Page 1 of Censorship time for an update ??????????

I don`t want to come across as a sick puppy .................but surely it`s about time the bbfc left it to us adults to decide what we want to watch.
For example movies banned for the content :evil dead was banned because of tree rape scene -how long did it take to get it re-released and how lame does it seem now ?.
Don`t get me wrong i love the evil dead movies but they are quite lame compared to some of the stuff we see on sky news today.
Anyone else got an opinion on this ?

IMO nothing should be censored, and the worst scenes should receive 18 certificates, not R18s or rejections.


My DVD Collection

Well said rik
That`s exactly what my opinion is !!!!!!!!!!!! ;)

Gets my vote Rik!

Hang on, what about snuff, real footage of rape etc. Should amend that to say that nothing illegal under UK law should be included in the `no censorship` bit. Some stuff just shouldn`t be allowed.

This item was edited on Sunday, 21st March 2004, 22:33

Snuff = urburn myth ?
Real footage of rape = same as above ?
If it`s genuine movie stuff (effects) then leave it alone we know what we are willing to watch ................Don`t we ?

I refer you to this thread.

I am completely opposed to the ill-thought-out Video Recordings Act 1984 which brought home video under the auspices of the BBFC. It was a needless knee-jerk reaction to the home video release of cheap Italian gore movies. The rating system should have been industry applied rather than the remit of a quango populated by people with their own moral and political agenda. The ratings should also be advisory.

However, while there are many of us who abhor petty-minded censorship aimed at assuaging the sensibilities of precious little souls wilted by the mere concept of nudity or profanity, there are limitations and without some form of regulation you can be sure someone will delight in pushing and pushing at the bounds of what is acceptable.

I`ve seen a lot of unpleasant things in movies. Things I`d like to be able to go back and un-see like Henry, Portrait Of A Serial Killer which is as close to snuff-p0rnography as I`d care to come. The Evil Dead pictures on the other hand were just Itchy and Scratchy cartoons writ large. They were misread as being serious horror films, whereas they`re totally fantastical in style.

I`m not for censorship, but we live in a society where some degree of censorship is required to protect us from exposure to the unacceptable. There are a lot of movies that glamorise violence, especially that against women and children and I`m honestly of the opinion that there are enough sick souls in Hollywood that without some form of protection against their p0rnography of violence, things would be a hell of a lot worse.

J Mark Oates

Fair point, just wanted to cover my back in case anyone thought I was advocating ANYTHING being shown. As far as fiction presented onscreen goes, I don`t see any real point in censorship, just ratings for guidance.

Don`t see any reason why I shouldn`t be the one to choose what I can and can`t watch, I`m a big boy now.

What makes some joe with a clipboard sitting in Soho Square more suited to decide what people can watch than anyone else anyway? Never have understood that one.

Surely based upon all that they`ve been presented with onscreen they should be more f*cked up than any of us by now? Or are they immune?

Quote:
Should amend that to say that nothing illegal under UK law should be included in the `no censorship` bit. Some stuff just shouldn`t be allowed.

That covers a lot of ground, though. Would you censor genuine footage of illegal drug-taking, for example? Or CCTV film from crime scenes?

As I see it, if it`s an illegal act, then it`s illegal regardless of whether someone decided to film it. Banning the footage is just `blaming the messenger` - after all, if you stop these acts from happening in the first place, the censorship issue doesn`t even arise.

Quote:
I`m not for censorship, but we live in a society where some degree of censorship is required to protect us from exposure to the unacceptable. There are a lot of movies that glamorise violence, especially that against women and children and I`m honestly of the opinion that there are enough sick souls in Hollywood that without some form of protection against their p0rnography of violence, things would be a hell of a lot worse.

So you are for censorship. That`s fine. I just don`t see why you feel the need to say "I`m not in favour of censorship, but..." before advancing a strongly pro-censorship viewpoint! ;)

Mike

This item was edited on Sunday, 21st March 2004, 23:10

Quote:
Would you censor genuine footage of illegal drug-taking, for example? Or CCTV film from crime scenes?

You make a good point, it`s not a black & white situation. I wouldn`t be up in arms about seeing either of the above (just need to see Crimewatch or any documentary on addicts). A lot would depend on the context in which the footage was presented.

Quote:
There are a lot of movies that glamorise violence
That just sums it up "MOVIES!!!!!!!!!!" not real footage.
If you see a film like robocop,When Murphy get`s his hand blown off you may enjoy that film but i may not does that mean that i get it cut or even banned ?.
I`m not saying that there should be no censorship just a bit of common sense (if i don`t like it somebody might).
Please don`t miss quote me thinking that i want to see vulgar rape scenes and hardcore pornography.