Monster House Previews Misleading (1 Viewer)

I'm not sure how good of a review I can give, since we walked out of the movie, so what I will post is our reasons for leaving.

I have been looking forward to this movie since I first heard about it. My girls have been looking forward to this movie since they first heard of it. So last night we took our girls to this movie. It was packed with families with kids of all ages.

The first 20 minutes of this movie are so intense. Waaaaay too intense for kids my girls ages (7 and 8 years old) and younger in my opinion.

The opening scene with the little girl riding her bike and the old man coming out of his door ... his eyes all evil and dark, really freaked my girls out. He yelled so fiercly and just frightened many kids in the theater.

Many younger kids in the theater began to cry. One behind us was sort of whimpering.

Then the next scene...

the old man chases the neighbor boy and grabs him and yells at him and then as he is clutching him, the old man begans to have a heart attack. His eyes were piercing and scary. It was definitely an intense death scene. My youngest daughter couldn't handle it.

Then...

the house gets pissed that the old man is dead and he ends up going after the young boy. The chimney smokes and a dark shadow comes from across the street and into the boys room as he is lying in bed. A hand forms and reaches out to grab the boy.

The child behind kept asking his mother if she would take him home. She just told him to sit still and be quiet. That pissed me off. th ekid obviously was uncomfortable.

This had my girls curled up and scared. The sound effects were really scary in that scene. The whole feel of the movie was just not kid appropriate. I finally took my girls and left and got a refund.

I was so disappointed because the previews we have watched show this to be a funny movie, not scary and intense like it really was. I hate this about previews lately. This happened with another movie recently as well. The previews make it seem kid friendly, but in reality it was so not.

Anyway, I'm sure the movie was good, but I went into kid protection mode so I couldn't really say.

interesting, lucia.

can i ask you what it was about the TV trailers that gave you the idea that it would be a kid-friendly show? i mean, i realize that it's animated and that there are humorous moments in the footage, but there's also all the scenes where the house seems to, i dunno, EAT people. a LOT of people. and the house itself looks horrifying...

i was in fact just commenting to a friend of mine the other day that i thought this show was being mis-marketed. or at least that the presentation was confusing.

perhaps it's just my over-sensitivity to being scared myself...i dunno.

thanks for the review, though - at least i know that i'll be right not letting my son see it.

John,

The previews that we saw showed things like a car being pulled into the house by a carpet tongue, kids going up to the front door and being knocked off the porch, a kid walking on the sidwalk and it being pushed up to the door. I didn't think the house looked scary based on the commercials, but that is just me.

Honestly the previews I saw didn't have the feel the actual movie has. It seemed more light hearted in the trailers. The actual movie is anything but light hearted, dealing with death and revenge.... It's definitely a mature subject matter. Not for younger kids.

I agree that it is definitely being mis-marketed and I think it would be good if the trailers reflected the actual vibe of the movie instead of playing it off like it's a funny cartoon.

From mpaa.org:

Monster House: Rated PG for scary images and sequences, thematic elements, some crude humor and brief language.

That puts it on par with Jaws and Poltergeist (both "PG" films). I wouldn't take young kids to those films, either.

Ebert and Roeper gave two enthusiastic thumbs up for Monster House, but in their review they made it a point to mention that this film is NOT for viewers younger than 11-12.

Exactly. The film is rated PG; the MPAA website is always there to give parents more information, and just about every review mentioned the film was might be too much for very little kids. The information is out there for those who choose to find out about movies before they buy a ticket.

But, if those films were rated today, they would be PG-13. JAWS, in its day, had an additional discaimer that it may be too intense for younger audiences. When those films were released, the PG-13 was not available.

I find www.screenit.com and www.pluggedinonline.com invaluable tools for in depth reviews of films with material that parent's may want to watch out for.

Thanks for the post, I was prepared take my kids to see it when I pick them up from grandmas, 5 and 4 years of age. Scratching this one from the list.

We saw this movie and I agree it should be PG-13.
Way too intense and not appropriate for young kids.
If Stephen King made an animated horror movie this would be it.

I found it to be very funny, not scary; intense and honest about life rather than hiding it behind sugar coated nonsense. Too me there was nothing worse in the film than anything in most of the Harry Potters. I guess as an animated film, this one isn't given a pass the way scary PG live-action films are.

Wow. A PG animated film is just too much for some people....

*sigh*

also there's a very good reason Nebbercracker was so mean, which if someone walked out, would never find out:

Nebbercracker was protecting kids from his house by scaring them away. The house was created when Nebbercracker's wife (a giantess from the sideshow circuit) accidentally fell to her death while they were building the house together. At the time she was freaking out because she was being 'tortured' by kids for her size, so her malignant spirit infests and animates the house. also, Nebbercracker is not dead, he comes back to try to rescue the kids and works with them to try to subdue the house, and that's where the movie becomes a really fun and exciting (and yes, intense) ride.


There's nothing in the film that should suggest a pg 13. there's no language, the violence is cartoonish, and there's one intense heart attack, it's clearly not a G because of the intensity of the action, but is it really less upsetting than the Lion King? a g rated movie with a very traumatic death and intense climax.

I don't understand why some choose to ignore the PG warning and bring young children to films without any knowledge of why the film earned a PG rating. Hopefully, a valuable lesson has been learned.

Perhaps...or perhaps not. But they ARE rated "PG" and should give some insight into the level of intensity that might be encountered at that rating level.

Given that so many think a number of today's PG-13 films should be rated R, who's to say whether older PG films might not still be rated PG in today's environment? I could certainly envision Jaws and Poltergeist receiving the exact same rating and description as Monster House:

Rated PG for scary images and sequences, thematic elements, some crude humor and brief language.

Actually, they might even be tamer, since I don't recall any "crude humor" in either older film.

I can't speak for anyone but I think the point of thread is that the movie is marketed towards all kids when it should be aimed at kids above a certain age. The ratings of other movies or thematic elements (whatever the hell that is) aren't really what the thread is about.

I haven't seen it, and I doubt I ever will, but to me the ads definitely make it look like a movie for any kid that can sit through a 90 minute movie.

I understand it had a PG rating. Usually I am on the ball about checking out movies before I let the kiddos go to them. I usually check www.kids-in-mind.com before even taking them to movies, but after viewing the trailers a few times I figured it was okay. A bad decision on my part. My girls are only allowed to watch G and PG rated movies (a few PG-13 if I have screened it before hand and feel it is okay).

DaveB: While I agree that it really is the majority of the responsibility of the parent to keep an eye out for these things, I think the studios have some responsibility as well when marketing these films.

The responsibility falls on know one but the parents. It makes me mad to see people take a 4 year old to a movie like Starship Troopers. An R movie if ever one was made. My parents didnt take us kids when they saw Jaws, and i was 13! Of course i know how you feel Lucia, i dont know how your kids deal with scary movies that are kid friendly, some can handle scary movies and others cant. Glad your not the type who would go to an R rated movie with YOUNG kids. It is important to see what content is in a movie regardless of the rating. Remember breasts in PG movies? My daughter was scared by the 1931 Dracula when she was 10. I on the other had LOVED it at 8, and didnt think it was scary. Was this movie Harry Potter scary, or more, or less?

I made the mistake of taking my kids to see the movie. While a decent enough animated movie, it was not a comedy. It was, plain and simple, a horror movie.

I think the advertising was very misleading. Plus, the damn commercials were on continuously during shows that younger kids watch.

But you cannot argue with the proof, kids were frightened and crying in Lucia's screening. Regardless of how we adults might view this film, the fact is that it scared children.