Cult Labs

Go Back   Cult Labs > Film Discussions > Horror > The 1970's And Beyond > The 2010's

Like Tree2Likes

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #71  
Old 20th August 2009, 10:20 PM
Cult Addict
Senior Moderator Alumni
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daemonia View Post
But let's not also forget that the MPAA-approved versions of Candyman and A Nightmare on Elm Street are what we've been served up on DVD. Guess it was just easier to use the R-rated digital master worldwide - which probably means we'll never see them uncut again in this glorious digital age.
Thankfully Lionsgate did the opposite with My Bloody Valentine (at last!).
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 20th August 2009, 10:22 PM
The Reaper Man@Cult Labs's Avatar
Cult Don
Cult Labs Radio Contributor
Good Trader
Senior Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glasgow
Default

Paramount should have followed suit and reinstated the footage from the Friday films.
__________________

Teddy, I'm a Scotch drinker - you know that. I just have the occasional brandy when I'm not drinking.
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 20th August 2009, 10:25 PM
Daemonia's Avatar
Cult Addict
Good Trader
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Make Them Die Slowly View Post
I have a feeling that the BBFC don't actually believe that a film will make somebody commit a crime directly from watching a film but certain images in a film could be seen as normalising deviant behaviour to those who are disposed to such behaviour,so if you are a rapist, then repeated scenes of rape in a film that shows no consequences for the crime could normalise rape.In "Grotesque" the female victim and male victim are both masturbated to orgasm by the killer thus implying that sexual assult is a pleasurable experience.As dvd can be replayed and edited at home,I'm guessing that the BBFC are concerned such scenes can be taken out of context and used to fuel fantasy which in a very few people becomes reality.
I get all that. But then apply the same to all media. In some genre books I've read there is often graphic depictions of sexual assault, graphically describing the feelings and emotions of both victim and perpetrator. Or in Gangsta rap where women are often referred to in demeaning terms and also in much stronger terms. If you're going to apply this rule of possible harm, then apply it to everything, why only to visual media?
__________________
Sent from my Hoover using the power of Uri Gellar
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 20th August 2009, 10:28 PM
Cult Addict
Senior Moderator Alumni
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Default

I'm surprised that to date there's been no UK release of the restored My Bloody Valentine.

At least we have the unrated prints of Return Of The Living Dead 3 and House III (via Hollywood DVD) on disc. The former also never had a BBFC problem (even with Ferman).
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 20th August 2009, 10:39 PM
Make Them Die Slowly's Avatar
Cult Addict
Cult Labs Radio Contributor
 
Join Date: May 2009
Blog Entries: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daemonia View Post
I get all that. But then apply the same to all media. In some genre books I've read there is often graphic depictions of sexual assault, graphically describing the feelings and emotions of both victim and perpetrator. Or in Gangsta rap where women are often referred to in demeaning terms and also in much stronger terms. If you're going to apply this rule of possible harm, then apply it to everything, why only to visual media?
Totally agree with you there D.It is odd that only film suffers this way,though I do remember a few years ago the fourth issue of "Answer Me!,the Journal of Hate" was seized when imported into the UK, it was a satirical look at violence towards women.That said the main writer in the journal ended up doing time for assulting his wife,so perhaps not the best example to give!Interestingly when he published a book defending his actions it was not seized/banned in the UK.
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 21st August 2009, 06:09 AM
Angel's Avatar
Cultist on the Rampage
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Default

The BBFC have to classify in accordance with UK law when making their decisions so that means a work that may fall foul of the OPA is likely to be cut or rejected. The BBF take their advice from the Obscene Publications Unit and also various leading QC's as to whether a work is likely to be found obscene by a court of law. The BBFC are not above the law, if they were to pass obscene material they could find themselves being prosecuted and also the dealers as well.

Personally I find the OPA more disturbing than the DPA. Films that are classified under the VRA are exempt from the DPA. Not the case with the OPA. In any case (and personally speaking) the DPA which applies to extreme pornographic work has no bearing on anything I watch. It is the stuff the BBFC already cut from R18's.

There is a great deal of work the BBFC are legally obliged to cut involving various legislation.

I think it is the cutting of sexual violence that always gets discussed the most and after all it is (almost) the only reason a film would be rejected today. This is what the BBFC had to say: "The BBFC operates on the precautionary presumption that particular violent scenes, with the potential to cause sexual arrousal, may encourage a harmful association between violence and sexual gratification".

In making these decisions "the BBFC often consults or carries out research involving experts in Psychology, Psychiatry, Law and Pornography".

And of course the VRA also requires the BBFC to intervene when there is a potential for harm to the viewer.

Now of course fortunately, the truth is the BBFC rarely ever cut scenes of sexual violence, the vast majority gets through without any problems, it's only really a tiny fraction that ends up getting cut.
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 21st August 2009, 06:17 AM
gag's Avatar
gag gag is online now
Cult Veteran
Good Trader
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Here there and everywhere
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Just a few things puzzle me...

1.. Films ppl have a choice of what they want to watch and if they want to watch it....if you had a dvd that u think wasnt suitable for minors or your kids then you keep it out the way...and if you didnt like it you wouldnt watch it again... you can avoid watching a film if you dont fancy it ...BUT there isnt much said about ganster, rap etc style of music that causes ppl to go round shooting and acting like ganster..after all the tone and sometimes language in these songs can be appaling because a lot do sing about killing shooting ppl etc BUT the difference this time is if you dont like these songs you cant avoid them.. you hear them on the radio in shops at work etc etc etc...

2 If some off these films are so bad then how come the ppl who censor them havent been affected by these films? after all some one must have seen loads of violence killings gore etc etc ...but have nvr gone on to harm any 1 are they trying to say they are more immune than you average person
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 21st August 2009, 06:20 AM
Angel's Avatar
Cultist on the Rampage
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daemonia View Post
What makes them immune to this 'danger of harm'?
They are no more immune then we are.
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 21st August 2009, 06:23 AM
Angel's Avatar
Cultist on the Rampage
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gag View Post
2 If some off these films are so bad then how come the ppl who censor them havent been affected by these films?
They probably have.
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 21st August 2009, 06:28 AM
gag's Avatar
gag gag is online now
Cult Veteran
Good Trader
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Here there and everywhere
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Probably.. but not in the sense they watched a film and gone out and done something to somebody because of what they just watched, because after all they do state that films are the cause of a lot of violence and not much say about music causing it..personaly i think rap ganster etc etc causes more than films these days hence going back to my 1st statement about avoiding films if you want but cant avoid music you hear it every where..
Reply With Quote
Reply  

Like this? Share it using the links below!

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Our goal is to keep Cult Labs friendly. If you feel discouraged from posting by certain members' behaviour then you can e-mail us in complete confidence.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
All forum posts are contributed by members of the site; Cult Labs cannot take responsibility for all content posted on the site. If you have an issue with content posted on the site please click the 'report post' button.
Copyright © 2014 Cult Laboratories Ltd. All rights reserved.