the 18 category. This shift would be due to certain things in society becoming more and more acceptible to us in everyday life. We see more violence and bloodshed on the mass media than ever before, they were even debating over the bodycount on the 9 O'Clock News at one stage.
As we become more 'naturalised' to these types of events, it becomes more and more acceptible to show them in the younger categories of films. What we have to take care about is the fact that we don't immunise ourselves against these sorts of things, become so used to them that the value of human life is degraded.
Parents on the whole should take responsibility for what their children watch, because what children watch and see can have a great impact on their developing personalities.
If it were myself, I would use 'more flexible' to mean that the U, PG, 15 and 18 ratings are there as a guide only, and not a restriction, so that it would be ok for anyone to hire any movie, at any age, as long as parents took the responsibility of censorship into their own hands.
That way, my 7 year old nephew could watch Gladiator with me, and I could point out to him that all that blood and stuff isn't real, but that it is based on real events that happened many years ago, and educate him as to why it no longer happens. As it stands at present, all his mates have seen it and he hasn't, so he finds it difficult to converse with them at school on the subject.
I blame the parents myself.
At present we have, (I think)
U = Universal, anyone can see it
PG = Parental Guidance, some scenes may be unsuitable for young children
15 = 15 or over only
18 = 18 or over only
Usually, when you apply the term 'flexible' to a bureaucracy it means they will just change the U to a zero and the PG to a 12, which will make them 'less flexible', but that's the BFCC for you.
In this case, I think it means that will start to allow more content to creep into the PG and 15 categories, maybe even the 18 category. This shift would be due to certain things in society becoming more and more acceptible to us in everyday life. We see more violence and bloodshed on the mass media than ever before, they were even debating over the bodycount on the 9 O'Clock News at one stage.
As we become more 'naturalised' to these types of events, it becomes more and more acceptible to show them in the younger categories of films. What we have to take care about is the fact that we don't immunise ourselves against these sorts of things, become so used to them that the value of human life is degraded.
Parents on the whole should take responsibility for what their children watch, because what children watch and see can have a great impact on their developing personalities.
If it were myself, I would use 'more flexible' to mean that the U, PG, 15 and 18 ratings are there as a guide only, and not a restriction, so that it would be ok for anyone to hire any movie, at any age, as long as parents took the responsibility of censorship into their own hands.
That way, my 7 year old nephew could watch Gladiator with me, and I could point out to him that all that blood and stuff isn't real, but that it is based on real events that happened many years ago, and educate him as to why it no longer happens. As it stands at present, all his mates have seen it and he hasn't, so he finds it difficult to converse with them at school on the subject.
I blame the parents myself.
It has been revealed latley that age ratings for films in the UK might become more flexable.
This has already happened in the US of A and look what it's done to them! Kids of 12 years old have guns, paedophiles roam country. Obviously not all of this can be credited to films but I'm pretty sure of it's down to the relaxation of the age laws.
Twelve rated films nowadays either have quite a bit of swearing in them,(Nutty Professor 2 proves my case) maybe some sex, and more often than not, violence. Should we let underage kids see this? Thats for you to decide and reply here.
If a child is in some way mentally unstable then he/she is going to be warped by a film. (maybe maybe not) Yesterday I watched the program Cannibal. A documentry about real life Hannibal Lectors, a pattern has been found linking cannabilism to frontal brain damage. What if theres a link between violence and brain damage?
I'll let you lot decide before I state my opinion.
This has already happened in the US of A and look what it's done to them! Kids of 12 years old have guns, paedophiles roam country. Obviously not all of this can be credited to films but I'm pretty sure of it's down to the relaxation of the age laws.
Twelve rated films nowadays either have quite a bit of swearing in them,(Nutty Professor 2 proves my case) maybe some sex, and more often than not, violence. Should we let underage kids see this? Thats for you to decide and reply here.
If a child is in some way mentally unstable then he/she is going to be warped by a film. (maybe maybe not) Yesterday I watched the program Cannibal. A documentry about real life Hannibal Lectors, a pattern has been found linking cannabilism to frontal brain damage. What if theres a link between violence and brain damage?
I'll let you lot decide before I state my opinion.