Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
;) |
Quote:
Cruel or not, I think such things should be included. Censoring them creates a false impression. The chickens still went through it, removing your choice over seeing it doesn't change anything. |
Quote:
We all support censorship to some degree. |
Replace "chickens" with "car chases"? You can go on for ever at that game. It's still spurious. The children argument especially. Chldren are protected all around the world. Filming their assault is a crime, everywhere, pretty much. So it wouldn't occur in a legitimate film. The law comes into play long before any censorship board. Children are not raised in factories for people to eat. If they were it might all look very different. I see no benefit to the "brush under the carpet and pretend it didn't happen" approach to the animal issue. If you don't want to see it, don't buy the film or use your fast-forward button, or pressure for "animal cruelty free" alternative versions if you must. |
Quote:
Either way, my point stands: by removing scenes of animal cruelty it teaches the filmmaker that such practices will not, at least, be tolerated in this country and that they will not be able to profit from them. And the chickens are "just there to be eaten" argument may be taken to task by some of the vegan and vegetarian members of the forums! My main feeling that cutting Inferno feels remarkable folly is because cats eat mice on the hour, every hour and - set up or not - I can't justify seeing people feed their pet snakes live rodents whilst the BBFC removes something similar in a movie. |
Quote:
Oh, and I have long been involved in animal welfare and have been a vegetarian for over 30 years. I find the cutting of old films so people can pretend such things don't happen as offensive as the act itself. If it happened, nothing can be done about it now. Seeing it shows up how hideous such things are, hiding it through censorship just paints a false pretty picture. |
Quote:
The point is that inflicting brutality - or death - on a sentient being (animal or human) should be of obvious concern. Whilst I disagree with the cut to Inferno, I am glad the BBFC removes sequences of suffering inflicted upon helpless animals (note, however, they do not remove scenes filmed for a documentary so, if you wanted to do a piece on chickens in a battery farm, I imagine you'd be okay). (I'm not a vegetarian actually: Ironically, given this discussion, I still eat chicken. ;) And I don't subscribe to animal rights - animal welfare, yes. So I'm not arguing my own intrinsic thoughts here, I'm merely pointing out why I think some degree of "protection" is needed). This is an interesting dicussion, by the way, but I guess maybe we should get back to Inferno? |
Quote:
More people would be concerned about animal welfare in cinema if they saw what has gone on in the past. If you hide it, who's to know what monstrosities can go on? |
All times are GMT. The time now is 03:51 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Copyright © 2014 Cult Laboratories Ltd. All rights reserved.