Watership Down that "traumatised" a generation of children...

[Elixer]

gets wussified.
Those poor, poor children that somehow managed to survive the original film, what were those parents thinking allowing their kids to see this?

It was the film that traumatised a generation of children, with its much-loved rabbit characters slain on screen in graphic and memorable scenes.

But the story of Watership Down is to be remade for a new era, as programme-makers promise to tone down its most brutal images.

The BBC has teamed up with Netflix for one of the most expensive mini-series ever made for the small screen, and the first animated four-part drama of its kind.

The show’s executive producer told the Telegraph the 2017 version will not just tone down the levels of on-screen violence to make it more appropriate for children, but give a boost to its female characters.

Female rabbits including Clover, played by Gemma Arterton, Strawberry, played by Olivia Colman, and Hyzenthlay, played by Anne-Marie Duff, will get a dose of doe power, as it were, to allow them to display their own heroics alongside their male co-stars.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...-down-with-less-violence-to-avoid-scarring-c/

 

[Newbian]

 

[Jaskalas]

I cannot exactly recall how young I was when I first watched that. 3, maybe 4.

 

[Ichinisan]

I never heard of that. What does the name have to do with the subject matter?

 

[thedarkwolf]

"The title refers to the rabbits' destination, Watership Down, a hill in the north of Hampshire, England, near the area where Adams grew up."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watership_Down

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

Wait, I was traumatized? Who do I sue? ALL of the great children's stories were far grittier in print than was ever depicted in film. I guess the BBC just decided to take a play out of the Disney handbook.

 

[mikeymikec]

As much as I love Watership Down, the violence in it is quite graphic. Furthermore, in the UK it is rated 'U' (meaning 'suitable for all'). Is the graphic level of violence needed, strictly speaking? It is meant to be a children's story, as is the book (the book is also worth a read IMO, btw).

To anyone who is about to comment on how graphic they think it is, bear in mind if it's been some years since you last watched it, you might have a bit of a selective memory about it.

@ OP

Do you consider childrens' movies to be some kind of rite of passage or something? Why are you talking about surviving? They're meant to be instructive/enjoyable.

 

[zinfamous]

It is possible that I can't recall ever watching all of this, but if there are trauma reparations to be claimed, who do I contact?

 

[olds]

Read the book as a kid. Never saw a movie.

 

[JSt0rm]

Kids should be introduced to some levels of violence in media. The film doesn't glorify violence and that is an important distinction when dealing with 8 year olds.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

As much as I love Watership Down, the violence in it is quite graphic. Furthermore, in the UK it is rated 'U' (meaning 'suitable for all'). Is the graphic level of violence needed, strictly speaking? It is meant to be a children's story, as is the book (the book is also worth a read IMO, btw).

To anyone who is about to comment on how graphic they think it is, bear in mind if it's been some years since you last watched it, you might have a bit of a selective memory about it.

@ OP

Do you consider childrens' movies to be some kind of rite of passage or something? Why are you talking about surviving? They're meant to be instructive/enjoyable.

Why do you consider violence in movies to be worse than that in books?

 

[Skel]

I barely remember the movie, in fact all I can remember from it was it was about rabbits and was very dark for a cartoon. I'd have to watch it again, but it's one of the very few things I remember has being disturbing from that period of life so I'm inclined to agree toning it down for kids might not be that bad an idea.

Of course the most important thought I have is "I don't have kids so who the fuck am I to really care one way or the other?"

 

[Fenixgoon]

i had to read the book in high school i think? i don't remember a thing about it, other than it had rabbits in it.

 

[Sonikku]

I remember it vividly. It was good and I would not change a thing. If it glamorized violence I would probably be against it, but this is like people taking issue with Starship Troopers for thinking it was "glamorizing" Fascism. Idiots.

 

[mikeymikec]

Why do you consider violence in movies to be worse than that in books?

I didn't say anything like that.

 

[Thebobo]

Kehaar the crow was cool

 

[Captante]

Read the book as a kid. Never saw a movie.

Same here.

And as long as the theme of the story stays mostly intact I have no problem toning down the violence a bit.

 

[Paratus]

Oh look bunnies!

WAIT WTF OMG!11

 

[Elixer]

@ OP

Do you consider childrens' movies to be some kind of rite of passage or something? Why are you talking about surviving? They're meant to be instructive/enjoyable.

That was a tongue in cheek reference of "surviving".

Oh look bunnies!

WAIT WTF OMG!11

I saw this on another site, and was going to post it, but then, I didn't want to traumatize the AToers.

 

[mikeymikec]

Kehaar the crow was cool

Kehaar was a seagull!

The crow was in 'The Secret of NIMH'.

 

[drquest]

I was reading the book on a flight just yesterday. I remember Watership Down being shown on Easter around here. Didn't bother me much, but it's certainly not an Easter type movie, but is one of my favorites.