Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I agree that it is refreshing. I roll my eyes at all these wimpy, scaredy-cat kids running around. I'm glad we didn't go there with DD. There's nothing cute about it.

Sounds like you'll be very proud and smug when your DD is playing Call of Duty at 7 years old and thinks nothing of killing . . . not like those wimpy kids you detest, right?

Nope. She is brave and fearless and strong. None of this hiding behind behind us and pretending to be afraid because it is supposed to be "cute."

I have considered taking my 5 year old...

She likes movies like the labyrinth, the first harry potter... willy wonka and the chocolate factory..

I think this one would top those though. I am waiting to hear more about the movie

Anonymous wrote:

I agree that it is refreshing. I roll my eyes at all these wimpy, scaredy-cat kids running around. I'm glad we didn't go there with DD. There's nothing cute about it.

Sounds like you'll be very proud and smug when your DD is playing Call of Duty at 7 years old and thinks nothing of killing . . . not like those wimpy kids you detest, right?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am taking my 4y old!

I hope you will enjoy the 5 minutes of the movie before you will have to leave with a terrified, crying kid.

No, she will be fine based on past experiences.

I find that weirdly disturbing.

And in stark contrast, I find it commendable that this parent has raised a child who based on this evidence appears able to determine what things are not worth being frightened by. Iow, I find a 4 year old who is able to recognize that a fictional movie is not a threat to her security quite advanced and admirable, not disturbing at all.

I have taken a similar approach with my girls because I saw no benefit and several possible drawbacks to encouraging them to be frightened by things which do not present legitimate threats through my action of presuming they would be frightened and unable to handle them.

Why would a 4 year old watching animated movies without becoming terrified be disturbing?

I agree that it is refreshing. I roll my eyes at all these wimpy, scaredy-cat kids running around. I'm glad we didn't go there with DD. There's nothing cute about it.

My 6 year old saw the trailer and wants to see it. But she did say that she hopes it's not too scary. She's seen PG movies before -- Thor, Captain America, etc. -- and hasn't had a problem with them. So we might wait until a rainy day when it's playing at the cheap movie theater. But I know some 7 year olds who could handle a "scary" movie and some who can't (and some 4 year olds). It totally depends on the kid. After all, it's just a movie. I don't understand why people get all dramatic about young kids seeing/not seeing scary movies (either way). There are more important things to worry about, and more interesting things on which to judge each other's parenting abilities {said in a sarcastic tone}.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am taking my 4y old!

I hope you will enjoy the 5 minutes of the movie before you will have to leave with a terrified, crying kid.

No, she will be fine based on past experiences.

I find that weirdly disturbing.

And in stark contrast, I find it commendable that this parent has raised a child who based on this evidence appears able to determine what things are not worth being frightened by. Iow, I find a 4 year old who is able to recognize that a fictional movie is not a threat to her security quite advanced and admirable, not disturbing at all.

I have taken a similar approach with my girls because I saw no benefit and several possible drawbacks to encouraging them to be frightened by things which do not present legitimate threats through my action of presuming they would be frightened and unable to handle them.

Why would a 4 year old watching animated movies without becoming terrified be disturbing?

Have you even seen a commercial or trailer for Maleficent? Not animated, and Angeina Jolie is pretty wicked in it. This is not your Disney version.

The movie is a Disney movie. It is, in fact, "your Disney version."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am taking my 4y old!

I hope you will enjoy the 5 minutes of the movie before you will have to leave with a terrified, crying kid.

No, she will be fine based on past experiences.

I find that weirdly disturbing.

And in stark contrast, I find it commendable that this parent has raised a child who based on this evidence appears able to determine what things are not worth being frightened by. Iow, I find a 4 year old who is able to recognize that a fictional movie is not a threat to her security quite advanced and admirable, not disturbing at all.

I have taken a similar approach with my girls because I saw no benefit and several possible drawbacks to encouraging them to be frightened by things which do not present legitimate threats through my action of presuming they would be frightened and unable to handle them.

Why would a 4 year old watching animated movies without becoming terrified be disturbing?

Have you even seen a commercial or trailer for Maleficent? Not animated, and Angeina Jolie is pretty wicked in it. This is not your Disney version.

You are correct, my apologies. I posted too quickly and made an unfortunate error. What I intended to say was that the movie was a Disney movie based on an animated film (at least the version I am aware of is still made by Disney and based off of a plotline for which there is an earlier, animated version that many kids have seen) but instead I wrote that the movie itself was animated. I regret the embarrassing mistake -- for some reason I appear to have a mental block whereby Disney and animated go together in my brain -- but yes, I have seen many commercials for the film, as have my girls. The 5 year old was not frightened, but neither was she interested in seeing the film. The 8 year old wants to see it as soon as possible, so we will be seeing it soon.

I can definitely appreciate that many kids might, appropriately for their young ages, be frightened by it so obviously it is a judgement call on the part of the parent based on the individual child. However, I stand by the opinion expressed in my earlier post that it is not disturbing for a 4 year old to watch that movie without becoming a terrified mess. To me, if it says anything other than one child's film preference is different from that of another child, it is a positive that the child in question would not be "terrified and crying" due to the film.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am taking my 4y old!

I hope you will enjoy the 5 minutes of the movie before you will have to leave with a terrified, crying kid.

No, she will be fine based on past experiences.

I find that weirdly disturbing.

And in stark contrast, I find it commendable that this parent has raised a child who based on this evidence appears able to determine what things are not worth being frightened by. Iow, I find a 4 year old who is able to recognize that a fictional movie is not a threat to her security quite advanced and admirable, not disturbing at all.

I have taken a similar approach with my girls because I saw no benefit and several possible drawbacks to encouraging them to be frightened by things which do not present legitimate threats through my action of presuming they would be frightened and unable to handle them.

Why would a 4 year old watching animated movies without becoming terrified be disturbing?

Have you even seen a commercial or trailer for Maleficent? Not animated, and Angeina Jolie is pretty wicked in it. This is not your Disney version.

I don't really see any point in taking a 4 year old to see this movie. She might be "fine" but what's to be gained?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am taking my 4y old!

I hope you will enjoy the 5 minutes of the movie before you will have to leave with a terrified, crying kid.

No, she will be fine based on past experiences.

I find that weirdly disturbing.

And in stark contrast, I find it commendable that this parent has raised a child who based on this evidence appears able to determine what things are not worth being frightened by. Iow, I find a 4 year old who is able to recognize that a fictional movie is not a threat to her security quite advanced and admirable, not disturbing at all.

I have taken a similar approach with my girls because I saw no benefit and several possible drawbacks to encouraging them to be frightened by things which do not present legitimate threats through my action of presuming they would be frightened and unable to handle them.

Why would a 4 year old watching animated movies without becoming terrified be disturbing?

My 6 year old DD is scared of the commercials so it's a no go for us. I want to see it though....

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am taking my 4y old!

I hope you will enjoy the 5 minutes of the movie before you will have to leave with a terrified, crying kid.

No, she will be fine based on past experiences.

You know, that might not be a good sign. There is something called desensitization, and it's not a good thing.

Is it weird that *I* really want to see it? Wondering if it would be an OK date night movie. Or perhaps DH and I need to get an adult life.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am taking my 4y old!

I hope you will enjoy the 5 minutes of the movie before you will have to leave with a terrified, crying kid.

Because you are an expert on PP's kid.

My 6, 8, and 10 year olds are excited to see it. I showed them all the trailers and no fear. It totally does depend on the kid.