Didn't like movie thrown off plane

[Lewisc]

http://news.msn.com/us/couple-says-united-diverted-flight-after-movie-complaint

Parents didn't think PG13 movie, Alex Cross, was appropriate for their kids. Asked several times to have one of the drop down screens turned off. Plane made an unscheduled stop, family was removed from the plane and accommodated on a later flight.

I see the parents point but there is a limit to how many times you can ask different people before your making a PITA of yourself.

 

[Missytara]

I saw this story yesterday. I have to agree.

 

[lost*in*cyberspace]

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/unit...light-removes-pax-because-ife-complaints.html

 

[maxiesmom]

Reading that, the parents have lost a bit of credibility. First off, PG13 movies do not have "extreme, graphic violence" or "sexually explicit content". At least, not in the way I define those things.

I also don't think a 4 year old would even be interested in that type of movie. Give them SpongeBob SquarePants and they are in heaven. Alex Cross, not so much. The 8 year old may be a little different, but I would still think it would be easy to divert their attention. That is, if the parents were not going on and on about how bad the movie was, and how they shouldn't look at it. Which it sounds like is what happened.

I find it hard to believe that all the parents did was ask nicely for the movie to be turned off a couple of times and that was enough for the captain to divert a whole aircraft full of people. Maybe I am naive, but I would like to think the people in charge of flying me around don't get all crazy at the drop of a hat.

 

["Cinder" Ella's Mom]

But why would they show a PG 13 film on a plane with passengers under that age? On screens that can not be put out of viewing areas? It does seem like better choices could have been made by the airline. Why not PG?

 

[ryalluvdiz]

This is just so ridiculous! You cant hear the movie without earphones.... Just keep your kids busy and they wont watch.. Uuugh!!!

 

[sam_gordon]

I haven't read the article yet, but this sounds like a bad choice of movie when you have kids younger than ~10. From the imdb description...

A woman wears a bikini at a cage-fighting event. A woman strips down to her underwear. A man ties her to the bed in a prelude to sexual activity. Sexual sounds are heard and a brief shot of a couple in bed is seen along with clothes strewn across the floor. Derogatory sexual comments are made.

Characters are frequently shot, beaten, punched and threatened. During a cage fight a mans arm is broken after a serious battle. A man injects a paralyzing drug in a womans neck. A man catches on fire from a stove. Bloody injuries and surroundings are depicted along with numerous dead bodies. A man sets off several explosions in and outside of office buildings. A speeding vehicle rams a characters car. Men are shot after taunting a character. A character cuts off the fingers of a woman and puts them in a bowl. Other depictions of tortured women are seen. A man cauterizes bloody wounds and exposes himself to other pain-inducing activities. Characters are hit with a golf club, kicked in the groin, stabbed, hit with a club and taken captive by an angry mob.

It's easy to tell kids "don't watch" or "don't listen", but is that realistic? I don't know that I'd want my kids watching this either.

 

[Donna M]

A review of their movie policy is a good idea; it's not necessary to show a PG-13 movie to a captive audience, but the parents could have diverted the children's attention too, even though boys will want to watch shooting scenes.

 

[sam_gordon]

A review of their movie policy is a good idea; it's not necessary to show a PG-13 movie to a captive audience, but the parents could have diverted the children's attention too, even though boys will want to watch shooting scenes.

For 90 minutes?

 

[tink'smom2B]

My girls are 10 and 13 and I'm appalled at what is acceptable viewing for their age even on the Disney Channel. Parents should be able to shield their children from something they deem inappropriate. Don't we have some rights???

 

[DebbieB]

I've seen movies on planes edited. I can't remember the movie's name but I think it was Terry Bradshaw that had a naked rear shot. It was edited out of the one on the plane. You can't hear the sound without an earphone, so the kids would not have heard it.

 

[OrangeCountyCommuter]

There is another side to this story. Asking and disturbance are not the same thing. Anyone else bet family acted younger then the kids they were traveling with. LOL

And honestly it is generally impossible to actually watch movies on those old things anyway. Most kids can't even see them unless they stand up and half the time the picture is so bad it is just kind of a blurred image.

 

[Alesia]

Reading that, the parents have lost a bit of credibility. First off, PG13 movies do not have "extreme, graphic violence" or "sexually explicit content". At least, not in the way I define those things.

You might want to see this particular movie before stating that. Among other things, a woman is shown being tortured and having her fingers severed one at a time with gardening shears. I'm not a prude by any means, but I think it's a very graphic movie. I can't believe that it only got a PG-13 rating - I've seen much less graphic violence in R rated movies.

 

[Lewisc]

You might want to see this particular movie before stating that. Among other things, a woman is shown being tortured and having her fingers severed one at a time with gardening shears. I'm not a prude by any means, but I think it's a very graphic movie. I can't believe that it only got a PG-13 rating - I've seen much less graphic violence in R rated movies.

Airlines frequently show edited versions of movies. I haven't read anything which indicates if the movie being shown was the "theatrical" version or an edited for plane version.

I'll agree the parents have the basis for discussion after the flight regarding what kinds of movies are appropriate.

How many times does a FA have to tell the parents NO before they get the hint?

Asking for pilot intervention? Asking the people sitting around them if it's OK if that screen is folded up? Sorry that's just wrong.

Distract the kids. Ask if there is an available seat without a good line of sight of a screen.

 

[maxiesmom]

You might want to see this particular movie before stating that. Among other things, a woman is shown being tortured and having her fingers severed one at a time with gardening shears. I'm not a prude by any means, but I think it's a very graphic movie. I can't believe that it only got a PG-13 rating - I've seen much less graphic violence in R rated movies.

I'm going by what, by definition, a PG 13 movie is. Maybe the argument needs to be the Motion Picture Association of America needs to do a better job rating movies.

Is it deemed acceptable by all airlines to show PG 13 movies?

I have another question: What would happen if a child was seated next to an adult who purchased a movie such as Alex Cross? Would people be ok with the parents of that child asking the adult to not watch the movie? What if the parent and child changing seats were not an option, as that would seem to be a solution.

 

[DebbieB]

I'm going by what, by definition, a PG 13 movie is. Maybe the argument needs to be the Motion Picture Association of America needs to do a better job rating movies.

Is it deemed acceptable by all airlines to show PG 13 movies?

I have another question: What would happen if a child was seated next to an adult who purchased a movie such as Alex Cross? Would people be ok with the parents of that child asking the adult to not watch the movie? What if the parent and child changing seats were not an option, as that would seem to be a solution.

These are the ones showing in April, don't know the ratings but there is usually a disclaimer that they were edited for airline use:

http://www.united.com/web/format/pdf/travel/inflight/entertainment/films/2013-4-hemi.pdf

They must have caused quite a disturbance because it probably cost the airline a fortune in fuel to land the plane and then take off again.

 

[Lewisc]

I'm going by what, by definition, a PG 13 movie is. Maybe the argument needs to be the Motion Picture Association of America needs to do a better job rating movies.

Is it deemed acceptable by all airlines to show PG 13 movies?

I have another question: What would happen if a child was seated next to an adult who purchased a movie such as Alex Cross? Would people be ok with the parents of that child asking the adult to not watch the movie? What if the parent and child changing seats were not an option, as that would seem to be a solution.

From the link posted by Debbie:

most films have been edited for airline use. It's deemed acceptable to show a PG 13 movie which has been edited down to approximately a PG movie.

I think it would be appropriate for the parents to tell their child not to bother the person sitting next to them. Read your book, watch your show.....but leave him alone. No Sound. Not a good line of sight of the screen. Shouldn't be an issue. Where is the adult seated. Window or Aisle? Have the parent take the middle seat. The adult watching the movie is in a middle seat. Offer to switch seats. You want the aisle seat for yourself and the window seat for your kid? Can't have it both ways. Your going to be bothering that passenger every time you talk to your child. You don't get to complain that the passenger will be bothering you by watching a movie you don't approve of.

 

[sam_gordon]

Distract the kids. Ask if there is an available seat without a good line of sight of a screen.

I don't thinking asking to distract kids for 90 minutes (guessing on the runtime of the movie) is a viable option. Asking for an available seat sounds good, but when planes generally fly full, I don't know how practical that is.

If the movie was edited down, I'm surprised that wasn't mentioned by the airline. Granted, the family could have (and probably did to cause the diversion) over reacted, but I think the airline errored (?) in their choice of movie.

 

[maxiesmom]

If the movie was edited down, I'm surprised that wasn't mentioned by the airline. Granted, the family could have (and probably did to cause the diversion) over reacted, but I think the airline errored (?) in their choice of movie.

If it was the full on version of the movie as described, I would tend to agree. But we don't know if it was an edited version or not. And I'm kind of curious as to if the parents had seen the movie before, if they asked if it was edited, or just what exactly they saw that they objected to? Or did they see the title and, make an assumption, and fly off the handle?

 

[LadyBeBop]

Another reason why we don't fly (although a minor one).

Even if edited down, there's probably still a lot that would frighten a toddler. And you can't control what they look at for 101 minutes (the length of Alex Cross through IMDB.com.

My DGD-4 is at that stage in which she's frightened of Scooby Doo. A couple of weeks ago, she ran crying to me regarding a new monster cartoon on Nickelodeon. At least we can change the station. But we can't change the channel on an airplane.

Wondering if anyone missed their connections out of Baltimore because of this.