BBFC Problem Films

[Pete]

Originally Posted by iluvdvds

Loops, that Cruel Camera documentary is incredible! Sooo interesting! Thanks for that

What one did you watch, the original from 82 or the 2006 version?

The original is more interesting. It includes an interview with the guy who rode the horse in Heavens Gate which was blown up.

[42ndStreetFreak]

Never could understand the 'animal cruelty free' version of "Cannibal Holocaust".

So not actually seeing the animals killed in that version is okay with you...DESPITE the fact that the animals still died and died for the very film you are watching and supporting. Whether you see it or not.

If you really cared about animals being killed in a film...you would actually have nothing to do with that film! Anything else is hypocrisy.


And that only leaves (if you don't actually care they were really killed..which you obviously don't if you are even watching the film) the fact you don't want to see it.
But why do you want to see rape and butchery either?
yes, that's not real...but you obviously don't care about the animal deaths being real either otherwise you would want nothing to do with the film at all.

Either watch the film as is, or boycott it (as is your right, don't get me wrong. That is a decision I can respect) and don't support and validate it.
But watching a bullshit 'animal cruelty free' version is STILL supporting and validating it.
And all those little animals you supposedly care so much about...are still all dead and killed for the film you're watching.

[vincenzo]

Originally Posted by 42ndStreetFreak

But why do you want to see rape and butchery either?

At the end of the day the rape and butchery in the film is simply makeup and acting. The animal killings are real.

[Angel]

Originally Posted by vincenzo

The Cinematograph Films
(Animals) Act 1937

Severin can say what they like. If the BBFC 'have no legal basis for cutting animal cruelty' then they could be sued and defeated. They haven't been.

Craig Lapper at the BBFC:

The Act only applies to the public exhibition of cinema films, However, we apply it to video and DVDs as a matter of BBFC policy. I'm sure that if we decided to allow animal cruelty on video/DVD it would cause a public backlash and the law would probably be extended to those formats anyway.

[Angel]

Yes it's always a difficult one, watching the uncut Holocaust and then saying you approve of the cuts. But, yes I support the cuts as well. For me I really didn't want to see the film at all in any version because I knew I wouldn't like it. I'm not a fan of extreme cinema. But with Holocaust it had to be the uncut version. With all this talk that the BBFC may have made a mistake regarding some of the cuts they made to the animal killings ie some of them were in fact quick kills and shouldn't therefore have been cut, I really felt I needed to see the full version to see for myself.

[42ndStreetFreak]

Originally Posted by vincenzo

At the end of the day the rape and butchery in the film is simply makeup and acting. The animal killings are real.

But, they were still real (and really dead) in the 'animal cruelty free' version. Someone just skipped over it for you.

So you surely don't care that the animals were really killed any way, or else why have anything to do with the film that killed them!?

Which indeed only leaves the aesthetic aspect. So why is rape and butchery okay from an aesthetic point of view then?
Yes it's not real...but by watching (even buying) the film you don't really care that the animal stuff was real either. Or why buy it and support it?

Not wanting to have anything to do with the film, if the real animal death is a big moral problem for you, I totally respect.
Simply skipping over the visual evidence though of what you have a moral problem over...is utter hypocrisy.


"This is the film where they really raped a child"
"My God! I want nothing to do with such a film"

"This is the film where they really raped a child...but those scenes have been removed for you"
"Excellent! I'll buy it tomorrow"

[vincenzo]

Originally Posted by 42ndStreetFreak

Or why buy it and support it?

I have never 'bought it to support it'. In fact I don't own a copy at all. Not even a cut version. I watched it (a borrowed copy) because I have always been interested in the subject of censorship, and only by seeing the full version can anyone make up their mind over a film.

Incidentally I've seen the cut Vipco print (for comparison reasons) though not the 'animal cruelty free' print. I don't see the point in watching it.

[42ndStreetFreak]

Originally Posted by vincenzo

I have never 'bought it to support it'. In fact I don't own a copy at all. Not even a cut version. I watched it (a borrowed copy) because I have always been interested in the subject of censorship, and only by seeing the full version can anyone make up their mind over a film.

Incidentally I've seen the cut Vipco print (for comparison reasons) though not the 'animal cruelty free' print. I don't see the point in watching it.

When I said 'you' I meant a general person you, not a you....you.

[vincenzo]

I thought you meant You, You, Barney McGrew, Cuthbert, Dibble & Grub.

No worries.

[Angel]

Originally Posted by vincenzo

I thought you meant You, You, Barney McGrew, Cuthbert, Dibble & Grub.

I like it Vince, I remember that line.

Yes it can be a chore sitting through some of these films purely for censorship reasons, for instance I watched Slaughtered Vomit Dolls yesterday the biggest load of rubbish I've ever seen in my life, but unless you watch them you really won't know what the BBFC's decision is likely to be or if they were right in cutting them in the first place.