I don't. I think there should be distinction between serious animal cruelty and the stuff contained in, say, old westerns. Not that any animal cruelty is acceptable, but those westerns were uncut for years and it's only recently they've started cutting them. For instance, the initial DVD of A Fistful of Dynamite retained the horsefalls, the subsqeuent SE had these scenes cut.

So no, the BBFC are being thoroughly inconsistent and making cuts where they don't have to. I don't think that's a good thing. In this instance they're actively looking for new ways to cut old films.

If the BBFC are so concerned about the welfare of animals, how come they never ask if the horses pulling carts and carriages in old films were grazing horses that were forced to suddenly become workhorses. Just as cruel as anything else.

Really?

Fair enough, but I find that a hard attitude to understand in someone who likes film.

Oh well.

Indeed, and can they absolutely guarantee that every single "professional" animal "actor" (Doctor Doolittle etc) has been trained and works under exemplary conditions and methods?

Indeed, many would say that any training of such kind is inherently alien and cruel to animals.

Indeed. I've always considered any friend of censorship to be an enemy of film. Censorship of fictional works, anyway. I can understand why films like Traces of Death would be rejected - but cutting some horsefalls in old John Wayne Westerns? Come on. Like I say, these were uncut for years, so why the sudden urgency to censor these works? I'm not an advocate of animal cruelty - but removing sight of such things doesn't make it suddenly as if it never happened. I would actually say that it's inherently damaging to the history of film. How can we chart the progress from these methods to the humane treatment animals receive today if the BBFC insist on removing all the evidence? Sometimes it feels like the BBFC are trying to rewrite history. These films are a document of their time and, like it or not, this IS the way animals were treated. Why whitewash it? Thank God animals aren't treated this way anymore (although, as Gojirosan points out, training animals to perform could be considered an act of cruelty in itself by some radicals).

In the case of Dr Dolittle the BBFC have no need to guarantee anything. It was shot under the auspices of the American Humane Society.

It didn't feel very humane when I had to sit through it!

:lol:

The Eddie Murphy remake? That was just....horrible. If the BBFC have to censor anything, why can't it be Eddie Murphy?? :lol:

The falls are on the first dvd. They occur during the brige ambush, which is the same in both versions (aside from the cuts to the 2nd dvd).

That's what I thought, loops.

Looks like I'll be importing all those old westerns in from abroad when they appear on Blu-ray then. Free of BBFC interference. :nod:

A detailed screencap comparison of the cuts to Duck You Sucker can be found on WWDVD Forums.

The BBC used to do it for them when they televised his films back in the 80's.

"Get the frick outta here" and "Melonfarmer!" spring to mind. :pound: