1. Join Now

    AVForums.com uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Censorship inconsistencies

Discussion in 'Movie Forum' started by FoxyMulder, Jan 31, 2003.

  1. FoxyMulder

    FoxyMulder
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Just got my Lord of the Rings 4 disc set from America (( first order went missing in the post)) anyways watched the film and i understand its uncut for a PG rating in the UK, it contains a decapitation and a headbutt scene yet is rated PG and uncut in the UK, how come then that Star Wars episode 2 gets censored for a fairly similiar headbutt scene and The Mummy Returns is a 12 certificate but also gets a headbutt removed indeed didnt the Matrix have a headbutt scene removed for a 15 certificate, point being who makes up such crazy rulings its all very inconsistent one thing i will add is thank god james ferman has retired as many films are being released uncut now :) oh one final point picture and sound quality on the new line 4 disc version of Lord of the Rings welllllllllll i thought picture was decent enough and sound (( i listened to DTS version)) was very good although not the best ive ever heard dunno why but i thought at times it lacked something but sounded great when the action scenes kicked in anyways censorship inconsistencies i really can't abide em what do others think ?
     
  2. johndickinson

    johndickinson
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2003
    Messages:
    369
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +25
    fully agree with you there. I understand that different people will view the film and agree on a rating or which parts to cut. I bought The Matrix from America as I want to watch a film how it was meant to be shown. I can only think that the BBFC has changed its views on film content (maybe thats why they have now got a new cover at the cinema)
     
  3. PoochJD

    PoochJD
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2000
    Messages:
    10,992
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Location:
    Norwich
    Ratings:
    +1,862
    Hi,

    I think I can explain this one, for you.

    Basically, in "LOTR", the headbutt was left in, because of the context in which it appears, e.g. during a fairly intense and pretty violent battle sequence. Unless you look closely, the headbutt isn't so noticeable, especially for younger audiences. The decapitation, was against a creature, and not a human character. As such, and because of the fantastical nature of the world the film is set in, it was felt that the decapitation didn't warrant censorship. Also, the decapitation isn't shown in a bloody or graphically explicit way. It's one quick swipe, the head falls off, and that's it. No blood, no gore, no sight of the resulting wound(s).

    With "Star Wars 2", the film has a high kid-friendly factor. As such, Fox were given the choice to go for an uncut "12" certificate (not the new "12A" rating), or stick to a cut PG version. For the sake of one single second of film, Fox predictably decided to edit the scene, and have the lower rating, which equals more money from more people seeing the film.

    Okay, onto "The Mummy Returns". The film's headbutt shot, is during a sequence of explicit personal violence - that is, one person against another person. Both are human, and the violence is in hand-to-hand combat. Because of this, the headbutt was felt to be too detailed and too easily copied, to risk letting through unscathed. Hence, the BBFC advised the film-makers that the headbutt would be censored, if they submitted the film in its original format. It was the film-makerss who decided to tone the headbutt down, so that you don't see it, not the BBFC.

    Lastly, "The Matrix". Again, as far as I can remember, the headbutt was during a scene of personalised combat, e.g. one person fighting another. Despite the sci-fi/fantasy setting, the film doesn't offer viewers any kind of justification for the violence. It appears to say that violence is okay, and that violence is the best way to solve everything. With the glamorous nature of the way the weaponry was depicted, and the characters who used the weapons, the BBFC felt that the headbutt was not justifiable. Either the film would be toned down for violent content, but the headbutt would remain, or the violence and gunplay would remain, but the single headbutt would be cut. Again, rather than diluting the impact of the entire film's violent content, the headbutt was cut.

    I hope this helps you understand why the BBFC do what they do. I don't necessarily agree with why some of their decisions are the way they are, but it's not always as clear cut as everyone likes to think.

    Pooch
     
  4. Joe Soap

    Joe Soap
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    There are worse things in the world to worry about :rolleyes:
     
  5. adi

    adi
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    in reply to......."Again, rather than diluting the impact of the entire film's violent content, the headbutt was cut."

    its wierd isnt it - you can see someone emptying an entire clip from an uzi into someones chest, with bullet holes appearing and blood flowing, yet you're not allowed to see someone nutting someone else
    :confused:
     
  6. Dutch

    Dutch
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2002
    Messages:
    2,561
    Products Owned:
    1
    Products Wanted:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    106
    Location:
    North Yorkshire
    Ratings:
    +257
    Hi FoxyMulder,

    Not only has James Ferman retired, he's gone and bloody snuffed it!

    Steve

    P.S. Mr Ferman will be sadly missed.
     

Share This Page

Loading...