Sweden’s Supreme Administrative Court (Högsta förvaltningsdomstolen) declined to look at an appeal of the age limit for the hugely-popular vampire saga.
Nordisk Film, the distributors in Sweden of The Twilight Saga: Breaking dawn – part two, had already complained in a lower court about the age limit imposed on them by the Swedish Media Council (Statens medieråd).
“The five films portray a fantasy world without any links to real events,” the distributors wrote in their latest appeal.
“The sequences that they refer to in their decision are in our view so far from reality and portrayed in such a way that they do not risk triggering fear or panic with children older than 11.”
In their appeal, filed on November 9th, 2012, the distributors also drew the court’s attention to the fact that Swedish fans had been handed one of the strictest limits among Western nations.
In neighbouring Denmark and Finland the limit was set at 11, while the French permitted all children to see it, the distributors said in their appeal. The UK opted for a 12-year age limit while the US settled for 13.
When the film premiered in Sweden, many younger fans expressed their disappointment.
“Usually, you don’t go to the cinema alone, and I don’t think Twilight is so disturbing that it scares you,” teenager Nilla Blomlöv told Sveriges Radio (SR).
The distributors claimed the age limit was sexist and paternalistic, writing in their appeal that films with a young, male target audience often slipped through without limitations.
“Nordisk Film believes that films that speak to young women should be judged by the same criteria as films that primarily speak to young men,” they wrote.
“Young women should not be seen as more sensitive than young men,” they added, before citing Skyfall, Harry Potter, Pirates of the Carribean, Predator and The Hunger Games as examples.
The Supreme Administrative Court rejected the appeal last week and upheld a lower court’s verdict.
In its decision, the court stated that it will only look at appeals if they may set a legal precedent, or if the lower court can be shown to have been negligent or made a gross error of judgement.
The Supreme Administrative Court found that the Nordisk Film appeal satisfied neither criterion.