Video Nasties - The Definitive Guide

[vipco]

I agree the rape in DW2 was gratuitous and completely unnecessary . It was way to long and as you say D, its a bit hard to believe that the rape of the maid would lead to such a violence responce.

Was'nt that keen on Ms 45 though and I usually like Ferrara's films.

[vipco]

I would like to see Deodatto's HOTEOTP pass the BBFC intact. Now with LHOTL passing uncut theres no legal reason I can see for the BBFC not to pass this.
Be a good title for ARROW to pick up or screen and bring the brilliant Ruggero Deodatto over again.

[Angel]

House on the Edge of the Park wouldn't stand a chance with the BBFC. Last House on the Left didn't contain anything that was in breach of Board guidelines.

[vincenzo]

Fully agree Angel. Some of the previous cuts to House On The Edge would be waived today but there's no way it will pass uncut.

Personally I can't see any point in reissuing it as the cuts would still be pretty heavy.

[vipco]

Pity, as theres no breech of any law as far as I know, just BBFC policy, which once again boils down to a faceless group of people deciding that for some reason or other the adult population of the UK, (unlike the rest of Europe) , cant be trusted to view HOTEOTP as the director intended .

[vincenzo]

Easy solution. Buy the uncut version from abroad. Problem solved.

[Daemonia]

That might be the solution, Vin, as I'm sure it's what most of us have done. However, the point still stands, the BBFC have no legal obligation to cut a film like House on the Edge of the Park, but they do so because it's their 'policy'. Once again reinforcing my point that somehow the British public are viewed with distrust and suspicion. I'll be curious to hear back from the BBFC as to what makes UK citizens so untrustworthy that we have to be protected from these films.

[vincenzo]

Under both the VRA & OPA the BBFC are obliged to cut scenes that depict sexualized violence. They prefer not to but often have no choice in the matter. House On The Edge would definitely be a film that would cause problems.

When BU brought legal action against the BBFC after they imposed 16 secs of cuts to Last House On The Left (under the OPA) the matter went to the VAC (Video Appeals Committee). The BBFC's decision was upheld and the VAC then decided that the BBFC cuts didn't go far enough. Hence another 15 secs was additionally removed.

[Angel]

Yes the VRA requires the BBFC to intervene when there is a risk of harm to viewers.

[Daemonia]

How do you define 'risk of harm' though - and to whom?

The OPA is a strange one, as it basically says that it would have to be considered obscene for its target audience, not just random people off the street. You cannot just label something obscene (unless it clearly contravenes the law) until a jury in a court of law has viewed the material and ruled that it is actually obscene. I read the OPA some years back for a research paper I was doing on censorship. Getting something classed as legally obscene isn't as easy as many people think it is.

And I dislike this notion of 'potential' harm. That's anticipating criminal behaviour, which I consider to be the area of thought crime. I think that's a dangerous stance to take.