A 12!!! NUDITY IS NOT 12 MATERIAL!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Walkabout
alexander-combe — 18 years ago(May 21, 2007 05:56 AM)
As much as i did enjoy the nudity my 7 year old brother was watching at the same time! this is not a 12! waty do you think? (did you lads like the nudity by any chance)
-
Flaight — 18 years ago(May 26, 2007 03:20 PM)
The funny thing about all that is that usually the most "responsive" age group to such nudity is usually more above the age of 7. Those below 7 will likely not really think much of it other than thinking it's funny, while a 12+ year-olds would have matured enough to see the eroticism. A bit of a paradox, isn't it.
-
aar809 — 17 years ago(April 06, 2008 05:50 PM)
not true. kids aren't retarded. At that age they probably havn't even seen a fully naked body before. (not counting breast feeding cause the wouldn't be able to remember). anyways they know certain parts of the body that are considered forbidden to the eyes and usually already have fantasies (mentally) of them at ages as early as 7. so being exposed to that kind of material is not appropriate at all. and considering that it wasn't just a mere flash but a relatively lengthy and fully exposed sense, yes i do see a problem in a 7 year old watching this movie.
-
hallogallo — 17 years ago(May 23, 2008 05:09 PM)
(7 year old kids) know certain parts of the body that are considered forbidden to the eyes
Not if they are brought up to understand that the human body is not forbidden or shamefull. If they believe such then it is because of the hang-ups of their parents and nothing to do with human nature.
In none threatening environments it is perfectly healthy that 7 year old should be confetable with seeing parents/siblings/close relatives naked or being naked around them (say at the beach or bathing). Same goes for movies, I would concider the nudity in Walkabout none threatening, and the same can be said for other movies such as Jabberwocky (a kid's film with Michael Palin's arse AND blatant full-frontal female nudity LOL) or Mrs.Henderson Presents (lots of male and female full frontal shots but only awarded an "under 12's must be accompaned by an adult" 12A cerificate). I don't believe my child was disturbed by the nudity in any of the above movies.
I think it pointless to stop a child from watching a movie just because it features the odd snipet of naked flesh. Moderatly sexual nudity for an 7 year old is OK (eg: say a brief shot of a naked someone getting into a bed with another person, that's OK as they already know that's what Mummy & Daddy do sometimes) but I wouldn't want them to see even a mild sex scene (because at 7 they don't understand what is going on). None-sexualy nudity and most nudity for comedy's sake are, I feel, also acceptable for a healthy 7 year old.
"I think you're a load of old crap too, Mr Mulligan." -
alric-ender — 17 years ago(July 18, 2008 02:45 AM)
not true. kids aren't retarded. At that age they probably havn't even seen a fully naked body before. (not counting breast feeding cause the wouldn't be able to remember). anyways they know certain parts of the body that are considered forbidden to the eyes and usually already have fantasies (mentally) of them at ages as early as 7. so being exposed to that kind of material is not appropriate at all. and considering that it wasn't just a mere flash but a relatively lengthy and fully exposed sense, yes i do see a problem in a 7 year old watching this movie.
OMG!. You have got to be kidding!
If a child has not seen a few naked bods by the age of 7 then there is something seriously wrong with the upbringing of that child. Children do not have a natural negativity toward nudity and it is very normal and highly recommended that they be exposed to nudity via bathing with siblings or parents, sleepovers, swimming, change-rooms, etc. It is unnatural and dangerous to deprive children of natural curiosity and the chance to feel unafraid of their bodies and the sight of other peoples' bodies. Sadly there seems to be an increasing number of people with distorted views like yourself. Perhaps you should seek out a psychiatrist and discuss your phobias before they are used to damage any young people who are exposed to your unfortunately warped way of thinking. I certainly hope you don't have any kids of your own. -
richimorton — 13 years ago(April 15, 2012 05:16 AM)
@ aar809 : Wot ???? Where did you grow up ? When i was a kid i saw my parents & sisters nude all the time . As was I . This is perfectly normal in Europe . I'm assuming you are in the U.S. as only they could be so uptight about such things . WoW you people are messed up !
That which does not Kill me makes me Stranger -
gribfritz2 — 12 years ago(November 11, 2013 10:11 PM)
Promiscuous? Some wacko over at Bigthink ranked countries and the US was #22 right on top of France. Then there's also this:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1090612/Now-Britain-leading-worldpromiscuity.html
I checked out some Rape statistics too. Again, UK fared worse than the US. Although some other European countries had impressive ratings.
Now take everything you said about the USA and replace "in the USA" with "with arabs". Or "with muslims". Or whatever other group that fits. Notice how it's okay to bash the USA but bashing these other groups is seen as an outrage? Please be more polite to the many hard-working and upstanding citizens of the USA that take all the crap idiots like you throw at them for no good reason. Thank you. -
EmmaPopell — 12 years ago(December 22, 2013 06:59 PM)
I completely AGREE, Royalcourtier. America is the only place where womens' breasts, etc. are "nasty" and not beautiful, naturally. (See any breastfeeding controversy.) It is a sick way of looking at nudity, here in the USA. I truly wish the society/men would EVOLVE to the level of artistic appreciation of a natural nude body that IS in most other places around the World. Until then, it really IS a sick society.
-
mikedmeyer — 11 years ago(July 28, 2014 05:09 PM)
It's hilarious that this thread turned to America bashing, when the original poster is clearly NOT American. Here's a couple hints: 1) Movies aren't rated "12" in the US - the rough equivalent is "PG-13." 2) "lads." Those two add up to Ireland or the UK being most likely.
-
IMDb-Rot_in_Hell — 9 years ago(September 08, 2016 08:29 AM)
You are an idiot!!
First of all your delusion that Europe is a sexual liberated utopia and America hates sex is an over-used and silly argument with no merit and nothing to it other than the fact you are clearly just another douchebag European, completely in love with your own country and just wants to rag on America and its people, what a brave social stance you have taken!
Second, the OP referred to the rating as "12", is that a rating that exists in America? No, its british you idiot.
Just proving that for all your smart-alleck, pseudo-intellectual, self-righteous behaviour, the only people that spend time on these message boards for this website are the most pathetic people on the internet. -
thomasdosborneii — 12 years ago(February 23, 2014 11:19 PM)
I don't think the nudity is the slightest problem at all, but I do worry about a young child seeing a movie with all the animal killing. I know that it is "real life" and probably a child needs to be exposed to this reality at some point, but I am not sure at which age it is okay. I'm a full grown adult and while I, of course, do understand that animals have to be killed (and I am a carnivore), there was so much of it that was sad and disturbing (and unquestionably graphic) even for me (particularly the spearing and cutting up of the kangaroos and the shooting and eviceration of the cattle). I might not want a child of seven to see this; not yet, anyway.
-
hallogallo — 18 years ago(May 26, 2007 05:28 PM)
LOL. It's a 12. Your 7 year old brother shouldn't have been watching it anyway!
Actualy, speaking as a parent, I'd say that with proper parental supervision this movie would be fine for a 7 year old, though most would probably get bored of it.
And yes, for what it's worth, I did like Jenny's nudity. While they're not sexy as such, the swimming scenes are very sensual, the combination of that lovely music, the way they are shot, and Jenny herself (there's no getting around that she was a very pretty 16 year old), make them very memmorable.
"I think you're a load of old crap too, Mr Mulligan." -
Roy_Bland — 18 years ago(May 28, 2007 04:21 PM)
I can see absolutely no reason why a 7-year-old would be depraved, shocked or led astray by an artful series of shots of a nude woman. Yes, I can understand why one might have concerns about allowing somebody of that age to see a sex scene. There is, however, nothing wrong with him seeing this. Actually, the tragic suicide at the end would probably trouble somebody of that age more.