Loud baby in movie theater - Who's side are you on?

[LBIJim]

I went to the movies this weekend , which I don't do often.
Here were the major distractions during my time there-
-Several groups entering late and using bright flashlight apps to get around and choose seats.
-someone who brought their own snacks in some sort of crinkly bag
-someone who answered their phone and talked
-parents that left their 7/8 yr old child alone in the seat in front of me. He fell asleep and we never saw the parents come back.

Theaters are full of distractions. Not fun.

Kids crying/screeching/making weird noises is reason #38 I don't go to movies anymore.

You've listed reasons #39 thru #42.

 

[LBIJim]

She seems like a real drama queen .. "while my pillow gets heavier with my tears" ... good grief. Some random dude thought your kid was too loud, did it effect your movie at all? Apparently not since you didn't leave, move on.

Yeah, I read this story last night and yelled out "go whine to someone who gives a F."

 

[ronandannette]

I haven't read the link or one single post in the thread; I don't need to. I'm on the side of parents and their loud babies not being allowed to remain in movie theatres and disrupt the show for others - period.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

I think it depends on the time and what Disney movie. Disney movies are not all created equal. How much noise was the infant making before the "coward" opened his mouth.

I get it. We had a non-verbal child so his noises were different. But sometimes a movie is not a place for others to put up with that. Summer is coming as are the free and reduced price offerings. That is a great training ground to see how your kid does in a theater.

It is unfortunate that both patron's experiences were not up to par. But in the end, the mom made the choice and should maybe have a better handle on what her family can do.

I don't think the guy was a coward. I think he was frustrated. And he may have been saying what others were thinking. The baby was free, but nobody else's ticket was. As expensive as movies are today, I think it is reasonable to expect to not be disturbed--even at a film that may have a younger audience.

I guess if Vito was giggling at a laugh line, I would feel differently. But I suspect that he was just being himself while his family tried to enjoy a movie.

And I don't find mom not cowardly for posting randomly on a blog rather than confront the man.

 

[DisneyLvr55]

I have three kids, my youngest being 6 weeks. My older girls take martial arts - I've take the baby to their class a few times so far. Every time she starts to cry/get noisy, I get up and leave. People are paying good $$$ to send their kid to class, and having a distraction like a crying baby (and trust me, all the kids lose concentration and stare at her the second a noise is made) isn't fair. So yeah, I'm on the side of the paying patrons who want to be able to watch a movie without dealing with a loud baby.

 

[Diznygrl]

I have zero tolerance for screechy/disruptive babies and children in a theater. One of the many reasons why I just don't go to the movies anymore.

This "My child is The Second Coming and he WILL go everywhere with me and everyone else just has to suck it up and deal" mentality that is so prevalent these days has to stop.

 

[mrsstats]

My first reaction was to remove the child, then I read the story. It seems she took him out when he acted up but his noises are not typical. Since it was a children's movie I agree with others that noise is expected. Not being there and hearing the type of noise I am not sure which way to go. Yes, if he was disturbing the entire theatre then he should go.

 

[lizabu]

I'm going to vote other. I don't think laughing at a movie is disruptive enough to require removing the kid. I also don't think everyone else in the world should have to conform to the mothers will because her son has a disability. I think the mother should've just ignored the comment and not been so sensitive. It's not like the guy in the theatre could have possibly had any idea the kid had a disability and wasn't just your run of the mill brat. She tried to shame the guy after the movie but clearly no one in the theatre wanted to join her at her pity party.

 

[smiths02]

Under 3 years you can't take a child to the cinema here so it wouldn't happen - If it could and did the child should be taken out

I won't take an under 3 year old to the movies. (And I have 3 kids, so I'm not some I hate children person)

 

[PollyannaMom]

I actually don't think a 20-month-old should be there in the first place. He's too little to be expected to behave properly in a theater, and should have been taken out when he was disruptive. That isn't "hiding" a disabled person from view. It's simply not allowing a child to do something until he or she can do it while respecting others' enjoyment of it as well. If it had been a picnic or something, I would have sided with including him.

 

[aristocatz]

Where I live, we have a few movie theaters that offer a "Sensory Friendly Movie Night" It's geared toward children with autism, but welcoming to any children who might have a hard time sitting in one spot for too long, staying quiet, etc... They alter the sound & the lights to make it "sensory friendly" & it is always a popular kids movie, often a Disney movie. I wonder if this is offered everywhere? Seems like a good option for the woman in the article...

 

[ilovefh]

I did read the article yesterday and the comments below it on Facebook yesterday. One of the comments mentioned that the Disney movie she saw was Tomorrowland. My opinion would be different if it was a movie like Frozen, but I don't consider Tomorrowland to be a kids movie in the sense that I would bring a 20 month old, even though it is PG.

That said, I think the kid was probably a distraction. I don't think the comment from the man had anything to do with his cancer.

 

[Goofydiane]

I also agree that there should be an 'other' option. My thoughts.....Go to the usher, they have a best practice to follow. I'm sure the usher would stand in the entry to the theatre and see if the child is overly loud, then ask them to quiet the child, and if that isn't possible, then the child should be removed. Even at a Disney or other childrens movie. At those movies, noise asks for more noise.

If a movie that isn't G rated.....then the child should be charged for the ticket. I think if you had to fork over the price of a movie ticket for a child, even an infant, it wouldn't occur as much.

The gentleman shouldn't have yelled out, he should have gotten an usher (my opinion), and in a dark theatre, he has no idea that the child is ill, or suffering from any disease. How would he know?

Bottom line, get the usher and let them deal with it.

 

[ZephyrHawk]

It depends whether its a matinee or not. If it is, that's fine. Annoying, but I understand. However, if it's the 9:30 showing of Avengers 2, then yes, you should remove your offspring.

Not that I'm referring to a specific incident, or anything.

 

[NJlauren]

I think there is a fine line, since the baby wasn't crying and making other noses.

I think if its disruptive to other people you need to remove the child.

However I went to a Broadway show (Annie a kids show) a few years ago and the child (7 maybe?) in front of me was making some noise (I think she was nonverbal but not 100%), but all happy noises and IMO not disturbing or loud. Should she not be aloud to go to and enjoy this experience? The people a few seats down from me felt like she was being to disruptive, and made a comment at intermission, we didn't have any issues.

My point is some of the time it's all subjective and people view the same noises differently.

 

[kirstenb1]

Agree with everyone else. I think our older dd was 4 when we first took her to the movies. Our younger dd has some special needs, so she was probably 6 or so---can't remember. Anyway, taking a totally normal 20 mth old is certainly rolling the dice, imho.

 

[LuvGoofy6]

As a teacher we are encouraged to ask ourselves one question if a student becomes disruptive, "Am I able to continue to teach and can the other students continue to learn?" If the answer is yes then we carry on and if we answer no then the child is removed from the classroom until he/she doesn't disrupt the teaching/learning of others. If the baby's chatter/giggling/laughing/crying or basically any type of vocalization is causing others not to hear or enjoy the movie then the baby needs to be taken out of the movie.

 

[sam_gordon]

If the baby's chatter/giggling/laughing/crying or basically any type of vocalization is causing others not to hear or enjoy the movie then the baby needs to be taken out of the movie.

Totally agree. There's basically two assumptions that can be made in this case...

1) The mom is downplaying how disruptive the child was.
2) The yelling adult was too sensitive to the noises being made.

Which assumption you make determines whether you think the child should have been taken out.

 

[3Gsandme]

This is difficult for me. On one hand, we absolutely need to be accepting of differently abled people. There's just no reason why a non-verbal person shouldn't be able to go to a movie and verbalize. We all do it. Some normal people have terrible laughs. We don't kick them out.

But, as a parent of a differently abled child, it's my job to balance her experience with the others around us. If she can't sit quietly, within reason, we have to leave and then try again next time. We came close when we went to see Cinderella. She started to crinkle a food container and a lady shot me the stink eye. I got her quickly under control, but if I hadn't we would have left. That's common courtesy.

Additionally, I don't think Tomorrowland is appropriate for a kid under two. Yes, it's Disney, but it's NOT a cartoon. A different audience will want to see that film, even at a matinee.

 

[DisPup75]

I wish that baby and his mom all the best but I can't imagine bringing a 20-month old, regardless of health, to any movie.