Well, I went to see Batman. I'm not writing a review, other than to say, it was Heath Ledger's film, god bless him wherever he is. And it was about an hour too long. I can't understand why everyone's going again. It was good, sure. Could have been seriously edited though. Long, drawn out yaaaawn.
And the other problem I had was that I knew of two little kids who'd been taken to see it - and with each new violent bit, I couldn't help but see it from a five year old's perspective. I mean, I found it hard to watch as it was, a good few close eyes, fingers in the ears moments.
I am appalled to find out that there's a 15A cert, that gives parents free reign to bring any age of child to any kind of film under 18 cert. You may bitch about the Nanny State, but the people who've brought their small children to this are not responsible, and do not know how to safeguard their children's best interests. I told Darren I shouldn't say shame on anyone - well, I've changed my mind. If you're a parent who knowingly brought your six year old to see this film, shame on you!
I've had to write this letter to the IFCO, or there's no way I'd sleep tonight. If you agree with me, maybe you'd write too. info@ifco.gov.ie
Dear Sir/Madam,
I have just been to see Batman. From the first ten minutes of the film, my enjoyment of it was seriously tempered by the fact that I knew of someone, a mother who is not a responsible carer, who took her two young sons to see this film. The youngest is perhaps four or five.
I have since been told that this is not unusual, and the matinees have been full of kids, being brought by their parents.
I have just been to see Batman. From the first ten minutes of the film, my enjoyment of it was seriously tempered by the fact that I knew of someone, a mother who is not a responsible carer, who took her two young sons to see this film. The youngest is perhaps four or five.
I have since been told that this is not unusual, and the matinees have been full of kids, being brought by their parents.
I have a five year old, and would not let her anywhere near this film. To be quite honest, I found a lot of it hard to watch myself, and knowing small children are seeing it makes it far harder to stomach. The small boy who saw it said it was ok, because he was a 'brave boy'. A brave boy? Films should be fun for kids, not ordeals.
In watching that two and a half hour, dark film, a five year old will see numerous shootings, hear a psychotic and terrifyingly made up man hold a knife to someones mouth while telling a story of seeing his mother killed and having his face slashed by his drunken father. They will see people tied, beaten, tortures, slashed, dropped from buildings, attacked by ferocious dogs, see a man with a nightmare face threaten to shoot another child. They will see a terrified man writhing on the ground with a huge scar on his abdomen and a phone inside him.
The list goes on, and on, and on, just like the film does, with relentless image after image. In addition to this, the scenery and moral and psychological content of the the film is dark and affecting. It is emotionally manipulative, effectively so. This is not Adam West's Batman, or even Michael Keaton's; this was NEVER intended for small children, yet for some reason, the IFCO deems it so?
Whoever made this film should sleep as badly as I will tonight, knowing that small children are being subjected to this film.
I presume the 15A rating protects 12 - 14 year olds from seeing the film alone. But 5 year olds with irresponsible parents are left unprotected one way or the other. It makes no sense to me.
