SnowAngel, I'm curious as to why your parents let your siblings see Master and Commander over VDT but that's their decision, so I'll leave it at that.

I agree with W4J,
It doesn't make any sense to be allowed to watch Master and Commander, yet not Voyage of the Dawn Treader.

It is my parents' decision to not allow the younger kids to watch Dawn Treader and I’m not going to question it. But I think the logic is is that fantasy violence (aka the sea serpent) is more frightening than realistic violence in the context of a battle. I do know that the kids don't wake up scared after seeing historical films...

As for Master and Commander, it is history and I think it does make sense in our home, though I should add it is a film we didn't see in theater. (Actually, we don't watch much in theater except Narnia - too expensive) We enjoy using accurate historical films to supplement our history studies - Mr. Smith Goes to Washington and Amazing Grace surely make political studies come alive, and you can't beat the epics such as the Longest Day or Gettysburg for setting up some of the greatest battles in history. I find that the more historical films I am privileged to watch, the more my history books and even historical fiction come alive.

SnowAngel

SnowAngel,
If you like historical movies you all might like The Conspirator. It released in theater earlier this year, not yet out on DVD as far as I'm aware. It deals with the trial of Mary Surratt, after Lincoln's assassination.

But I think the logic is is that fantasy violence (aka the sea serpent) is more frightening than realistic violence in the context of a battle. I do know that the kids don't wake up scared after seeing historical films...

I must admit I was confused by the Dawn Treader vs Master and Commander logic as well, but I think that cleared me up. After all I was watching Jurassic Park since I was 8 and probably could have long before, but put me in front of any alien invasion movie... even an animated one and it's bound to give me nightmares or scar me for life. (Fortunately I'm getting a bit better with the latter, but I won't watch most of them- especially after reading The Mothman Prophecies left me sleepless for a week. Anyone see the movie by the way? I probably won't, liked the book, but I can only handle so much.) Anyway I think it has a lot to do with the person, after all I grew up on dinosaur books and nature documentaries... but the first program I saw about UFO sightings did NOT settle well. (The worst part is I don't even believe they exist... at least not the take over the planet kind, but I'm getting horribly off topic, aren't I... Sorry mods )

Basic point is I understand your parents logic now

No worries, SnowAngel. I think I understand their logic a bit more. As for watching historical movies to supplement your history studies, great idea but be careful with that. Some of them aren't historically accurrate. For example, don't watch Pearl Harbour to get an idea of what really happened in that period!

I love watching historical movies to get a better idea of a time period! Even if some details aren't absolutely perfect, (Even the great movies will have things wrong with them or timelines slightly skewered), the overall movie ends up giving me a much better mental image of the period or the person I'm learning about. For example, watching the film Marie Antoinette was great because I was able to see in my mind Versailles, Petit Trianon, (spl?), etc as I would read about them in books. I'm an extremely visual person so that's why I often watch movies before reading books, and that's why even if the details might be a little fuzzy, seeing the time period come to life on screen gives me something to connect it to in my mind, if that makes sense.

re: fantasy violence vs. realistic violence. I'm not really sure there's a difference to me. I think as a kid (and I pretty much never watched movies + a very very very overactive imagination so got scared at pretty much anything) I'd get scared by a fire that killed someone [ not pictured on screen] in Heidi just as much as getting scared by "the land before time" (yeeeah).

For example, don't watch Pearl Harbour to get an idea of what really happened in that period!

No kidding. If ever there was a movie where the producers really dropped the ball, that's the one. I'm willing to forgive a great deal when it comes to movies like this, but PH pushed it too far. It's almost like an alternate history or something. And about the time I get to page 3 of discrepancies I usually press the Stop button on my DVD player.

I love watching historical movies to get a better idea of a time period! Even if some details aren't absolutely perfect, (Even the great movies will have things wrong with them or timelines slightly skewered), the overall movie ends up giving me a much better mental image of the period or the person I'm learning about.

I understand what you're saying, although I think in some cases the movie producers have ceased following the script written by history altogether and are creating a bit of their own. And when that happens the details of the person or time frame you're looking at runs the risk of being fabrication.

I understand what you're saying, although I think in some cases the movie producers have ceased following the script written by history altogether and are creating a bit of their own. And when that happens the details of the person or time frame you're looking at runs the risk of being fabrication.

Oh yes. For example, the movie The Other Bolyn Girl. After seeing it I read up on it and realized how many inaccuracies there were. Yet at the same time, after watching a historical movie, the chances of me remembering dates and timelines and even characters names aren't too high. I don't do well remembering details like that, I do better with ideas or the "bigger picture". So if I can't remember what The Other Boleyn's name was, I also can't remember the inaccuracies. But, if someone mentions that time period, or a character from the story, it gives my mind something to attach it to, an association that helps me frame things around it. Ugh, that doesn't really make sense. But maybe it does...anyways

And as much as I love the movies... Balto is about as accurate as a photo shopped picture of Nessie. For starters Balto was only one out of a hundred and a half dogs scattered over 20 teams. Secondly the Musher was not knocked out when they got back. (Speaking of inaccuracies... the proper term is "Hike" not "Mush"- Hollywood invention ) You can read more about the historical event (though wiki's really not the best source either) here... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1925_serum_run_to_Nome

I watched My Left Foot last night. It has Daniel Day Lewis (Oscar Winner for this role) who plays the real person, Christy Brown, a guy with several Cerebral Palsey and can't use much of any part of his body except his left foot, which is does extremely well. He ended up being a famous painter and wrote his own autobiography. It was a pretty amazing movie and I thought the portrayal of someone with CP was impressive.

Anyone here seen Fantastic Mr Fox? I'm actually just finishing up watching it right now and had to post something about it.
I should mention that I reallyreally don't normally like animated movies at all. Like seriously, I can't think of one that I like...except for this one. I love Wes Anderson's other films, and his style is evident in this one. The quirkyness, the intricate sets and the amazing witty script. Not to mention the usual Anderson actors are in it which makes it fun trying to identify them by their voices But yeah, I'd highly reccomend this, and while I still don't like animated movies, at least I can say I like this one.

I think I already have posted a few rants on that movie, Val. But yes, I've seen it, only once, and recently. I was not at all impressed. I didn't like the animation, but besides that, the whole movie seemed very stiff and void of feeling. All the voices were exactly the same, and again, lacked any emotion. So I didn't like it at all. But I should probably make myself watch it again.

Hey guys, I live in London and I'm attending a screening of Krabat at the Apollo Piccadilly. I thought it would be interesting to compare that film with Narnia.

I would be particularly interested in comparing the two movies because I
think they share many characteristics in the themes as well as the way the
films are shot.

Like Narnia, Krabat is a literary adaptation of a great classic of children’s
literature that explores the boundaries of what is truth and what is
fantasy and puts into question the concreteness and value of both.

Please tell me what you think of this comparison and if you are going to
join me at the screening.

This is the trailer to give you an idea:

LWW06

Yeah, I'm not seeing the similarities to Narnia.

Yeah, I'm not seeing the similarities to Narnia.

That is not much of an answer, tell me why you think so....
Is it not the case that both books and both films explore the liminality of our human condition in relation to the fantastic and the imaginary valueing the experience that transcends the material condition of human existence.

I agree with W4J,
I've known about Krabat for a long time now- its similarities to Narnia are next to none. You are reaching to see something that I don't believe is there at all. I don't plan on seeing it either.