Mother of the Year here!

[Regina]

Yes, but your Godmother didn't spend time beforehand reading reviews of the movie or else she would have realized it wasn't a good idea, I assume?

That's right, but it sounds like the OP read some reviews and thought it would be okay.

I'm not saying that I agree with the choice of movie. I won't watch a Quentin Tarantino movie (and that is how it's being advertised) because of the violence. I'm a heck of a lot older than 11. What I'm saying is, the OP came here realizing that she made a mistake.

I once popped in a tape of "Look Who's Talking" for my DD and a couple of her friends, one of whom already saw it. I never paid close attention to the beginning of the movie. You can imagine my surprise when her friend loudly proclaims "I KNOW WHAT THOSE ARE. THEY'RE SPERM."

It's just one of those things that happens, no matter how careful you think you're being.

 

[Toby'sFriend]

If the movie is as bad as described, you have to wonder why it received an R rating and not NC-17.

From what I have read, it was headed for a definate NC-17 rating and they reworked and cut some parts that showed some male full frontal nudity.

Because you know in the American culture, you can cut off slice and dice, show all the blood you want and do almost anything imaginable to a woman's body with any sharp, blunt or rounded instrument you can think of.....

but once you put in a glance of a certain male appendage -- NC-17 for you Mr. Filmmaker!

 

[justhat]

That's right, but it sounds like the OP read some reviews and thought it would be okay.

I'm not saying that I agree with the choice of movie. I won't watch a Quentin Tarantino movie (and that is how it's being advertised) because of the violence. I'm a heck of a lot older than 11. What I'm saying is, the OP came here realizing that she made a mistake.

I once popped in a tape of "Look Who's Talking" for my DD and a couple of her friends, one of whom already saw it. I never paid close attention to the beginning of the movie. You can imagine my surprise when her friend loudly proclaims "I KNOW WHAT THOSE ARE. THEY'RE SPERM."

It's just one of those things that happens, no matter how careful you think you're being.

I agree. And not only that, the OP admitted that she made a mistake, hence her mocking 'mother of the year' title of the thread. So that's why I really see no reason to make her feel terrible, especially when it's something so harmless.

 

[mommaU4]

That's right, but it sounds like the OP read some reviews and thought it would be okay.



It's just one of those things that happens, no matter how careful you think you're being.

The OP said she knew the movie would be similiar to the movie "Saw", which her child had already seen. I've seen the movie "Saw" and it was one of the most gory movies I've ever seen.

It was her DD and therefore her choice to make, but I don't believe she had no idea what she was taking her to see. At least not the gory part. She seemed to know about that and was okay with it, but didn't anticipate all the sex scenes.

To each their own. Some people have a problem with blood and gore. Some with sex. Some with both.

 

[N.Bailey]

I agree. And not only that, the OP admitted that she made a mistake, hence her mocking 'mother of the year' title of the thread. So that's why I really see no reason to make her feel terrible, especially when it's something so harmless.

I agree and then when you add in the fact that she was there with her friend, that probably put her into a predicament too. How do you tell your friend you want to go?

Hindsight is always 20/20.

 

[txgirl]

When we flaunt the forbidden we shouldn't be surprised when the scandalous happens.

"They censor themselves" is about the most absurd thing I've ever heard. An 11 year old girl is a child. I would be so upset if I were the friend's mother , but I am especially sad for your daughter as her exposure to things way beyond her years will sadly change her whether you believe it or not.

To the OP- I know you said you don't censor what your kids watch, but if you change your mind check out, screenit.com, scroll to the bottom and click "no thanks" and you can review all movies at great length before subjecting your daughter to something she shouldn't even have to "choose" whether to watch or not.

Screenit lists this movie with over #100 "F" words among a jillion other reasons children shouldn't see it including graphic sex scenes and incredible gore and violence. I cannot understand this sort of parenting.

 

[wvjules]

Holy Cow! I just watched the trailer....there's NO WAY IN HELL I'd let a 11 y.o. watch that movie!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Feralpeg]

I don't like those types of movies and neither does DD (17), however each to their own. If the OP enjoys them and knows that it won't bother her DD, I have no problem with it. I will say that I aways check to see what type of movie my DD attends with a friend. If the mother of the other girl didn't know what they were going to, that is not good.

 

[Planogirl]

Lots of assumptions here and it looks like the OP might have fled. I just wonder what she was thinking even making this post. It had "flame me" written all over it.

By the way, I've been told that Hostel is much worse than Saw. Saw implied more than it actually showed anything (most of the time) while Hostel doesn't bother with implying anything. Or so I was told.

 

[txgirl]

If the OP enjoys them and knows that it won't bother her DD, I have no problem with it..

If it doesn't "bother" the DD? I'm not sure I understand this. Is there a level of nudity or sex or violence or anything that would warrant a parental decision above that of whether the child is "bothered"?

I thought parents helped to make those decisions while their children were still children? If there is no line at all, then why not pornography? I think the sex scenes are only a smidge away from that anyway.

 

[Regina]

The OP said she knew the movie would be similiar to the movie "Saw", which her child had already seen. I've seen the movie "Saw" and it was one of the most gory movies I've ever seen.

It was her DD and therefore her choice to make, but I don't believe she had no idea what she was taking her to see. At least not the gory part. She seemed to know about that and was okay with it, but didn't anticipate all the sex scenes.

To each their own. Some people have a problem with blood and gore. Some with sex. Some with both.

Trust me, I'm not defending the choice of movie. I'm an adult and I can't handle anything gory or bloody. I don't know how I watch ER. Most of the time, I'm peeking between my fingers at the TV.

I was always super careful of what my kids saw. My DS called me from a friend's house to ask permission to watch Rambo. When my DD was at a sleepover, the girls put on late night cable and she got quite an eyeful.

Unfortunately, these things happen. You learn your lesson and do your best to be more careful in the future.

 

[barkley]

i recognize that a parent can make the decision on what their child sees at a movie (i may not agree that its appropriate for my child) but when a child sees a film with adult content and then shares it (line repeating) with my child at school or sez "let's play zzz (insert movie name)" and starts instructing the other kids in how to reenact stuff from the movie...

i'm not saying this is what will happen with an 11 year old (and i'm not talking reenacting sexualy explicit stuff) but when i taught younger kids (k-3) i was completly taken aback at the impact a kid seeing an adult content movie could have on the entire class. on a monday some kid whose parents took him along to the movies would come in and share on the playground what they had seen or heard. the kids would start playing "pulp fiction" (yup -2nd graders running around shouting "i'm going to get medevil on you") and by tuesday morning i had a line of parents out the door trying to find out where thier child learned the key plot elements to a movie they would no way, no how let their child see). and it's not just the gory stuff, it's stuff like 5th grade boys coming in an quoting line for line the stuff from "american pie" and going up to a girl on the playground and saying "my names stifler-what did you do at bandcamp?" and then launches into a graphic retellling of the movie plot...just inappropriate.

the majority of parents with the younger kids thought everything inappropriate would "go over their heads", the older kids it was usualy "well he kept buggin me to see it and he said all his friends had so i did'nt see a problem with it".

o.k.-fine if you want to take your kid, take your kid. but if your kid is "mature" enough to see it, make sure they are mature enough to recognize to keep the content to themselves.

 

[Tigger_Magic]

That's right, but it sounds like the OP read some reviews and thought it would be okay.

Here are some snippets of reviews of Hostel.

Atlanta Constitution Journal: "A truly disturbing horror film that will make you squirm in your seat."

Chicago Tribune: "...I spent much of the second half staring into my lap while listening to a cacophony of screams and shop tools..."

E! Online: "It's horrifying, in the best sense of the word..."

Hollywood Reporter: "Highly en-gross-ing"

Boston Globe: "Folks who live for the pull and snap of live flesh will have their share of sequences to cheer for in "Hostel..."

FilmCritic.com: "Regarding the controversy about the extreme blood, gore, and graphic violence — yes, it’s true. A man taking an electric screwdriver to another man’s body isn’t even the tip of the iceberg. (snipping the truly gory details) How the film avoided an NC-17 rating is beyond me, especially considering the startling amount of sexual content and nudity found in the first act. Note to parents: this is not a movie to take the family to on a Sunday afternoon after church.

So which one of these did the OP read that led her to think this was the kind of film to take young children to?

It's just one of those things that happens, no matter how careful you think you're being.

A young child eating too much candy or falling in a playground, skinning their knee or sneaking some cookies before dinner at a friend's house -- those are "things that happen." Taking a child to an R-rated slasher/horror film, especially after reading reviews about it, is not, no matter how much one tries to sugar-coat it.

 

[N.Bailey]

Trust me, I'm not defending the choice of movie. I'm an adult and I can't handle anything gory or bloody. I don't know how I watch ER. Most of the time, I'm peeking between my fingers at the TV.

I was always super careful of what my kids saw. My DS called me from a friend's house to ask permission to watch Rambo. When my DD was at a sleepover, the girls put on late night cable and she got quite an eyeful.

Unfortunately, these things happen. You learn your lesson and do your best to be more careful in the future.

I'm like you in a way. I can take it when it's fake, but I just cannot watch those medical shows when they're really cutting someone open. Hubby loves those types of shows and I just have to get out of the room when he's watching them!

 

[BelleMcNally]

Lots of assumptions here and it looks like the OP might have fled. I just wonder what she was thinking even making this post. It had "flame me" written all over it.

Why? I guess I just don't see how someone who comes in with an "Oops, I really messed up" deserves to be flamed. I doubt her daughter's psyche will suffer any lasting damage...it sounds to me like she has a great, loving relationship with her mother, and that has to count for something...

Sure, not the best decision she ever made in her life (she, herself, seems to consider it a mistake), but I really don't think it's such a big deal. And I'm certainly not "sad" about what a terrible life her daughter must have...I mean, really...

 

[Regina]

I'm not trying to sugar coat anything. I have no idea what the OP read about the movie. Just seeing the TV ads was enough for me to know I'd never watch it.

She made a mistake, she came her to say she made a mistake, and I'm starting to think that was the biggest mistake of all.

 

[luvflorida]

I consider myself to be an open-minded, live-and-let-live type of person, but several things bother me about the OP.

First of all, am I the only one who doubts the authenticity of this thread? I am stunned at some of the things said in the original post:

leaving an 11 year old at home alone?

eleven year old saw and liked the movie, "Saw"?

parent read the reviews on Hostel and all seemed fine?

parent took someone else's young daughter to an R rated movie?

the girls sat away from the adults?

It all just seems to be too much. It seems like common sense would tell you to check reviews before taking a child to any movie, to check with friend's parents before taking them to any movie, (and maybe the OP did this), and to have the young girls sit near you, (afterall, you are responsible for that child while she is in your care).

IF this really did happen, the biggest problem I have with the whole episode, is the fact that the girls were left to watch the entire movie. If I had mistakenly taken my daughter and one of her friends to a movie that turned out to be something I thought to be inappropriate for them, (and this sounds like it was hugely inappropriate for their ages), I would have immediately taken them and left the theatre.

I know we all make mistakes and I believe the OP realizes a mistake was made. However, I think if she had left the theatre at the beginning of the movie, it wouldn't have been as bad an experience as it turned out to be.

And to those of you who say you've seen movies like this, or worse, at a young age, and suffered no ill effects, every child is different. I agree that some kids could sit through these types of movies and not give it a second thought. That isn't true of all kids. If my daughter had seen a movie like the one mentioned here at a young age, it would definitely have had an adverse affect on her. And if a parent took her without my knowledge, I would be furious with that parent, (I'm not saying that was the case for the OP).

 

[Tigger_Magic]

I haven't see any review that would indicate Hostel is anything other than a gory, sadistic horror/slasher film. The trailer itself was enough to convince me this was definitely not a film our family would go see. I'm simply astounded that someone would say they read reviews and decided to take young children to see it anyway.

 

[txgirl]

Why? I guess I just don't see how someone who comes in with an "Oops, I really messed up" deserves to be flamed. I doubt her daughter's psyche will suffer any lasting damage...it sounds to me like she has a great, loving relationship with her mother, and that has to count for something...

Sure, not the best decision she ever made in her life (she, herself, seems to consider it a mistake), but I really don't think it's such a big deal. And I'm certainly not "sad" about what a terrible life her daughter must have...I mean, really...

There is no genuine "oops" when you say you don't censor what your 11 year listens to or watches. There is a lack of parenting there. My daughter is in the 5th grade (most kids in her class are 11 or turning 11 soon).

I do think it's sad. It's also incredibly sad that there are other people who think it is okay for children to watch adults simulate sex in an incredibly graphic way.

 

[Planogirl]

Why? I guess I just don't see how someone who comes in with an "Oops, I really messed up" deserves to be flamed. I doubt her daughter's psyche will suffer any lasting damage...it sounds to me like she has a great, loving relationship with her mother, and that has to count for something...

Sure, not the best decision she ever made in her life (she, herself, seems to consider it a mistake), but I really don't think it's such a big deal. And I'm certainly not "sad" about what a terrible life her daughter must have...I mean, really...

I'm not saying that she deserved to be flamed. Flaming someone does nothing constructive IMO. But that's what is normal here and she should have known that she was in for it.

Notice that I've given no opinion. She's had plenty of them.