Censorship

[Angel]

Originally Posted by vipco

An artist should'nt have to defend their work.

IMO Deodato and Lenzi have nothing to prove, its the censors who have to prove they , Deodato and Lenzi , were lying in their claims, personally I believe in Deodato's.case he was being truthful.

The censorship system in the UK doesn't work that way. The BBFC are required under UK law to cut scenes of animal cruelty, they see the scenes in these films as cruel, as I imagine most people would, therefore it is up to the film makers to provide the BBFC the evidence that these scenes are not actually an infringement of the ACT that they appear to be. It not not the BBFC's job to prove that these these people are telling the truth.

When the films were submitted to the BBFC there were no protests from the distributors about the cutting of the scenes. If they were faked you would have thought they would have said something. There's no doubt in my mind that these films feature genuine scenes of animal cruelty that should be cut.

[vincenzo]

Yes I fully agree. Personally I don't believe a word of what Deodato says about it being naturally filmed footage anyway. If he's so enamoured with the footage why does he now express 'regret' (or so he says) for filming it in the first place.

The simple fact is that the chance of this passing uncut in the UK is zilch. It won't happen, period. The only alternative for people who wish to see it is to buy overseas DVD's of the film(s) concerned.

[vipco]

There's no argument wether or not the footage is real or not, its wether its cruel.
IMO its not. The animals were killed in a non cruel way, or hunted for food.
I think Ruggero says he regrets the footage as for 30 years its the main thing people ask him about. I recon he's just p'oed explaining it to journalists who if they'd have done their homework would already know his views , reasons and 'farmyard mentality'.

I know it will never appear uncut, thats why i've either muliple originals or originals with CD-R back up of all the cannibal films.
I also have the UK versions as well, ( I like Cannibal films ) and will buy the CH re release on its July 28th release date.
I just hate that these films will not be seen as they were ment.

If only Almar would consider submitting an uncut FEROX to the new liberal BBFC, i'd love to see what they'd make of it, as the BBFC have never censored the full version for home viewing , as all submission's were pre cut by the owners. Though the VIPCO version was the Replay pre cut release , cut by a further 2s by the BBFC for animal distress.

I recon it would fare well and put a few quid in Shameless's pockets into the bargain.
Afterall, the top selling Shameless releasease to date is minimally cut and also a former 'Nasty' .
With the Shameless quality reputation, the Cannibal rivalry between Deodato and Lenzi, and the films notorious past to sell it, I think it would be Shameless's best seller yet, especially when the Cannibal hype wagon starts rolling for Deodato's new film AND the CH remake, its definitely one the casual punter would pick up.
Look at how many Z grade US zombie flicks were sold when Land of the Dead was being hyped., and im sure 90% of them weren't bought by hardecore genre fans.

[vincenzo]

Only Almar could answer this one re Cannibal Ferox. As the cuts would still be fairly heavy (all the animal cruelty & possibly edits to the breast impalement) I'm more inclined to think that people would prefer to own the fully uncut version - and probably already do.

Blackhorse will probably re-release the same cut print as before if recent submissions are anything to go by.

[Angel]

The BBFC first cut Cannibal Ferox in 1982 removing the animal cruelty and various scenes of violence. Replay submitted the film to the BBFC using the voluntary scheme. As to the BBFC waiving any of the animal cruelty cuts? Very unlikely.

[vipco]

I agree about the animal scenes, but I always thought that although Replay submitted under the voluntary scheme, it was a pre cut version they submitted, and that ended up banned or procesquted anyway when the VRA came law, effectively making it a film that was never offically scrutinised and classified under VRA guidelines in uncut form for home viewing.
I stand corrected.

Ferox is currently 'deleted from catalogue' everywhere in the UK , as its currently a VIPCO title in the here , and any store that do have it charge ?20 for it, and people pay it.
I agree most people would have an uncut copy Vince, I would just hate for it to remain in its current UK state as its still a title in demand , according to an indie shop I use.
He was pleased when I told him that Holocaust was getting a re release through Blackhorse , as he says that CH, Ferox, Eaten Alive and any other Cannibal films he can get, sell very quickly . He asked about Ferox , as he'd been asked for it quite a few times but his supplier was unable to get it.

I wonder how the BBFC would treat the pig loving scene in MOTCG as, like the horse scene Angel mentioned , ' it seemed to be enjoying it'. LOL.

[Angel]

Wasn't the bestialtiy scene in Cannibal God, faked? If so then it shouldn't have any problems. If it was very obviously unsimulated then it's likely to be cut. I haven't seen that film with the horse by the way, I just read the BBFC's reply on another site. It's always possible that the scene was missing certain detail that would have made it illegal.

Cannibal God by the way is being re-issued next month. Don't know what company but wonder if they will submit the full version.

[vincenzo]

I've seen the bestiality scene and it definitely looks faked to me.

If Vipco/Blackhorse still own the rights they'll probably just re-release the cut version.

[steve]

Originally Posted by Angel

That was probably true in the 60's and 70's in regards to regular violence although I can't think of any examples in regards to animal cruelty but it's unlikely to be the case today anyway. In fact I'm pretty sure it's not. A lot of people used to complain that there were double standards regarding art house/subtitled films. A lot of subtitled films have been cut recently for scenes of animal cruelty eg cockfighting being the main reason.

I meant in relation to sex and 'general' violence. I think animal cruelty has been dealt with very swiftly in the UK over the past few years.

I can't remember the name of the film with the 'notorious' cockfighting scenes that was in the news a couple of years ago but were they staged for the film or were they part of a 'cultural' thing?

I don't want to see things like that but I think it's always interesting when cultural things are seen, I want to understand why they do these things. It's still cruel but there's a reason unlike beheading a snake because it's makes for a good scene.

I saw an interesting documentary about bull fighting a few years ago and whilst I thought it was shocking and very upsetting I understood why they did it. I don't agree with it though, it's very cruel.

[vipco]

Originally Posted by vincenzo

I've seen the bestiality scene and it definitely looks faked to me.

If Vipco/Blackhorse still own the rights they'll probably just re-release the cut version.

.

I know it was simulated , I was only joking.
I own the Blue Underground disc and it has the scene intact , yet its missing from the VIPCO Extreme version , I wondered if VIPCO had sumbitted the full version and the BBFC removed the pig scene, as if it was a pre cut version submitted , VIPCO surely would have removed the killing and mutation of the lizard., yet this scene is included in the UK VIPCO version . Makes me think they submitted an U/C print for classification .