Cen***ship

Owwmykneecap · 19-08-2009 07:43PM #1

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/8209829.stm
The BBFC have banned a new Jap Horror film and so we wait with baited breath to see how long it takes IFCO to copy them.

So then Cer***ship, for it or again it?
Can a Movie really harm you?

Is the whole business entirely pointless given the internet and our abilty to anything we want, should the Censors office be scrapped for being an archaic institution and being a massive waste of money?

Won't somebody think of the children?

mikom · 19-08-2009 07:48PM

Owwmykneecap wrote: »

Can a Movie really harm you?

I once dropped a box-set of "Girls gone wild" on my foot.
Hurt like hell but no lasting harm.

My name is URL · 19-08-2009 07:49PM

A movie can't harm you, but I dunno if seriously grotesque films wouldn't desensitise some people over time, and that could be dangerous.

But I'm against reactionary censorship that only happens because people might be offended by something, and anybody that's really offended would not consider watching it in the first place

markok84 · 19-08-2009 07:49PM

The film sounds like a load of crap..... The english patient, now that's my kind of film.

Owwmykneecap · 19-08-2009 07:54PM

mikom wrote: »

I once dropped a box-set of "Girls gone wild" on my foot.
Hurt like hell but no lasting harm.

i know your pain. i sliced my frenulum on a dvd of debbie does dallas

K4t · 19-08-2009 07:55PM

* ******* **** ********** *** ******** tbh.

mikom · 19-08-2009 07:56PM

Owwmykneecap wrote: »

i know your pain. i sliced my frenulum on a dvd of debbie does dallas

Banjo kazooie......... ouch.

irelandrover · 19-08-2009 07:58PM

some of the japanese stuff should never be seen, by anyone. Anyone that ever saw ichi the kiler should kind of know what i mean

markok84 · 19-08-2009 08:02PM

irelandrover wrote: »

some of the japanese stuff should never be seen, by anyone. Anyone that ever saw ichi the kiler should kind of know what i mean

yah I seen that, that is to say I saw it. It's rediculous, the violence is so over the top it's almost comedic.

jumpguy · 19-08-2009 08:05PM

IFCO's classification system: If England rate it something, we'll outdo them and rate it higher!

Seriously, it's always one higher. If it's 12's in England, it's 15's here. It's retarded and annoying! Also, why do we have a 16's class now? Does it really make a huge difference it you're 15 or 16?

ChocolateSauce · 19-08-2009 08:08PM

I don't accept that anyone has a right to decide what I may or may not see.

19-08-2009 08:11PM

jumpguy wrote: »

IFCO's classification system: If England rate it something, we'll outdo them and rate it higher!

Seriously, it's always one higher. If it's 12's in England, it's 15's here. It's retarded and annoying! Also, why do we have a 16's class now? Does it really make a huge difference it you're 15 or 16?

That's not true, there are numerous films with a lower rating in Ireland than in England.

Having seen Grotesque I can understand the BBFC's dislike of it. It's a thoroughly unapologetic 90 minutes of gore with no real redeeming factor. The story is simplistic and barely there, in fact it's merely an excuse for scene after scene of violence. It's not the worst gore film, ever made but the lack of anything resembling a good story make's the film into pseudo snuff.

genericguy · 19-08-2009 08:15PM

nah, just slap an 18 cert on it. there's too many classifications now anyway.

and tbh, the laws here now would prevent father ted from being released today.

Overheal · 19-08-2009 08:16PM

Didnt the Irish Film Board ban Boondock Saints?

irelandrover · 19-08-2009 08:26PM

OK. I live in Holland. It realy is the country where anything goes. But some of the films that are available in ireland to 15 or 16 year olds really does shock me.

shenanigans1982 · 19-08-2009 08:27PM

Overheal wrote: »

Didnt the Irish Film Board ban Boondock Saints?

I had never heard of that but aint actually seen it for sale anywhere now that I think of it.

Can't see any reason why it would be banned though.

As for censorship...nobody should have any right to completely ban the film but in the long run more people are probably going to see it now than would have in the first place.

Overheal · 19-08-2009 08:34PM

shenanigans1982 wrote: »

I had never heard of that but aint actually seen it for sale anywhere now that I think of it.

Can't see any reason why it would be banned though.

As for censorship...nobody should have any right to completely ban the film but in the long run more people are probably going to see it now than would have in the first place.

Apparently it portrays Irish Catholics in a negative light.

Far from it, imo.

DoireNod · 19-08-2009 08:39PM

I picked this: 'This stuff will make you a god damned sexual Tyrannosaurus, just like me.' because it's such a great line. Predator is class.

Fúck censorship!

Raiser · 19-08-2009 08:47PM

I've heard the Irish Film Censor classification guy interviewed on the radio twice - he really does come across as intelligent, articulate and very open-minded.

- Personally I do sometimes think that we have enough sick fcuk-ups roaming our streets without uber talented Film-makers releasing their oh so cool and edgy content just to give Scum bright ideas......

Biggins · 19-08-2009 09:57PM

K4t wrote: »

* ******* **** ********** *** ******** tbh.

That's easy for you to say! I might disagree to be honest. :rolleyes:

Otis Driftwood · 19-08-2009 10:09PM

If someone is going to be a rapist/sadist/murderer then a fcuking film isnt going to send them over the edge.

Its a retarded argument.

As adults we should be allowed make our own decisions as to what we deem acceptable.

Rebelheart · 19-08-2009 10:39PM

Owwmykneecap wrote: »

So then Cer***ship, for it or again it?
Can a Movie really harm you?

I remember, it must be 10 years ago anyway, going to the local video store and getting a new release. I'll never forget the name of the movie (or 'film' as it then was): War Zone.

It was directed by Tim Roth and starred Ray Winstone. It was on the shelf like any other movie there. I brought it home to watch it and there was a father (played by Winstone) raping his daughter, while being filmed by his son. It was horrific stuff.

I'm by no means a prude - even feeling that I have to say that seems unwarranted - but I don't think this sort of film should have been among the rest of the movies in my local video store.

Rebelheart · 19-08-2009 10:43PM

Raiser wrote: »

I've heard the Irish Film Censor classification guy interviewed on the radio twice - he really does come across as intelligent, articulate and very open-minded.

John Kelleher (the film censor) is a sound man. He was the producer of 'Eat the Peach' years ago (1986), if anybody remembers it.

dsmythy · 19-08-2009 10:54PM

nedtheshed wrote: »

If someone is going to be a rapist/sadist/murderer then a fcuking film isnt going to send them over the edge.

Its a retarded argument.

As adults we should be allowed make our own decisions as to what we deem acceptable.

If someone buys it i guess we'll get the tax off it. Not sure i want that tax source however...

Stercus Accidit · 19-08-2009 10:55PM

Once you are over 18 you should be able to watch what ever the fuck you want.

Nodin · 19-08-2009 11:01PM

Rebelheart wrote: »

I remember, it must be 10 years ago anyway, going to the local video store and getting a new release. I'll never forget the name of the movie (or 'film' as it then was): War Zone.

It was directed by Tim Roth and starred Ray Winstone. It was on the shelf like any other movie there. I brought it home to watch it and there was a father (played by Winstone) raping his daughter, while being filmed by his son. It was horrific stuff.

I'm by no means a prude - even feeling that I have to say that seems unwarranted - but I don't think this sort of film should have been among the rest of the movies in my local video store.

A film that was - by all accounts - utterly and unrelentingly grim. Therefore, why would you ban it?

dsmythy · 19-08-2009 11:03PM

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

Once you are over 18 you should be able to watch what ever the fuck you want.

How's about the 90 minute fictional depiction of a presumed (but probably not quite) underage girl being sexually abused? In this proposed film there is no character development or plot in sight like the film here that's going to be banned. But sure, once they're over 18 they can buy what they like...

19-08-2009 11:06PM

I don't see the problem, the distributors must be in heaven. The amount of free advertising they've recieved over this means that R1 copies are going to be flying off the shelves. I know 4 people who have ordered the R1 DVD today.

MikeC101 · 19-08-2009 11:08PM

jumpguy wrote: »

IFCO's classification system: If England rate it something, we'll outdo them and rate it higher!

Seriously, it's always one higher. If it's 12's in England, it's 15's here. It's retarded and annoying! Also, why do we have a 16's class now? Does it really make a huge difference it you're 15 or 16?

It's not always the case - I've seen a few films that received a lower rating here (though they'd generally be ones that relate to Irish history). The 16 rating is a cinema only rating, any film that receives it is upgraded to 18 on DVD release.

The reasoning behind the 16 rating goes something like this: originally the cinema rating was 15A, so kids under 15 could go to a film accompanied by an adult. But some parents were shocked and appalled and outraged and calling Joe Duffy due to the content of some of these 15A films, so the 16s cert was introduced. It allows more violence, boobies and drug usage.

Not sure I totally follow the logic behind it.

Rebelheart · 19-08-2009 11:14PM

Nodin wrote: »

A film that was - by all accounts - utterly and unrelentingly grim. Therefore, why would you ban it?

I don't know whether I'd ban it or not from Ireland. I would certainly not allow it to have been available on my local video store shelf along with more conventional movies. Taking home a movie from my local store only to find a guy raping his child ( at least twice, before I ejected the video and returned it) is unnecessary (to put it mildly).

To this day it remains the only movie I have been truly repulsed by.

Proxy · 19-08-2009 11:26PM

It's a ridiculous movie. It has literally no redeeming qualities (other than maybe the pride the VFX guys took in their work). There's no art here. Aside from this, I felt awful after watching it, physically sick, even if I am a horror fan. It's torture porn.

The creators of this film need to be psychologically assessed.

As for the censorship question, in this case it would be valid, more as a "this isn't a film, what the **** are you thinking" point.

Cen***ship

In favour of film censorhip? 16 votes

Comments