There's no question the BBFC have moved on in leaps and bounds over the past few years and, indeed, it it highly unusual for them to cut a film these days, never mind ban it. I'd certainly have them over the MPAA or ( god forbid ) the German censors any day. I think it's ( yet again ) their inconsistancy here. Why is Grotesque suddenly more 'harmful' than Saw / Hostel / Martyrs and any other number of 18 rated movies that have featured extreme violence and / or sexual violence?
It's a similar situation to them passing Irreversable uncut, yet removing 16 seconds of fumbling from Tombs Of The Blind Dead. Or, indeed, Shameless' own Venus In Furs.
From what I've read and heard, this ban has been widely criticised by the general public, so the widespread public support for this action isn't there - including the Daily Mail's own website, interestingly enough.
Part of me ( the cynical bit! ) wonders if maybe Grotesque was a bit of a kneejerk reaction to recent pressure on the BBFC from certain quarters?
 |