You are right. I’ve been to countless R rated flicks, most recently Friday the 13th to see kids as young as 6 in the theater with parents. But guess who gets blamed when that child kills or mames some one. The film makers and not the parent.

While I wouldn’t bring my 12 year old daughter to this (and she’s seen “Aliens” with a number of “cover your eyes” scenes) I’m glad to hear that you actually pre-screened this and put some thought into your decision.

I think most parents don’t think about it at all.

Vic

No less horrified than I am, I expect, at parents who let their kids pour thousands of hours of Disney, Nickelodeon, and Nintendo garbage into their eyes and ears each year. What’s the long-term effect of that, compared to seeing a few minutes of violence and sec? Or parents who let their kids skateboard without a helmet. Or kids who don’t take their kids to museums, concerts, etc… on a regular basis.

Truly, my kids see a lot more of the world than most, and I spend a ton of time and attention making sure that happens, because it’s that’s exactly how I like it. Maybe in this case I strayed a little further over the line than usual. But I can live with that.

Your kids, your choice.

What happened to getting a babysitter?

One other think, def worth mentioning. A show stopper for some parents will probably be the Dr. Manhattan character and his frontal nudity. If you have a young girl, you may very well find that to be a problem. He’s nude on and off throughout the movie, so there’s no way to avoid seeing him in all his glory. It’s done very matter of factly, and is completely ignored by everyone. But it is there.

Having taken my 10 yr old twin boys to see the Watchmen movie on opening weekend, I previewed it and ran a stopwatch, marking five brief sections where I asked my kids to cover their eyes. Worked out pretty well.

Here are my suggested edits, which you can use if you want to duplicate what I did. Start your clock right after the Warner Bros logo appears on screen. Elapsed time in minutes and hours is shown below:

0:37 – Attempted rape and assault. The victim gets beaten up pretty badly.

1:26 – Kid bites another kids ear off. Pretty graphic, but quick.

1:30 – Murder by meat cleaver to the head. The victim kidnaps children.

1:44 – Prisoner gets his arms cut off with a power tool by another prisoner. Perhaps the most graphic scene of all.

1:47 – Extended sex scene, upper body only. Yes, you see breasts, but it’s not a biggie. This is the only scene that lasts more than about 10 seconds. It goes on for maybe a minute or two.

There are several other scenes that some might mark, which I didn’t. A prisoner gets attacked with a deep fryer, resulting in some serious burns. And a Vietnamese pregnant woman gets gunned down by the man who most likely fathered her baby. Also, at several points folks get their limbs broken, and broken bones are sticking through the skin. But somehow none of those struck me as worth censoring.

See you at the movies.

Ok, that’s good then, that was my only issue, not that he did it or whatever, is how the film portrays him given the fact. I THOUGHT the film portrayed him as a “good guy” so I would have had a problem with it, but if they don’t, then I can understand if that scene fit into the plot somehow. So it’s all good.

Trust me, he’s portrayed fully as a villain in the film and there is nothing remotely ambivalent about the rape scene in the film.

He does despicable things but the government gives him a pass because he’s doing their dirty work for them.

Vic

But I don’t know, like I said, I don’t know the story, but I really can’t think of a situation where rape is ok. I guess I’m not creative enough… For me, once he rapes someone, he’s a villain. I don’t care if he just saved a bus full of nuns and children. villains can do their good deeds here and there as well.

You make it out like I was trying to say rape is being justified, it’s not at all. I was merely remarking on The Comedian’s view of the world.

Well, I haven’t read it and haven’t watched it, so I don’t know the context. So in what context is rape not a bad thing? Just curious. I mean, except if he was in Japan of course…

http://entertainment.sympatico.msn.ca/movies/features/article.aspx?cp-documentid=18266086

but it seems in the last few days the buzz has grown to a very loud “OMMM” and with 70% of the 1600 midnight screenings sold out I am thinking of changing my prediction of 55-65 million..It could possibly beat 300′s debut of 70 million

Vic any thoughts here?

It’s just that his view of the world may be correct; he, by no means, is a hero but IMHO none of them actually are. In the traditional sense, there are no perfect “good” guys nor are there any truly “evil” characters. All are human beings and thus flawed–except Dr. Manhattan, who used to be. Audiences are asked to decide for themselves, who is right, wrong or “just caught in the right place at the right time” (or is it “wrong place at the wrong time”)

Each character defines the world in some particular way and The Comedian has a certain perspective. He’s not the “good guy” in the sense that The Joker wasn’t the “good guy,” but they both may be right in terms of how they understand the world.

The Comedian argues that “mankind has been trying to kill themselves for years” and humans are “violent, by nature.” Watchmen has always been morally ambiguous, The Comedian simply poses another question.

Midnight, Thursday.

Vic