It's if someone is under the age of 17 they will need to be accompanied.

Nothing* kills the enjoyment of watching a movie more than hordes of 12-15 year old kids sitting at the back of an auditorium.

It isn't that I don't want to watch it with my parents, it is that my parents don't want to watch it in the first place

I would have no problem with watching a movie like South Park or American Pie with my parents, not that big of a deal. They don't want to see either, and thanks to this amazingly stupid rule that tries to parent every moviegoing child in america I cannot go see these movies unless I download them (which is what I mostly end up doing because of this stupid rule)

The government isn't my parent, my parents are my parents and I want THEM to make moral judgements BEFORE the MPAA or the Government.

------------------
- Nick Catalano

Plus the economic benefits to the theatre would pay for the extra rounds the manager would have to take to ensure that teenagers are sitting quiet.

------------------
- Nick Catalano

Go back and re-read my first post. We are just covering our asses. We're not doing it because we like to. In fact it's hard not to just say "screw the rules" when a 15-year-old little shit threatens to come back and pop a cap in your ass because he can't get in to see The Players Club.

I have a number of personal objections to the MPAA ratings system, but the basic concept is reasonable under most circumstances, even if the implementation is flawed. Clearly there is a need for parental responsibility, but there is also a need for parents to have some way of knowing about the content of films (without having to pay $6-10 to watch them beforehand) in order for them to be able to make an informed decision about whether or not to allow their children to watch them.

As a practical matter, it would be foolish for any major first-run house to blatantly ignore the ratings guidelines completely, as this would both result in bad publicity for the theatre and would attract exactly the types of underage customers who are likely to ruin the filmgoing experience for others (not to say that _all_ under-17 customers at R- or NC-17 films are rude or obnoxious, just that many would be).

In an art- or revival house, there is more leeway, depending on the film. It's partly a moral judgment and partly a business decision. Fortunately, those who don't like the system are free to either ignore it (by making and showing unrated films) or create a viable alternative and encourage others to join them.

Ideally, I agree with Rachel that it would seem reasonable for theatres to permit underage customers to attend R-rated films without parental accompaniment as long as the parent purchase the tickets (and presumably has decided that the child will not be emotionally scarred by the film), but I can also see why this would cause problems if the (largely) loud and rowdy crowd that might result were to drive away legitimate customers over 17.

(For those who care, my objections to the current implementation of the ratings system is that a) it is politically and economically biased toward the major MPAA member studios, b) the criteria used are excessively arbitrary and fail to take into account many factors which may affect the degree to which a film might be acceptible to children, and c) that the current implementation [especially the stigma associated with the NC-17 rating and the problems of theatres which won't play NC-17 films and newspapers that won't advertise them) tends to stifle creativity, as NC-17 is often considered to be the kiss of death at the boxoffice.)

 |  IP: Logged

 |  IP: Logged

Speaking as a manager, I would be more than thrilled if no one between 13 and 17 enetered my theatre for ANY movie without being accompanied by their parents.. Far too many teenagers are obnoxious, immature, loud, destructive and overly violent. A vast majority of theatre disruptions at my complex are caused by teenagers. Almost all of the vandalism and property destruction at my complex are the result of teenagers. Most of the fights and other violent distrubances at my complex are caused by teenagers. With all the probelms that teens cause, do you really think that ANY theatre is going to do something to bring more of them in?

Trouble is, teens are the most frequent moviegoers, and account for a large percentage of a theatre's revenue. Define the problem as "unruly people" rather than "teenagers", and the solution is clear.
Better to get rid of the 1% who are troublemakers, than the 50% who are teenagers.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: +1 585 477 5325 Cell: +1 585 781 4036 Fax: +1 585 722 7243
e-mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

 |  IP: Logged

Has any chain ever been on the receiving end of a boycott because of their admission policy? At the art theatre where I worked, we figured if they were old enough to buy a ticket they were old enough to see the film. Because of what we showed, this system worked well.

But it strikes me as a maturity issue. Teens who can't behave themselves (talk during the movie (especially on CELL PHONES!!!)) should be treated just like "adults" who can't behave themselves ... and asked to leave the auditorium.