[Cleveland Rocks]

What do you guys think on this? I am having a talk with my sister on this because my niece is only 4, but she loves the magical scenes in Harry Potter, and yet, my sister feels she is not ready for her to see some of the violent scenes yet in the movies. I agree with this, but I still do not know what the appropriate age would be for a child to see the movies and/or even read the books for that matter? What do you all think?





======================================================================

A Portkey has been created for this topic.
Just click on this title in the list and be transported immediately.

[Maresa]

Well, the movies should only be seen by young children with a parent and if the parent feels that the child can handle it. (Heck, I screamed when that spider ran into the window!)

As for the books, *personally* I don't think children under about 10 should read them at all. However, it is up to the parent if and only if a) the parent agrees the child/ren can read it AND b) the child/ren can distinguish FACT from FICTION.

Really young kids are impressionable. If a 7 year old is reading the book, without the proper knowledge that the world of HP ISN'T real, who's to say that the kid won't try to go out and fly a broomstick? Now, if a 12 year old doesn't realize that it isn't real, they shouldn't read it either.

To me, it all comes down to whether or not they realize it is simply a story, and not to be taken as truth.

Also, the books mature with each succeeding one. We've seen this. The first three are very (I guess you could say) easy for children to understand. The fourth one is longer and a bit harder for younger people to understand fully. The fifth book has definitely shown JKR's writing style has changed slightly. I fully believe it will continue to mature, because the characters are maturing. The books or no longer just intended for younger children - they never were.

Anyway, that's just my view.

[DogStarBlack]

Well I think that parents should use their discretion with the movies-it all depends on how scared your child will get when a giant spider tries to eat Harry and Ron.
On the other hand, I think that the books are different. With the books, I think you should be at least 10 because as Harry gets older in each book, the books get deeper. Any younger than 10 and I don't think that the child will truly understand what's going on inside Harry's head; they'll understand the storyline, but not how Harry feels. But for OotP, I think you might want to wait until you're 12 or 13-not because it's scary, but because you won't recognize the angst, pain, and frustration Harry is experiencing without having actually went through that teenage stage in life yourself.
~DogStarBlack [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

[~*Jessie Flower*~]

Probably 10+ but it depends on the child. If the child thinks she could fly on broomstick (like stated above) she might do it. Just make sure she/he is mature and understands things.

[- Alex -]

you really think the kids should only see them with adults? [img]smilies/jaw_drop.gif[/img] you think they are not appropiate or scary or something???? [img]smilies/jaw_drop.gif[/img] I'm astonished guys [img]smilies/confused.gif[/img]

I think the movies are appropiated for all ages, my 4-year-old cousin enjoyed the films as much as me (I'm 18) and my sister went with her friend to see all the movies to the cinema and they loved it, and I think the movies are for everybody, no matter the age, the movies are very good.

About the books I think they are appropiate to +7 years, because in my country we learn to read at the age of 5 [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img] I think everything is good for the children. My cousins used to hare to read but since they've begun to read HP they are a lot into all kind of books

[guerinschick]

I have to agree it should be up to the parents weather they bring the kids to the movies.

I brought my 5 year old to SS and he was really scared. He wouldn't go to see COS because he thought Dobby was scary.


Lisa

[LittleMilkJug]

I took my 5 year old to see the film with no problems. and my 3 year old watches the DVDs, he loves them and it keeps them quiet for awhile. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

[Maresa]

See, I don't think kids that young should be watching too much television/movies as it is. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img] But I think that younger children can actually handle the movies better than the books, because they can see it and, well, they don't really have to think. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

But again, ONLY when they know it's NOT REAL.

[babycakes20]

When when I was a young child, I watched Mary Poppins and I knew that people can't just walk into chalk drawings. I wouldn't think that I could fly with an umbrella just because Mary did, and I certainly wouldn't have have thought I could fly on a broomstick just because Harry did. Maybe, I was just an extra intelligent kid. But then, every single one of my friends would have to be too. A generation gap thing. But I'm only 20 so ... If there are kids who can't tell the difference between fantasy and fact, I don't think it would make them impressionable, per se. It's definitely, partly, the parent's fault for not teaching them the difference.

[Bono's Girl]

My rule is if the kid asks me why there aren't any pictures, then he's to young. I tutor reading for the third grade, and frankly they whine at the thought that a book might have more than say twenty pages.
Kids get disintrested fast, and if they have to take longer than half an hour to finish an entire book they get frustrated no matter how great you think the book is. Show them the movie and eventually they'll want to read the book. Even though I hate it when people tell me they are HUGE fans of HP and never have picked up the book. But they're young so I let it slide just a little, reminding them always that the book is much more exciting.

[ 07-17-2003: Message edited Bono's Girl ]

[Celebrian Saralonde]

heres what i think: if the kid isnt intimidated by the size of the book then they are old enough to handle the contents. this may seem vague and lax but i know i babysit for these 4 and 6 year old kids and the only reason they havent read it is they dont like how big it is. they wanted to get the tapes and listen but their mom decided that since they cant even handle a few hundred pages worth of a book they shouldnt read/hear it.

[nesscafe]

This is actually a touchy feely subject. Let me tell you a little story and this should help clear things up.

My mother started taking me to the movies when I was 4 yrs. old because she knew that I would be able to sit and be quiet during the whole thing and believe me that is not true of every 4 yr old! I was exposed to all different types of movies from G to PG-13. (my mother always liked to cover my eyes during the less appropriate stuff) (took me a long time to figure out why her hands would suddenly go up) When I was 5 I talked her into letting me see my first R rated horror movie (Return of the Living Dead). My mother didn't want to take me but I begged her. She knew that I could tell the difference between fact and fiction, but the graphics were a bit much. She knew I would not be able to sit through it to the end. She even told me it was going to be gross and scary, but I told her that I would be able to watch. I sat through it until most of the town was eaten and something sprang from the ground asking for more brains. After that we agreed that it would be 3 more yrs before she took me to another R rated horror movie.

Moral of the story is mothers know their kids. If mom thinks junior can handle it they probably can. If mom says it's a little too much then it probably is (unless she's like oppressive Mrs. Weasley that is). Remember that every kid is different. I think the first Ghostbusters movie is about as scary as Chamber of Secrets. My mom didn't have any problems taking me to see it and I sat through the whole thing several times w/ no problems that same year. Mom's know best! [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

[spikenmefantasy]

My sons, ages 4 and 6, are too young to read the books, mostly because they are more complex emotionally. HOwever, they LOVED the movies, especially since they are ALL boy and love spiders and snakes, etc. I always watch everything my kids watch, so we saw them together. I reminded them it was only a movie, not real and you should have seen the look my 4-year-old gave me, like "Duh, mom."

Anyway, I too think it can be different for each child, and only a parent knows their child well enough to know how it will affect them. My children just aren't all that bothered by spiders or snakes and we have to remind them not to mess with either, in case they are deadly. So, no nightmares or screams on this end. I love the books, and will recomend them to my sons the moment I think they will get the most out of them.

[x Lindsay x]

Personally, I think that if the kid can handle the size of the book and understand some of the more difficult words, then go for it. Rowling has progressed the books so that the more mature themes are in the later books, of course, and the kids are older when they read them.

[* Marauder's Child *]

Personally, I think it's not a matter of age, it's a matter of the child's "maturity". It's a parent's discretion really.

Some 7 year olds can actually see "beyond" the story and spot the themes such as racism and the value of friendship. Yet some so-called "adults" are lost. What they actually focused upon was "witchcraft or think that "baby Harry" must be the spawn of Satan because how else could he counter Lord Voldemort's curse... they didn't see that it was Harry's mother's unconditional love for him that saved him from this evil, which is exactly what they should be teaching their children.