Censorship is quite strict in countries like Pakistan, Vipco, that's probably why it was banned. I wouldn't expect any problems here.
Of the 3 films mentioned I have only seen Nekromantik 2.
From what I know both films are very similar in content. But as far as NK2 is concerned it certainly shouldn't have any serious problems with the BBFC if indeed they can find anything to cut at all. It came across to me as being more art than exploitation. There is a scene of necrophilia at about 20m. Well I see no reason why this should be cut, the BBFC passed scenes of necrophilia in Flesh for Frankenstein and Kissed so it clearly isn't illegal. There is a shocking scene of violence near the end. Over here the violence, unusually, is carried out by a woman against a man. It's also one of the most realistic decapitations I have seen as well as bloodiest. The violence is also sexual. During the days of James Ferman the entire scene would have been removed without a doubt but today the scene really should scrape through. Scenes of violence against a man by a woman is never cut by the BBFC. The film by the way doesn't endorse necrophilia as the people are clearly shown too be pretty sick. The film should pass uncut.
I believe the first film does contain a scene of genuine animal cruelty that will have to be cut but apart from that scene if it's anything like the 2nd film then it shoudln't have any serious problems.
The Nekromantik films were never submitted to the BBFC in the 90's, no doubt because they knew the films would never pass whilst James Ferman was director.
By the way I found NK2 to be one of the most boring films I have ever seen. The film is painfully slow, with long gaps where nothing happens.
 |