Parents Strongly Cautioned

When my mother rented Robocop for my brother and me, she was probably just thrilled that we were able to agree on something.  I can still remember the look on her face and the shrill "TURN THAT OFF RIGHT NOW!!" as the main character is brutally (and graphically) gunned down towards the start of the movie.

While the movies rating system was introduced in the late 60's, not many paid very close attention.  Tom and Jerry were as violent as any movie we could have watched, so what was the difference?

For our generation, we are hyper-aware of the ratings the government places on our movies, television, and music.

Well, at least you think we would be.

I am the first to admit that I am constantly confused by the ratings applied to movies:

Shrek is rated PG, but Monsters, Inc (released the same year), with its growling hairy monsters only earned a G rating.

Anastasia and A Bug's Life earned G ratings in the late 90's, but movies with similar content (with regards to the violence, fighting, and innuendos) earn a PG rating today (see: Kung Fu Panda and How to Train Your Dragon).

This past Saturday, we went in search of a movie that was playing to which we could take our 4 1/2 year old son.   He has already seen Mr Popper's Penguins (PG), Cars 2 (G-huh?), and Winnie the Pooh (G) was not going to be released for another couple of weeks.

The only thing that was even close to what we'd find interesting was The Green Lantern (stretching the boundaries with a PG-13 rating).

Me being me, I went in search of reviews that might give me some insight on the movie's content and if it really deserved to be rated so close to the edge of R.   Most of what I read listed it as "not so bad" and "nothing so terrible."  There were mentions of no sex, little foul language, and just some cartoon-ish mahem.

It was armed with this that we went forth to see The Lantern.

Idiots.

The fact that there were NO other children in the theater should have tipped us off.  The first part was fine.  However, as the movie progressed, it was clear that we had made a bad decision.   Older children would probably be fine...as in the 13 and older recommendation made by the Motion Picture Association. As for our son, two thirds of the time was spent with closed eyes and covered ears.

It leads me to question the toys that are geared towards younger children.  We are behind told that toy makers want you to play with the toys that represent the movies you should probably avoid taking your kids to see at the theater.

A mixed message of merchandising that goes right along with the mixed message of the ratings system itself.

Now, let me point out that I do NOT expect the government to tell me how to parent my child.  Last time I checked, that is the job of the hubs and myself.  It is our duty to determine what Z should and should not be allowed to see.

I count this experience as a lesson learned.  No parent gets it right all of the time. Many may think that I should have known better.  Again, I point out the flawed ratings system that is supposed to help me determine to what I should expose my son.

At the end of the day, everything is up for inspection.  I know that I cannot shelter my son from all of the world.  He needs the life experiences to grow and develop.  However, if there are any questions about what he'll see, then it's off the table until hubs and I can watch it ourselves and make a decision.

Parents Strongly Cautioned indeed.