›

Crikey, I'm a dad! Now, which 007 film has the lowest age limit??

2»

Comments

  • BounineBounine
    Posts: 2,598
    AceHole wrote:
    Have just become a father, my son (Marcus) arrived last week, and I'm itching to introduce him to Bond-dom asap (met with dissaproval all around from my wife & mother in law :)) ), so which of the films could you show a young kid? And from what age onwards..?

    I'm leaning towards age 9-10 with TSWLM, MR and TLD, or are these choices misguided?

    LTK. Start with the scene where Leiter is eaten by the shark. ;)

    Yeah, I'm thinking TSWLM and Moonraker are the most appropriate for an infant. They are the biggest in terms of their set pieces. A child needs something that has strong visual components and obvisoulsy
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,554
    TSWLM was the first Bond film I ever saw (at 9).

    I'd say that Goldfinger is the place to start. It's most "violent" scene is when Oddjob shoots a guy at point blank range in the car: but there isn't a spot of blood. Jill dies naked, with gold all over her. Her sister gets hit with Oddjob's hat: but again, it's not explicit. The fight scene at Fort Knox is tame. Oddjob dies a brutal but deserving death. And Goldfinger himself gets sucked out of a plane. The only objection could be Pussy Galore's name.
  • AnonAnon
    Posts: 246
    TripAces wrote: »
    The only objection could be Pussy Galore's name.

    Funny! My view is you either understand the double-entendre or you don't. So Pussy Galore's name is either a weakly humerous and salacious point of note - or she's just a feisty pilot with a funny name.

    And if the concern is for an adult having to explain the joke to a child upon viewing, well
    I can't imagine an oblivious child singling out that character's name as one that needs further explanation. Bond films are full of ludicrous names - not all of them with 'fnarr' overtones - so kids think nothing of them unless and until they get the gag.

    I'd be far more worried about the nice young lady called Plenty O'Toole.

    Thinking back, I never really watched Bond films with the family - it was nearly always a group outing of peers, the film being followed by much boisterous reenactment.

    My advice is to let your kids discover them themselves - they'll appreciate them all the more for it too. Arrange for your offspring and mates to go see whichever is the latest movie when you judge them of an age to be able to comprehend and enjoy it. If they like it they'll backtrack - and then you can wheel out the blu-ray box set with pride.
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    Posts: 1,727
    TripAces wrote: »
    The only objection could be Pussy Galore's name.

    Thx for your input, but this would be the least of my worries :)
    I'm personally more concerned by a child thinking it's okay to gun down people randomly than them being privy to some sexual innuendo that most likely doesn't interest them at all.

    *Boobs or other body parts on screen & (normal) sexual scenes viewed by a kid = me not too bothered, it's part of life

    *Human beings getting slaughtered on screen = should not be part of a child's idea of life


    But then I guess that's an age old discussion, and a cultural issue too... :-S
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    When my son was nine, I showed him the latest Bond at the time. CR. He could take it, but a Moore film is probably better suited for younger kids.
  • AceHoleAceHole Belgium, via Britain
    Posts: 1,727
    Thunderfinger wrote: »
    When my son was nine, I showed him the latest Bond at the time. CR. He could take it, but a Moore film is probably better suited for younger kids.

    Yeah I'd have to say I think that really is the absolute limit for that particular film... I personally would not take my 9 y.o to CR, whereas I wouldn't have a problem with him seeing YOLT or MR.
Sign In or Register to comment.