Censorship

[Angel]

Originally Posted by Peter Neal

You're probably right about "Katie Bird" and the BBFC, but from a non UK citizen's pov their attitude towards violence committed by women against men sounds a bit...well...like reversed sexism on their behalf Then again, as long as there's a solid reason NOT to cut something, why should I object?

They would have a tough time trying to justify cutting scenes of violence carried out against a man by a woman. I'm not saying that they would never cut such scenes under any circumstances but it's very unlikely that they would. They cut scenes of sexual violence directed at a woman by a man because of the "harmful" effect that the scenes might have on a small minority of men. If they were going to cut scenes of sexual violence (or sexualised violence) against a man by a woman (and bearing in mind the BBFC don't cut non sexual violence) then it would mean they believe the scenes could have a harmful effect on some women. I guarantee the BBFC will never say something like this, they would make themselves look rather foolish if they did. Whether it's right or wrong all sexual violence cuts are down to the effect it might have on certain men.


Even cutting scenes of violence by a woman against another woman is remarkably rare. Only 2 films cut for this reason in the last 10 years.

Non sexual violence in no longer cut because there is no evidence that such scenes are harmful

[Peter Neal]

Originally Posted by Angel

Non sexual violence in no longer cut because there is no evidence that such scenes are harmful

God, I just wish somebody would give the overly busy and concerned folks at the German BPJM a good earful of that

I'd say it's a safe bet that the BBFC probably wouldn't pass the poor German DTV horror flick "Rossa Venezia" even though it features a female killer going after women. But the movie's whole inept direction is so misogynist that the "Who's the killer" question wouldn't make the difference...Odd to what great extent the censorship in the EU alone can still differ....

[siccoyote]

You could say that Bad Taste was Misogynistic as there are no women in it, well unless you count a receptionist on the phone.

[Peter Neal]

Would be interesting to hear what the BBFC would respond to this reading of "Bad Taste", Sic!

[Angel]

Originally Posted by Peter Neal

I'd say it's a safe bet that the BBFC probably wouldn't pass the poor German DTV horror flick "Rossa Venezia" even though it features a female killer going after women.

Not a film that I'm familiar with but noticed that it has been banned in Australia.

What about In a Glass Cage, Peter. Any release in Germany?

Never been submitted to the BBFC but apparently it will have to be cut if it ever does as it contains scenes that are in breach of the child protection act. Most reviews though say it is a very good film. This film has also been banned in Australia.

[Peter Neal]

No, it hasn't seen a DVD release in Germany yet, though it was apparently screened uncut at the "Halloween Filmfest".

On another BBFC issue: I've been just recently wondering when Warner (in particular) and some other companies are starting to resubmit their chopped-in-the-80's/90's Seagal/Van Damme/Lundgren/Stallone actioners, which were mostly trimmed on UK VHS and DVD for long gone and outdated guidelines concernig Asian weapons, knifes etc.
A lot of these movies have alternate releases in the EU, but even here in Finland we got for instance Seagal's "Marked for Death" and that old fave "Darkman" containing the unneccesary BBFC cuts

[Angel]

An uncut Under seige 2 would be interesting. The BBFC cuts were way over the top especially considering it was passed uncut at the cinema.

Eraser was another film that suffered a ridiculous amount of cuts here for video. The distributor requesting a 15 rating only made matters worse. Still no resubmission.

Cliffhanger has recently been passed uncut with a 15 rating which surprised some people.

[bedorca]

Originally Posted by Angel

An uncut Under seige 2 would be interesting. The BBFC cuts were way over the top especially considering it was passed uncut at the cinema.

Eraser was another film that suffered a ridiculous amount of cuts here for video. The distributor requesting a 15 rating only made matters worse. Still no resubmission.

Cliffhanger has recently been passed uncut with a 15 rating which surprised some people.

It is all about the big studios and bums on seats or discs in drives!!!

[Angel]

Yeah apparently Eraser didn't do too well at the cinema with its 18 rating hence the 15 for video. Warner's must have been desperate for the 15 because they must have known what cuts would be required and still went through with it. James Ferman also must have been overjoyed about their decision to want a 15 because it's well known that he didn't like these type of films branding them a danger to the public.

Lethal Weapon 2 (another Ferman favourite) was quite the opposite starting life as a 15 but then going out as an 18 on video.

[vincenzo]

Originally Posted by Angel

Lethal Weapon 2 (another Ferman favourite) was quite the opposite starting life as a 15 but then going out as an 18 on video.

Ditto for Con Air and Point Break. The cinema cuts were restored for the latter.