Would you take a 3-year-old to see a 3D film?

iwilldoitthistime

as regards the 3d and its effect on childrens eyesight, Ive just copied this from the Nintendo website -


WARNING - 3D FEATURE ONLY FOR CHILDREN 7 AND OVER

• Viewing of 3D images by children 6 and under may cause vision damage

this is in relation to the 3DS.

onlyroz

Tiddlywinks wrote: »

But WHY is it acceptable for noisy kids to be the norm? If they can't keep (or be kept) quiet then don't take them - simples!

Why should the rest of us have to put up with the grizzling, roaming around, banging on seats etc?

I was merely pointing out that if kids at the cinema annoy you then go to a late night viewing when they'll be in bed.

I've been to the cinema hardly at all in the last 7 years and it has always been late at night with Grandma looking after the kids. I have taken my son (age 7) to the cinema maybe half a dozen times and he's been very well behaved. My daughter has a shorter attention span but she does enjoy films (her current faves are Despicable Me and The Little Mermaid).

If it's true that Brave is very scary then I guess we'll have to go for The Lorax. I looked into the kids club and the only thing on is Tintin - my son would probably enjoy it but I'm not sure it would be my daughter's thing.

kiss_me_now9

GobbledyGook wrote: »

I thought eyes were pretty much developed in full by the time a child was 3?

Anyway thanks for the links.

I, personally, think you should caveat your statements about 3D though. 3D isn't unsafe for children, it may not be safe in your opinion and there may be a lack of studies on the long-term use of it, but that is not the same thing as stating it IS unsafe for 3 year olds imo.

As far as I can see the big worry about the impact of 3D is about the regular home use (and over use) of it rather than the one-off effect of a trip to the cinema so I'd still take mine as a treat every now and again.

TBH I'm a psychologist, not an ophthalmologist (how I managed to get a biology based ophthalmology topic for my dissertation is still a mystery to me) and I'm at the very beginnings of research so you're right; I should have caveated it The trouble with the research out there at the moment is that a lot of it is biased and done by the TV companies that are developing it so it's unreliable. I'm not sure it's worth the gamble of is it safe or not for me personally - but then I'm also a bit of a skinflint and paying the extra £4 for me and a kiddie to go see a film in 3D seems like a waste

onlyroz

iwilldoitthistime wrote: »

as regards the 3d and its effect on childrens eyesight, Ive just copied this from the Nintendo website -


WARNING - 3D FEATURE ONLY FOR CHILDREN 7 AND OVER

• Viewing of 3D images by children 6 and under may cause vision damage

this is in relation to the 3DS.

I think that the 3DS is a bit different to 3D cinema though - the 3DS is held right in front of your face for long durations, whereas the cinema is usually an occasional treat (especially when it costs an arm and a leg to go)

GobbledyGook

kiss_me_now9 wrote: »

TBH I'm a psychologist, not an ophthalmologist (how I managed to get a biology based ophthalmology topic for my dissertation is still a mystery to me) and I'm at the very beginnings of research so you're right; I should have caveated it The trouble with the research out there at the moment is that a lot of it is biased and done by the TV companies that are developing it so it's unreliable. I'm not sure it's worth the gamble of is it safe or not for me personally - but then I'm also a bit of a skinflint and paying the extra £4 for me and a kiddie to go see a film in 3D seems like a waste

The majority of research is biased one way or the other in my experience. Very few companies/people do research out of the goodness of their hearts.

kiss_me_now9

onlyroz wrote: »

I think that the 3DS is a bit different to 3D cinema though - the 3DS is held right in front of your face for long durations, whereas the cinema is usually an occasional treat (especially when it costs an arm and a leg to go)

I think it's the distance AND the length of time. Shorter distances mean more convergence which is worse for your eyes.

Now I'm intrigued, going to have a look and see if there is any specific research into whether up close (3DS) or far away (movie) is any more fatiguing etc.

**Patty**

I thought The Lorax was fab

kiss_me_now9

GobbledyGook wrote: »

The majority of research is biased one way or the other in my experience. Very few companies/people do research out of the goodness of their hearts.

All the research I (should be at least!) using is scientific and not funded by anything other than universities etc. - which is another reason why there's a lack of it!

Charlie23

I took my two to see Brave 2d today. My dd is 5 and my ds is 3 next month. I've never ever had an issue with them sitting and watching a film at the cinema, we've been 3 time this holidays and they loved it! We don't even have toilet breaks they love it too much!!!

Brave is a bit scarey though. My ds loved it all and wasn't scared at all. My dd did get a bit upset and was worried and cried at the end (i won't tell you too much!)
But she walked out asking if we can get the dvd because she LOVED it so much.

You know your child and know whether they scare easy or don't behave in the cinema, have fun if you go!
We all loved Brave even OH who thought it was fab!

building_with_lego

onlyroz wrote: »

I was merely pointing out that if kids at the cinema annoy you then go to a late night viewing when they'll be in bed.

I've been to the cinema hardly at all in the last 7 years and it has always been late at night with Grandma looking after the kids. I have taken my son (age 7) to the cinema maybe half a dozen times and he's been very well behaved. My daughter has a shorter attention span but she does enjoy films (her current faves are Despicable Me and The Little Mermaid).

If it's true that Brave is very scary then I guess we'll have to go for The Lorax. I looked into the kids club and the only thing on is Tintin - my son would probably enjoy it but I'm not sure it would be my daughter's thing.

I pretty much refuse to take my children to anything other than Kids' Club- bargain :beer:! This means that we see slightly older films (but paying £5 for four of us to go to the cinema makes up for it ) and sometimes we see films which may not particularly appeal.

Tintin was brilliant- it's not a film I would have chosen but we went because it was the holidays and it was raining. Wonderful little film and highly enjoyable- there were a couple of scary bits but it was an unexpected pleasure.