Possible Duplicate:
To what extent are child actors exposed to the violent aspects of the movie they perform in?

Am I correct in thinking that children who make films which are rated at a particular age rating cannot actually see the movie until they are of said age?

For example: let us assume that John, aged 8, has played a major part in a horror movie (Movie X), where he was filmed in a number of scary scenes involving lots of blood, gore and some swearing. However, upon classification, the BBFC decided that a rating of 15 was suitable for Movie X. Therefore, will John not be allowed to see his "own movie" until he is at least 15 years of age even though he acted in the gory scenes?

Logically, I would say no, John is not allowed to see said movie until he is of age; however, that statement in itself is illogical, given the background history of the movie as he starred in many gory and horrific scenes.

My question is: which would be the most accurate assumption? That John is or isn't able to see the movie until he is of age, even though he starred in most of it and has seen the horror scenes first-hand?


Browse other questions tagged .