[marvinnashsear]

Originally Posted by Michael Brooke

I don't know what the Dangerous Pictures Act is - there's nothing on the statute book by that name. Reading between the lines I assume it's a sarcastic reference to the more prosaically named 2008 Criminal Justice and Immigration Act, which first defined "extreme pornography" and criminalised its possession as well as distribution.

To quote the legislation directly, this is what causes problems:



But this legislation postdated the UK release of The Good Old Naughty Days so it wouldn't have been a problem at that time. However, if anyone was ever minded to reissue it in any format in the UK, the bestiality would have to be removed, no matter how brief and mild it is (a small dog performing a bit of opportunistic cunnilingus, if I remember rightly). And yes, it is technically illegal to possess the French DVD, although in practice I suspect you'd only be likely to get into trouble over it if you were being investigated for other reasons and the police fancied an easy legal win.

(Tartan wanted to put it out on DVD over here prior to 2008, but the BBFC wouldn't give it anything milder than an R18 - understandably, as it's proper hardcore filth regardless of its advanced age. And since it's impossible to make money on R18 video releases unless you actually have a financial stake in a sex shop, there wasn't any point. Same goes for Thundercrack!, which Tartan also wanted to release.)

Yeah, you're right it was a sarcastic reference. So, if that film did get a video release at R18 prior to the legislation that version would then be illegal? Also did you have anything to do with the DVD release of Sweet Sweetback? I've always found that situation interesting. When I watched it on Channel 4 I was surprised at the opening scene. I thought it was blatant that that was Mario Van Peebles who was clearly underage and the scene as uncut. IMDB claims Melvin Van Peebles lied to the bbfc about it being an older actor but it's often wrong.