Star Wars The Force Awakens PG 13 rating

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic_farmer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Catholic_farmer

Guest
How many parents here with kids under 13 are skipping this movie?

We won’t be taking our 7 year old to see it. Nevertheless, Disney is marketing to children under 13 with toys, games, and food targeting them, despite the fact that the movie is not appropriate for them due to “sci-fi violence”.

It will be interesting to see how many parents will keep their kids away and how many will just go anyway. The parents at our son’s Catholic school are very good about skipping the recent superhero and Harry Potter movies that were all marketed towards kids but rated PG-13.

I figure it will take a couple of years to come out with the remaining two movies and, by that time, our son will probably be old enough to watch all three.

I am very disappointed with Disney. They could have edited it to make it less violent. They chose not to. So much for them being a trusted “kid brand”.

Ironically enough, I don’t like watching your average PG-13 movie. I was in the war. I have seen enough violence. The fake stuff doesn’t impress me.
 
Well the movie is about a war. In the stars. The star wars, if you will.
 
The filmmakers aim for PG13 in order to appeal to the broadest audience. G or PG is considered too mild for adults and R is too “raw” for younger people. It’s the golden rating for most films these days. Disney is a company in the business of making money. Sure it’s not for the little ones, but older children understand it’s merely fantasy.

Star Wars has to have a certain amount of violence in it because that is the story–a war, although a cartoon kind of war, in which the audience doesn’t have to view blood and gore in order to get the concept that the good guys are in danger and the bad guys have to be defeated. It’s not meant to be realistic but rather mythological–like Lord of the Rings and other such fare.
 
Older Star Wars movies were PG because the PG-13 rating didn’t exist. The 2005 Star Wars movie was PG-13.
 
Sentinel947 said:
Older Star Wars movies were PG because the PG-13 rating didn’t exist. The 2005 Star Wars movie was PG-13.
Click to expand...
Yep, and PG-13 doesn’t mean it’s inappropriate for kids, just that parental guidance might be needed.
 
I would wait until the movie comes out then check a place like Common Sense Media. Their ratings seem to be usually spot on, and the go into specific details, which is nice.

As far as Star Wars itself, Disney is a corporation like any other, trying to make money. Star Wars was never strictly a kids movie, so to speak, either before or after Disney acquired them. Although Disney or no Disney, there have always been marketing strategies towards older children (7 and up). I never had issue with it, but that’s just my opinion. It has to be the individual parent that makes the decision, and I support that 110% percent, no matter what others may say.

Now as far as Disney being kid friendly in general… I personally think they got out of that business a long time ago. Poor Walt would have some words to say, I’m sure…
 
It wasn’t George Lucas’ Star Wars movies that caused the PG-13 rating. It was Steven Spielberg who continually pushed the envelope (even when he teamed up with Lucas for Indiana Jones). The first three Star Wars movies would still be rated PG today Also, the PG-13 rating already existed for the last three Star Wars movies. Two were given PG. The sixth one was given the higher rating because of the scene at the end (falling in lava, etc…).

PG-13 does NOT mean parental guidance. That is the PG rating.

Here is the official definition:

“parents strongly cautioned, a rating in the Voluntary Movie Rating System indicating that some material may be inappropriate for children under 13”

Even most of the Disney cartoons are given a PG rating now. Only some are G. Other countries, such as Aardman out of England, manage to make very funny movies that appeal to both adults and kids without excess violence. They are given PG or G ratings.

The media is bent on claiming that PG is ‘dead’, etc… They want everyone to show their kids stronger violence at a younger age. Why? Because they are all owned by the same people that want to sell you the toys and get as many people to watch their movies as possible. They don’t want you to think or use your ‘parental caution’ or ‘guidance’. Just buy more stuff, lol!

Disney chose to allow PG-13 and are still purposely marketing to younger kids. Hollywood could have made Harry Potter, LOTR, and all the recent superhero movies PG without losing the story, if they wanted to. They didn’t want to. They wanted to make something to appeal to adults and teens. Nothing wrong with that until they marketed the toys to little kids. It’s the marketing to little kids that I think is despicable. Hollywood has never, and will never, force a movie on my family just because they market the toys to young kids. I’m glad the rating system is in place to warn us of movies with stronger scenes. I loved the original Star Wars movies, but I want to do the best thing for my young child, so we’ll skip it. It’s just a movie, after all.

I appear to be the only one who sees the problem with toys being sold to kids too young for the movies. Many of our friends are also skipping Star Wars because of the rating. We must be an anomaly.
 
Pax85, great reminder about Common Sense Media. Thanks! 🙂
 
It really distresses me - I had planned to take my 8 year old nephew that I have really bonded with over the past three years through star wars and legos (every year I try to get at least one new huge lego set for him to build…he has built a republic gun ship, an AT AT, Shuttle Tydriuium, B-Wing (and those are just some of the ones I have personally purchased for him. There’s a star destroyer just waiting to be built during Christmas break when we have our family christmas at our country house we have for such things)

He has not seen Revenge of the Sith (he’s too young and he’s fairly sensitive) plus I refuse to own it.

I almost though about canceling my two reserved tickets, but first I’ll see it with my dad, then maybe I’ll see if my brother would see it and then hopefully Kolbe my nephew (my brother’s son) can see it…the only PG-13 movie he has seen is Jurassic Park (nope, I wasn’t the one who let him watch that)

The reason I am distressed is because all of the merchandise first of all is definitely always aimed at kids. The second reason is we had been planning to see it together when it was first announced. He has never seen star wars on the big screen - we watched Empire Strikes Back together (slowly working up to the BIG fateful announcement) but it was just on a 40 inch tv (not the O-OT version - ESB has never been my favorite so I didn’t buy the LE dvd that included the Theatrical version)

So, i just hope the violence is NOT the level of ROTS or he’ll be upset…especially if any of his friends get to see it, but he doesn’t.
 
Catholic_farmer said:
I appear to be the only one who sees the problem with toys being sold to kids too young for the movies. Many of our friends are also skipping Star Wars because of the rating. We must be an anomaly.
Click to expand...
You are certainly not the only one, at least regarding marketing in general. For Star Wars specifically, however, I suppose I would be OK with older kids playing with the toys, since they can create their own story and in the end, I would be the final “gatekeeper” so to speak as to whether they could watch the movies themselves. But I definitely see what you are saying, and perhaps I need to reflect on that a bit…

While I have no kids of my own (for obvious reasons, if someone looks at my profile, haha), I was a teacher once upon a time, and it really distressed me to see the marketing techniques employed to younger and younger children for various franchises, media properties, etc. This goes not only for toys, but other types of media, clothing, and so on.

Don’t get me started about clothing marketed to kids! :nope:

In the end, it’s all about the parents making the right choices for their own children, after being properly informed themselves. Kuddos to you, Catholic farmer, because many parents today would simply go with the flow!
 
Catholic_farmer said:
PG-13 does NOT mean parental guidance. That is the PG rating.

Here is the official definition:

“parents strongly cautioned, a rating in the Voluntary Movie Rating System indicating that some material may be inappropriate for children under 13”
Click to expand...
I think the key word there is MAY. Regardless of the movie industry’s intent, it is the responsibility of parents to ensure that the movie is appropriate for their child/children. My kids are all too young for this Star Wars movie but we will decide on an individual basis when they are ready for it. I can already tell that my oldest will likely be ready before she’s 13. My two younger children are a toss up.

I also don’t generally think of ratings as being for parents to determine what their kids should see (though many use them that way). I see ratings as a way for movie theaters to be able to draw a line and say "no, we aren’t admitting you to this movie without parental consent. "

As for the marketing, I see it the same as any other corporate endeavor - a way to make money. If someone gives my kids a Millenium Falcon, I’ll just tie it back to the original movies (I’m lucky enough that they are young enough for that to work).
 
Catholic_farmer said:
It wasn’t George Lucas’ Star Wars movies that caused the PG-13 rating. It was Steven Spielberg who continually pushed the envelope (even when he teamed up with Lucas for Indiana Jones). The first three Star Wars movies would still be rated PG today
Click to expand...
I don’t know about that. The first one…maybe. But ESB has Han getting tortured and ROTJ has a couple people getting eaten by a rancor; Jabba getting choked to death by a chain; the emperor, who is pretty frightening; and that whole force lightning thing at the end. All of this is way more intense than any of the PG movies being released now. Not to mention ROTJ has Leia in that skimpy gold bikini. That alone would probably get it a PG-13 rating for “partial nudity”.
Even most of the Disney cartoons are given a PG rating now. Only some are G. Other countries, such as Aardman out of England, manage to make very funny movies that appeal to both adults and kids without excess violence. They are given PG or G ratings.
Click to expand...
Honestly, I think this is a result of the rating system becoming stricter with its criterion than any agenda on Disney’s part. The cartoons in the early days were a lot less sanitized and a lot more traumatic than anything they are releasing now. Snow White and Pinocchio scared the bejeebies out of me when I saw them as a kid. And that scene in the original Fantasia? With that giant demon summoning all the dead in the village? None of their newer cartoons come anywhere close to that.

And yet, Fantasia is rated G and Inside Out, which had absolutely nothing objectionable or frightening whatsoever, is rated PG. That’s why I say the rating system has gotten stricter. Pretty much every movie we watched as kids that was rated G or PG would be considered PG or worse nowadays. So I’m not surprised the new Star Wars is PG-13. You can’t really make a movie with violence and suspense without getting that rating anymore.
 
jlc2k2 said:
I think the key word there is MAY. Regardless of the movie industry’s intent, it is the responsibility of parents to ensure that the movie is appropriate for their child/children. My kids are all too young for this Star Wars movie but we will decide on an individual basis when they are ready for it. I can already tell that my oldest will likely be ready before she’s 13. My two younger children are a toss up.

I also don’t generally think of ratings as being for parents to determine what their kids should see (though many use them that way). I see ratings as a way for movie theaters to be able to draw a line and say "no, we aren’t admitting you to this movie without parental consent. "

As for the marketing, I see it the same as any other corporate endeavor - a way to make money. If someone gives my kids a Millenium Falcon, I’ll just tie it back to the original movies (I’m lucky enough that they are young enough for that to work).
Click to expand...
I think too many parents now a days (not the original poster) take kids to the movies that are inappropriate to their age. I’ve seen parents bring babies and toddlers to movies and then they complain about the context. Parents who don’t read what the movie is about amaze me because even I won’t see a movie unless I know a little about it.

First of all, there’s been so much hoopla about this movie, I’d try and wait to see what the critics have to say. I’m sure there will be some violence in this movie, but again IRS Star Wars. I’d worry more if I was a parent about unnecessary sexual scenes. For example, in one of the movies Princess Leah who was a captive was dressed very scantily. Mi cringed when I saw that as I’m sure it was put in to attract the pre teen boy audience.

As for the toys from this movie, there were plenty of these marketed from the first movie. I remember my 10 year old daughter collecting some of these. No harm in that as she’s 47 and still loves Star Wars and has some of the action figures.

Simply, if you don’t want your kids to see the movie, don’t take them! Same as for the action figures. No is still a word. As for me, will see the movie eventually, but not right away. Part of this is I want to remember the original characters as they once were.
 
I think it’s not a problem. These days you’ll get movies rated PG-13 and even R even when there’s very little blood, not swearing, and no sexual content just because the action is intense. And Star Wars has always had intense action, gunfights, duels to the death, etc, with very little in the way of sex and profanity, and stayed directed to kids and adults through that.

Movies like Star Wars and Harry Potter don’t end up PG-13 to appeal to adults, they do it because the filmmakers couldn’t tell the story honestly without dealing with some dark stuff that kids need to learn to deal with themselves.

I think you guys are seriously underestimating kids. Some might be too sensitive for some of the material, but they are outside the norm.

If we were talking a PG Star Wars, we’d be talking about people fighting a War where: Luke’s uncle and aunt don’t die to inspire him to fight the empire, lightsabers and blasters just lightly tickle people, Alderaan doesn’t blow up, the empire doesn’t really do anything evil beyond cackling and twirling their mustaches, the Rebels are just trying to change the decoration, and the dark side literally just makes people wear black and red.

Seriously, this is the most ridiculous discussion I’ve ever seen on this forum.
 
Robyn_p said:
I don’t know about that. The first one…maybe. But ESB has Han getting tortured and ROTJ has a couple people getting eaten by a rancor; Jabba getting choked to death by a chain; the emperor, who is pretty frightening; and that whole force lightning thing at the end. All of this is way more intense than any of the PG movies being released now. Not to mention ROTJ has Leia in that skimpy gold bikini. That alone would probably get it a PG-13 rating for “partial nudity”.

Honestly, I think this is a result of the rating system becoming stricter with its criterion than any agenda on Disney’s part. The cartoons in the early days were a lot less sanitized and a lot more traumatic than anything they are releasing now. Snow White and Pinocchio scared the bejeebies out of me when I saw them as a kid. And that scene in the original Fantasia? With that giant demon summoning all the dead in the village? None of their newer cartoons come anywhere close to that.

And yet, Fantasia is rated G and Inside Out, which had absolutely nothing objectionable or frightening whatsoever, is rated PG. That’s why I say the rating system has gotten stricter. Pretty much every movie we watched as kids that was rated G or PG would be considered PG or worse nowadays. So I’m not surprised the new Star Wars is PG-13. You can’t really make a movie with violence and suspense without getting that rating anymore.
Click to expand...
I remember when I realized the first movie had the skeletal remains of Luke’s aunt and uncle trying to escape their home. Pretty grim.

I don’t put a lot of stock in the MPAA’s rating system, for a variety of reasons. I prefer others (Decent Films has a good one).
 
pensmama87 said:
I remember when I realized the first movie had the skeletal remains of Luke’s aunt and uncle trying to escape their home. Pretty grim.

I don’t put a lot of stock in the MPAA’s rating system, for a variety of reasons. I prefer others (Decent Films has a good one).
Click to expand...
For the longest time I thought they were burnt robots honestly. Maybe that’s because Luke doesn’t seem all that…distraught. It’s easy to miss as a kid if you’re not paying attention.

And I agree, Decent Films is pretty good. I like how thorough and fair he is. His reviews are always enjoyable.
 
Robyn_p said:
For the longest time I thought they were burnt robots honestly. Maybe that’s because Luke doesn’t seem all that…distraught. It’s easy to miss as a kid if you’re not paying attention.

And I agree, Decent Films is pretty good. I like how thorough and fair he is. His reviews are always enjoyable.
Click to expand...
I missed it too for several years. I probably was 5-6 when I first saw the film, but that part didn’t click until 10-11. DH has mentioned maybe letting our oldest watch it within a year or two. I dunno. I’m not nearly the fanatic he is.
 
pensmama87 said:
I missed it too for several years. I probably was 5-6 when I first saw the film, but that part didn’t click until 10-11. DH has mentioned maybe letting our oldest watch it within a year or two. I dunno. I’m not nearly the fanatic he is.
Click to expand...
I think I was about 4 when I saw them myself. One of my earliest memories in fact is watching it on those old VHS tapes with my dad. He was a huge Star Wars fan and was so excited to show them to me. I still remember sitting on his lap and hearing him read the opening crawl to me. I probably asked a question every three seconds, but he didn’t seem to mind.

Good times.
 
Christianus Dei and Tim D, I am sorry you think this is the most ridiculous thread ever posted. I suppose I should win some sort of award for that. I do wonder, however, if you think it’s so ridiculous, why did you bother to respond?

Thank you, Pax. It is harder being a parent today than when we were kids. We have a seven year old and I have to say “no” a lot more often than my parents had to. Luckily, our son’s friends have parents that agree about limiting movie violence. As a substitute teacher at the Catholic school, I can tell which kids are watching the more violent stuff at home. Their play is much darker. Most of the younger kids at our son’s Catholic school do not watch movies that are rated higher than PG, so the few that do really stand out. They talk about this movie or that movie and want to recreate shooting people or blowing things up. The other kids haven’t a clue and go on playing more innocent things. There is plenty of time for 1st and 2nd graders to just be kids. The middle school age kids will see Star Wars, which is fine. Unless kids are sensitive, I’d say 11 is old enough for most PG-13 movies, depending on the content.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top