1984 publicity stunt

In an effort to make the play seem dark, edgy, frightening and powerful while also seeking some much needed publicity, the show bans those under 13 from seeing it.

"We have found our advance to be slowing recently and have thought of an ingenious way to counter some of the narrative that our show is boring, uninspired or a waste of time. By pretending that the show is too scary for anyone under the age of 13, we can try to convince the public that our show is an unmissable event".

A 12 year-old theatre goer reacts to the news "From what I hear, the real reason this policy was implemented was so that the show could not be accused of child abuse for torturing patrons with boredom. They can get away with it for adults but not children. Thank you for sparing us, 1984."

Updated On: 6/21/17 at 09:56 PM

Link: https://www.broadwayworld.com/article/No-1984-After-2004-Broadway-Production-Announces-Age-Restriction-20170621



Interesting. I can sort see why they would want to do this, especially if they've had complaints (possibly from parents who took their kids after reading the book in school). But I wonder how precedented this is. I've never seen this done before. Seems like there are a ton of shows out there that are more deserving of age restrictions than 1984, but those producers just let parents decide for themselves. Still, it sorta makes sense as a concept, considering we do the exact same thing with film.

UncleCharlie said: "You're just jealous your mom can't take you now.



"

If the show can stay open for another 2 years I might be old enough!

qolbinau said: "In an effort to make the play seem dark, edgy, frightening and powerful while also seeking some much needed publicity, the show bans those under 13 from seeing it.

"We have found our advance to be slowing recently and have thought of an ingenious way to counter some of the narrative that our show is boring, uninspired or a waste of time. By pretending that the show is too scary for anyone under the age of 13, we can try to convince the public that our show is an unmissable event".

A 12 year-old theatre goer reacts to the news "From what I hear, the real reason this policy was implemented was so that the show could not be accused of child abuse for torturing patrons with boredom. They can get away with it for adults but not children. Thank you for sparing us, 1984."



"

Have you even SEEN the show? Or are you just being a bitter b*tch about it?

So 13 year olds can see Harry Potters nuts and watch him stab horses but 1984 is too much. Okkkkkkk. Whatevs.

How do you suppose they'll even enforce this? How could they really tell the difference if a kid is 12 or 13 with proof on a nightly basis? Thoughts?

I saw this production last week. During the torture scene 4 or 5 people left the theater, including a parent with a child. I liked the show very much, but it is very intense and absolutely not appropriate for children. I was actually shocked that there wasn't already an advisory of some sort for this show.

GreasedLightning said: "qolbinau said: "In an effort to make the play seem dark, edgy, frightening and powerful while also seeking some much needed publicity, the show bans those under 13 from seeing it.

"We have found our advance to be slowing recently and have thought of an ingenious way to counter some of the narrative that our show is boring, uninspired or a waste of time. By pretending that the show is too scary for anyone under the age of 13, we can try to convince the public that our show is an unmissable event".

A 12 year-old theatre goer reacts to the news "From what I hear, the real reason this policy was implemented was so that the show could not be accused of child abuse for torturing patrons with boredom. They can get away with it for adults but not children. Thank you for sparing us, 1984."



"

Have you even SEEN the show? Or are you just being a bitter b*tch about it?



"

My post was clearly a joke, calm down - jesus!

Bettyboy72 said: "So 13 year olds can see Harry Potters nuts and watch him stab horses but 1984 is too much. Okkkkkkk. Whatevs."

I saw both Equus and 1984, and I would've been comfortable taking a minor to Equus but I would not take a minor to this production of 1984. While 'Muricans are curiously prudish about nudity/sexuality, they're generally blasé about exposing children to violence.

One saw very little of "Harry Potters nuts" in Equus (blink and you missed it) and the depiction of horse-stabbing was highly stylized and far from literal (cage-like sculptures made of chrome pipes approximated the shape of horse heads). On the other hand, 1984 depicts the lengthy torture of a man in extremely literal and graphic terms.

Lot666 said: "One saw very little of "Harry Potters nuts" in Equus (blink and you missed it)"

Missed them.

It doesn't seem like it would be much of a publicity stunt because you'd have to know about the show in the first place to be more intrigued now that there's an age restriction. Of course, there have been worse examples of marketing... I wonder if they were just getting too many complaints, or just one or two from very vocal parties.

As stated above, I doubt many young people were rushing to see it anyway.

Just gets a bit of an eyebrow raise from me. Generally an advisory is enough for theatrical productions, even particularly graphic ones.

perfectlymarvelous said: "givesmevoice said: "LightsOut90 said: "this is such a dumb stunt, when I saw it in London there was an entire class of 8th year student behind me and they were entranced by it "

Aren't most 8th graders at least 13?"

Year 8 in the U.K. would be 12/13 year olds. "

in the US, 8th graders are 13/14 years old. so an 8th grade class wouldn't be barred.