#871
| ||||
| ||||
I believe we should have the right to watch films as the director intended, regardless of content
__________________ If I'm curt with you it's because time is a factor. I think fast, I talk fast and I need you guys to act fast if you wanna get out of this. So, pretty please... with sugar on top. Clean the ****ing car! |
#872
| ||||
| ||||
Quote:
Especially yourself. Yes we should show historical animal violence in films, for better or worse they are part of the film and the history of film. Although in today's CGI dominated world we have no need to repeat those failings. |
#873
| ||||
| ||||
I also agree we should show historical animal related violence in films, as to gloss over it would be to pretend it never happened. We as a species more than any other need to look to the past in order to learn from our mistakes not censor them.
|
#874
| ||||
| ||||
Quote:
In terms of films being made in, for example, China with horse falls (The Good, the Bad and the Weird springs to mind), I don't want to condone that unnecessary animal cruelty by going out of my way to get the uncut version.
__________________ Last edited by Nosferatu@Cult Labs; 22nd September 2014 at 08:42 AM. |
#875
| ||||
| ||||
I really enjoyed reading thru this thread, but I think censorship has a more basic use by those in power, now if I say that humans are pretty stupid compared what their brains could achieve, and 'dumbing down' is a very powerful weapon against a population that starts to question what they're being told or in some cases ordered to do, censorship comes in very handy indeed. Lets say that mobile phones give you brain tumors or the public water you drink gives you cancer, that information will be censored until there is no choice but to release it(even tho it was known to have a strong basis in truth) because of the effect it will have on public order. There is a clause in the Health and Safety act that implies that if you suffer because of a breech in the act you may be stopped from taking action if it effects the 'National interest' in other words censoring your rights if it has a negative cost on public morale(or makes those in power look corrupt or incompetent) Now on to the BBFC, if all they had to was slap a certification on a film, they would have virtually no power(most film makers would know where their film would fall) so we maybe would have a R18 for normal porn and say a V18 for violent horror that goes beyond an 18 and SV18 for sexually violent material(that could only be sold in registered outlets) , so no need to cut any legal action at all(if society decides something is illegal and a criminal offense then you can't expect to film it as entertainment and sell it for profit) but those in power would lose the power to control what you see if you were over 18, and until you can make a decision based on uncensored raw untampered facts you could argue the freedom is a moot point as you are only free to believe what those in power want you to. (Why should Boo be have all the rants...)
__________________ "Mama... this Cult Labs forum smells of death" |
#876
| ||||
| ||||
YEAH!!! Rage against the machine, dude!! |
#877
| |||
| |||
Watched Patrick (1978) recently. Still amazed to see a frog being killed in this btw, and when it was shown on BBC1 a while back intact was this scene. Isn't this animal cruelty too??
__________________ [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] [B] "... the days ahead will be filled with struggle ... and coated in marzipan ... "[/B] |
#878
| ||||
| ||||
There seems to be some weird scale as what is okay to kill and show. Slimy and creepy and crawly are okay to butcher but exotic or anything with forward looking eyes are a no no. It is a total double standard. Dead is dead at the end of the day but humans value some animals lives over others in the cinematic world of animal snuff.
|
#879
| ||||
| ||||
Does that mean Ron's fair game?
|
#880
| ||||
| ||||
Quote:
__________________ |
Like this? Share it using the links below! |
| |