Censorship

[Philleh]

Originally Posted by stevoj

I hate all that "in context" rubbish.The lastest in context argument from the bbfc was the justification of allowing two double earclaps in the new Sherlock Holmes movie,rated 12A.

Hmmm, the detailed fisticuffs in that film would have been rated 15 for sure had it not been a Warner Brothers movie.

[Angel]

Originally Posted by stevoj

I hate all that "in context" rubbish.The lastest in context argument from the bbfc was the justification of allowing two double earclaps in the new Sherlock Holmes movie,rated 12A.

The BBFC don't take ear clap, headbutts quite as seriously as they used to. Back in 2005 their guidelines were changed.

[Stephen@Cult Labs]

They said the scenes in Sherlock Holmes didn't glorify the violence but i think the slow motion explanations of what he was about to do actually make it more dangerous.Explaining to people just how much damage they can inflict with those techniques.Ridiculous!

Anyhoo,I guess We'll just have to wait and see what the bbfc make of Satan's Baby Doll I guess.

[vincenzo]

Originally Posted by Angel

The BBFC will also pass hardcore if it is felt the primary purpose was not sexual arousal, that is not to say the film doesn't contain sexually arousing material.

Yes they did this with Justine's Hot Nights though the hardcore footage was quite brief. Personally I think the combination of graphic sex & violence in SBD would be hard to pass in context. More likely that the edited print would be submitted.

[Philleh]

Originally Posted by Angel

The BBFC don't take ear clap, headbutts quite as seriously as they used to. Back in 2005 their guidelines were changed.

The ear-clapping and headbutting is used to comic effect in Sherlock Holmes too, they probably didn't mind it as much in that contect, but I was surprised they allowed the detailed explainations as to why someone would punch someone in the throat for a 12A, in glorious slow-motion no less, to then have it repeated in real-time.

[Angel]

Unfortunately I'm unable to find the Sherlock Holmes film on the BBFC site, can someone post a link as I would like to see that explanation?

[Stephen@Cult Labs]

Here you go.

http://www.bbfc.co.uk/website/Classi...C?OpenDocument

[g053584398]

Originally Posted by stevoj

I hate all that "in context" rubbish.The lastest in context argument from the bbfc was the justification of allowing two double earclaps in the new Sherlock Holmes movie,rated 12A.

So do I stevoj . The culturally elitist stance of the BBFC, which has existed since the inception of the organisation, is nothing but class-based idiocy. It makes my blood boil.

Films should be classified with equal objectivity, irrespective of whether the intended demographic of a particular work are the working class or the middle class. I hate all forms of fascism, and cultural fascism is just as distasteful. I am sure Jess Franco would agree!

[Angel]

Originally Posted by stevoj

Here you go.

http://www.bbfc.co.uk/website/Classi...C?OpenDocument

Thanks Steve. It's been 6 years since the BBFC cut either a headbutt or ear clap so I'm not surprised they passed it here considering the headbutts they have been passing in a number of 12s recently, and they say both techniques are treated the same.

[vincenzo]

The BBFC lapsed a few times in the past with headbutts. Oliver Reed's superior Three Musketeers (rated 'U') has one during the courtyard fight and Dalton delivers a beauty on Carl Rigg in the PG-rated Living Daylights.

The faked hanging in Sherlock Holmes would have caused BBFC problems at one time.