Sony Apologizes for ‘Peter Rabbit’ Movie’s Allergy Scene
- Thread starter Colin Robinson
- Start date
EDIT:
The line between bear traps in bed-- clearly an example of Home Alone/Tom and Jerry-style cartoon violence-- and weaponizing a food allergy-- a real-life, possibly fatal, danger that actual children have used against each other-- is clear. People downplaying this issue henceforth will be subject to moderator action.
---
The line between bear traps in bed-- clearly an example of Home Alone/Tom and Jerry-style cartoon violence-- and weaponizing a food allergy-- a real-life, possibly fatal, danger that actual children have used against each other-- is clear. People downplaying this issue henceforth will be subject to moderator action.
Last edited by a moderator:
edit: I was posting this before I saw the moderator post above. I'll leave it as I feel it has merit based on what I said about the difference between seeing the scene written down by someone and seeing it for yourself in the movie. But if that's also considered bad or in poor taste then I'll leave it there.
Just sounds like some dark humour to me. Doesn't seem that bad.
It's also really hard to comment on without seeing the scene in question as delivery can VASTLY change how we perceive the scene.
Like the Tom & Jerry comparison earlier in the thread, I'm sure on paper, some of the jokes would make you automatically think "Not appropriate for a kids cartoon" but then you see it and it's not that bad.
Seeing it written down is just different from seeing it played out.
Still, as it stands, I don't think it's that bad but people are different including what we find humourous and what we find appropriate for a kids movie so whatever.
Still, that bit about "Beatrix Potter will be turning in her grave about now" is a bit much considering that assumes they know what she would think about it. Just seems very presumptuous to me. But I've never been a fan of "X turning in their grave" phrases. Mainly for that exact reason.
Just sounds like some dark humour to me. Doesn't seem that bad.
It's also really hard to comment on without seeing the scene in question as delivery can VASTLY change how we perceive the scene.
Like the Tom & Jerry comparison earlier in the thread, I'm sure on paper, some of the jokes would make you automatically think "Not appropriate for a kids cartoon" but then you see it and it's not that bad.
Seeing it written down is just different from seeing it played out.
Still, as it stands, I don't think it's that bad but people are different including what we find humourous and what we find appropriate for a kids movie so whatever.
Still, that bit about "Beatrix Potter will be turning in her grave about now" is a bit much considering that assumes they know what she would think about it. Just seems very presumptuous to me. But I've never been a fan of "X turning in their grave" phrases. Mainly for that exact reason.
I don't understand the uprorar, but to each their own.
Yes. Peter Rabbit was always dark. Hell, Mrs. McGregor cooked his dad in a pie.
Im sorry, but you must have missed the greatest chlidrens film of all time, Watership Down.
Do yourselves a favor and skip like all the kids movies I grew up watching, that shit is dark in hindsight, Seriously.
I’m just glad both my kids schools reversed a peanut ban. I’m all for making concessions but the idea that a table for peanut free kids “singled them out and made them feel bad” is just some next level stuff
I’m just glad both my kids schools reversed a peanut ban. I’m all for making concessions but the idea that a table for peanut free kids “singled them out and made them feel bad” is just some next level stuff
This sums it up perfectly. Especially for the age group a movie like Peter Rabbit should be targeting.
Thanks mods.
Regarding the stretch argument that this scene raises awareness about food allergies. An Epipen is not a permanent solution for allergy exposure. It is literally a shot of adrenaline to keep the heart from shutting down. It will only last for 15 minutes. That means you have only 15 minutes to get to a hospital to be treated or die. Most people don’t understand the harsh reality that people with severe food allergies face every day, and it pisses me off with how people are so dismissive of it. Even other parents!
Regarding the stretch argument that this scene raises awareness about food allergies. An Epipen is not a permanent solution for allergy exposure. It is literally a shot of adrenaline to keep the heart from shutting down. It will only last for 15 minutes. That means you have only 15 minutes to get to a hospital to be treated or die. Most people don’t understand the harsh reality that people with severe food allergies face every day, and it pisses me off with how people are so dismissive of it. Even other parents!
Yeah, not sure why people were making that analogy and it’s disappointing that people (especially here) would bust out the snowflake/fake outrage stuff. Cartoon violence wasnt the problem.
damn Sony,
this is fucked up, I don't have food allergies but I have worked with co-workers allergic to pine nuts and peanuts. It's no joke.
this is fucked up, I don't have food allergies but I have worked with co-workers allergic to pine nuts and peanuts. It's no joke.
Are you seriously trying to say that kids have never seen Tom and Jerry/Home alone style pranks in cartoons and movies and done them? That shit is very real and has very much killed kids/ adults in the past. I understand the point you are trying to make but using this of all things to make it?
They should apologize for all the murdering happening too because that’s pretty bad to show anybody of any age.
It sounds insane, but I could barely get through the trailer because of James Corden's voice.
That song is horrible and I'm mad I realized it real qyick.
I mean, people starting eating tide pods because they saw people online doing it. There are no bounds to the stupid stuff people will do without realizing the consequences. Children aren't exempt from that. I do get the outrage though, I could totally see a group of bullies doing this to a kid they know has a food allergy, not realizing the real danger it would put someone in
I had no desire to see this movie, being pretty ignorant of Peter Rabbit outside of being aware it’s a thing, but the trailer convinced me. It’s a CGI/live action version of Rushmore with a wascally wabbit & Non-Ron Weasley vying for the attention of a woman. Plus, you know, Movie Pass.
Having seen the movie, I personally don’t find the scene in question to be an issue. I seem to remember Peter Rabbit coming off like an asshole and, in fact, the entire movie frames Peter as a giant dick that pushed things too far and had to get over himself to make things right with everyone else.
Does that mean there needed to be a food allergy scene for plot? No. It could have been anything in its place. But Peter Rabbit also electrocuted the guy several times, layed bear traps around his bed, etc. Considered cartoonish in those instances or not, they could be just as “weaponized” as a food allergy. The movie framed Peter Rabbit as wrong for his actions quite clearly. But it’s also a parent’s job to teach their children right from wrong. To make sure kids understood the movie’s entire context. To isolate a single scene of the movie and misjudge it feels lazy and irresponsible.
I do understand the outrage, hopefully, comes from fear of a parent to protect their child. I can’t fault that motivation/instinct. But the best course of action here is to not badger Sony for an apology (yeah, too late) but to make sure a child fully understands the movie they just took in and the lessons learned (such as the consequences of Peter’s actions lead him to ruining several lives and getting over his ego to make things right).
That said, ditto what the other poster said. Go see Paddington 2. It’s a much better film and deserving of as much money and butts-in-seats it can get.
Having seen the movie, I personally don’t find the scene in question to be an issue. I seem to remember Peter Rabbit coming off like an asshole and, in fact, the entire movie frames Peter as a giant dick that pushed things too far and had to get over himself to make things right with everyone else.
Does that mean there needed to be a food allergy scene for plot? No. It could have been anything in its place. But Peter Rabbit also electrocuted the guy several times, layed bear traps around his bed, etc. Considered cartoonish in those instances or not, they could be just as “weaponized” as a food allergy. The movie framed Peter Rabbit as wrong for his actions quite clearly. But it’s also a parent’s job to teach their children right from wrong. To make sure kids understood the movie’s entire context. To isolate a single scene of the movie and misjudge it feels lazy and irresponsible.
I do understand the outrage, hopefully, comes from fear of a parent to protect their child. I can’t fault that motivation/instinct. But the best course of action here is to not badger Sony for an apology (yeah, too late) but to make sure a child fully understands the movie they just took in and the lessons learned (such as the consequences of Peter’s actions lead him to ruining several lives and getting over his ego to make things right).
That said, ditto what the other poster said. Go see Paddington 2. It’s a much better film and deserving of as much money and butts-in-seats it can get.
Did you watch Home Alone? Home Alone 2? Home Alone 3?
Or, really, any kid film from the 90s? It's a wonder we're not all sociopaths.
heh. well....
in all seriousness though, this isn't the 90s anymore. and really the cartoon violence wasn't the problem, hell i would show my kid a tom and jerry episode any time.
So we are basically not allowed to discuss the topic...
Apparently youre not allowed to say your opinion if a moderator doesnt agree with it.
As someone without fatal food allergies, I can see why an uncommon and misinformed medical problem like that can rub people the wrong way when it gets exploited in media.
Thank you for putting this policy in place, it was really discomforting having people joke about a real issue like this.
It's nothing alike. No kid will do Tom&Jerry or Home Alone pranks, but they may well slip an allergen into their classmate's food and literally kill them. If you don't see the problem, well, I don't know what to say beyond don't have children.
I would put my potential children to watch Tom&Jerry or Home Alone every time. Not this shit.
May I suggest that you simply just lock this thread then ? I mean, you are banning pretty much all discussion so what is the point of this topic on the discussion board if we can't discuss it...
First time I've seen a moderator on here threaten to ban/warn people for not agreeing with their stance on something.
If your child watches a cartoon rabbit fire a blackberry into a persons mouth with a slingshot and thinks that's something they want to repeat then you have already failed as a parent.
What exactly is being downplayed here? Who are we being inconsiderate to?
We're supposed to treat weaponization of food allergies against children as some serious and common problem, when it's clear it's a gag in a children's movie that went unnoticed?
I don't really agree with this, there's much more chance of a kid using a dangerous wrestling move on someone than copying the peter rabbit movie. Sounds like a funny scene
K, list some deaths then that have occurred with children doing wrestling moves. We have documented cases of deaths because of children not understanding the severity of deadly allergies.
Why is this simple argument, repeated several times in this thread so hard to understand?
*edit* Actually I retract my wrestling comment. I googled and found that was a thing. Even in this age group. Thats messed up.
Bruh, the problem is not the slingshot. The problem is like, everything else. There are so many inocuous, funny things they could slingshot, but they chose the allergy. You Yould not imagine kids could think that's funny and try ton slip in an allergen to see what happens? Kids have done that in the past, and this isn't helping matters.
Seriously in a movie of outlandish heinous slap stick violence that’s where we draw the line? I agree with the other posters just lock the thread otherwise it’s seems you just want discussion only condemning the movie.
I'm not saying it the allergy thing doesn't happen, I just still don't have a problem with it being a joke in the movie. It is wrong when in a series of unfortunate events the kids self inflict their own peppermint allergy to get out of a situation? I just disagree it is bad to have in the film
here's one: http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92804&page=1
''You can be outraged or get banned, your choice''
Damn what a great place for discussion
It is a serious and (relatively) common issue. Kids have died or been hospitalized several times in recent years in the UK alone from classmates pulling shit like this, and it's absolutely stupid that it made it into a kid's movie with the protagonist doing it.
How many kids have been killed by their friends setting bear traps for them? It's 100% different.
