1. Join Now

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

Headbutts

Discussion in 'Movie Forum' started by Metallifux, Aug 12, 2002.

  1. Metallifux

    Metallifux
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    I know this has been covered before but after watching LOTR yesterday I have to bring it up again. During the battle with the Uruk Hai at the end there is a blatant headbutt from the Uruk Hai captain to Aragorn, this in a PG rated film, I know it said some scenes unsuitable etc at the cinema but that is not a recognised rating whereas PG is. Now in Star Wars AOTC the only headbutt in the film Jango Fett on Obi Wan was cut for the cinematic release also a PG. Now how can the justify a headbutt in one film but not the other. Personally headbutts don't bother me in the slightest and should never be cut but some kind of uniformity amongst censors would be nice. BTW off topic but I watched the R2 version which I borrowed as I am waiting for th 3 disker and the sound does suck, the music is way too high in the mix.


    Ahhh and now having viewed the AOTC thread I see that my thread has been entirely negated, oh well never mind.
     
  2. 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,

    Metallifux said: "... after watching LOTR yesterday I have to bring it up again. During the battle with the Uruk Hai at the end there is a blatant headbutt from the Uruk Hai captain to Aragorn, this in a PG rated film, I know it said some scenes unsuitable etc at the cinema but that is not a recognised rating whereas PG is. Now in Star Wars AOTC the only headbutt in the film Jango Fett on Obi Wan was cut for the cinematic release also a PG. Now how can the justify a headbutt in one film but not the other."

    The difference was, I think, that in SW2:AOTC the headbutt was removed because it was a personalised and vicious attack on one individual. Hence, it was cut. As for the LOTR headbutt, can you tell me what timecode in the film you were looking at (e.g. 1hr 43m 23s) so that I can check for myself, if the headbutt really was there, or if it was just extremely clever editing. Then I'll let you know why I think that was left in (if, indeed, it was).

    I also think that the reason that one film was cut, whilst another may not have been, is that a headbutt during an intense war sequence (be it a fictional war) is more appropriate for the context of the headbutt. The fight in ST2:AOTC was not. Yes, the film is set in a fictional world, but the fight was something that could have taken place between any two people. (Bear in mind the characters were human, or human in a suit rather than a fantastical creature like an ork or hobbit.) Hence, I presume the BBFC decided that the headbutt was too blatant just to let go, in a PG film.

    You mentioned that the Advisory Rating with LOTR wasn't officially recognised. Well, technically, it is official, as the BBFC state that if a film is given a specific certificate (like PG, e.g. Jurassic Park, LOTR, and the like), then the Advisory Warning must be carried on ALL advertising media, be that TV adverts, posters, leaflets, the official movie poster, etc, etc.

    As such, it is official. Whether parents choose to take notice of it, though, is another matter.

    Let me know where that (alleged) headbutt appears in LOTR, and then I'll check for myself, and get back to you.

    Pooch
     
  3. Metallifux

    Metallifux
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Sorry I no longer have the disk so cannot give you the time index, having read the AOTC thread and seen the official BBFC line which made me laugh intensely I think the whole situation is a moot point now and just forces myself and many other individuals to by R1 disks. However I would like to hear your line on the LOTR headbutt which is during the dual between Aragorn and the Uruk Hai captain after Aragorn stops him from putting a 4th arrow into Boromir so I suspect it's circa 2Hr 35 mins into the film.
     
  4. 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'll go check it out, and see for myself, then get back to everyone later today.

    Thanks, Metallifux for that. Saves me watching the entire film in slow-motion! :D

    Pooch
     
  5. Setenza

    Setenza
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2002
    Messages:
    3,345
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    86
    Ratings:
    +226
    I am not trying to defend the BBFC, but I would like to make a few points, particulalrly as there apparent inconsistent policy on acts of violence, seem to be a rather common talking point.

    What some people fail to grasp is that it is not just the acts of violence that dictate a film certificate. There is context and motive.

    In recent years, horror movies seem to be getting lower certificate despite containing high levels of on screen violence. Why? Mainly because the context of such films is fantasy based. By and large, we don't consider people being ripped to pieces by werewolves etc to have any basis in reality. I consider this to a sound piece of reasoning. However, slash & stalk movies have a slighty closer basis in reality. Often the victims are "terrorised" before death and it is this pychological brutality that can augment the rating given.

    Sexual violence is still a great stumbling block for the BBFC. Serious movies that adress isssues such as rape, sexual abuse etc can often pass uncut if their moral stance is deemed appropriate. However, introduce any issue of ambiguity and this will often result in cuts.

    The BBFC's biggest problem is weighing up the needs to allow the public to view what they wish and to protect those who may suffer through exposure to such material. Yes I know it's a difficult and frustrating issue, but we all know that despite what some people say, movies do influence to a greater or lesser degree.

    Hairstyles and fashion have often been as a direct result of movies. OK this is not harmful, but I would then point out that a percentage of children will copy what they see on the screen despite warning. I spent large amounts of time in wood work at school during the late 70's, trying to make a pair of Nunchaku. The amount of kids I know that use to bludgeon themesleve senseless.

    Headbutts and earclaps are fight techniques that appear to be easy to imitate. However, if you ever have been in a real fight or had any martial arts training, you soon realise the perils of attempting a headbutt and using the wrong part of your head or making contact with the wrong part of your assaillents head. A quick earclap can leave you with perforated ear drums or worse.

    Now I have a 10 year old son and I am pretty liberal with what he watches. We always watch as a family and always discuss things before and after. Therefore, he realises when watching "Enter The Dragon" that it takes years of practise and should not be imitated. But some parents are irresponsible and will happily leave their children unsupervised, watching what they wish. The BBFC is attempting to look after their interests I guess.

    I don't particularly care for film censorship, preferring that the movies were just certified and clearly labelled, but I do not beleive that an "anything goes culture" is right or advisable.

    "Worlds greatest car chases" and material of this ilk is very popular. But were to we go from there? Would you like to see "dead people get cut out of there cars by paramedics Part 3" on the shelves at HMV. I wouldn't.

    By coming to this site you are excepting a degree of censorship. Look at the list of proscribed words. Recently a term of racial abuse was added (and IMHO justly so). But some people would argue that it is an infringement of their free expression etc.

    BTW, I think the BBFC since the departure of James Ferman, drasticly modernised and became a far more. Andreas Whittam-Smith did a good job under difficult circumstances. Yes, I know in a perfect world the BBFC wouldn't do anything other than classify, but we know that that ain't gonna happen over night. Considering you disproportionate voice of "The Daily Mail" etc. Who knows what way the new head censor will go.

    Basicly, anyone buying a DVD player is foolish not to buy one that can be made region free etc. If you have a problem with UK censors then, the logical thing to do is to buy from outside of the country. To decry the policy of the BBFC is a pointless task, as there adgenda, at the end of the day, is dictated by law which is set by the governement. And as we all know politicians are "unrelaible" to say the very least.
     

Share This Page

Loading...