Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ??????

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Movie News >> RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 3:30:19 PM   
Drooch

 

Posts: 152
Joined: 31/5/2006
Absolute DISGRACE. I hope many of you will join me in boycotting this atrocity. I'm trying very hard to avoid piracy but Fox are forcing UK viewers to avoid censored kiddy crap the only way we know with this cynical, audience-hating move.

DH4 was an offence to the excellent Die Hard Trilogy, and this looks set to be as bad, possibly worse (the UK version at least). This project was doomed the moment John Moore and Skip Woods signed on to a Rothman project, but I was prepared to reward Fox for going R rated by buying a ticket and encouraging other folk to join me in doing so, now I'm forced to reimplement the boycott.

What a shame. Yep, gonna have to go there - Fox have raped McClane's corpse with this despicable move. Oh, and the BBFC can go fuck themselves for failing to allow adults access to uncensored material. They claim they strive to 'balance freedom of expression with the possibility of harm' well the balance is horribly in favour of the latter. If they were serious about this they'd release an uncut version for adults, as a mandatory way of preserving freedom of expression, and whatever butchered version they want kiddies to placate the greedy, but misguided, studio. But I guess it comes down to who's buttering their bread - and it sure ain't the British public they supposedly exist to serve...




(in reply to veneeringman)
Post #: 31
RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 3:38:35 PM   
DancingClown


Posts: 4307
Joined: 8/1/2006
From: The Lot
Glad to see no-one's over-reacting.

_____________________________

Astronomic Tune Boy

'The town knew darkness, and darkness was enough.'

"Storm just bleeewwww me away..."

(in reply to Drooch)
Post #: 32
RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 3:39:02 PM   
MonsterCat


Posts: 7938
Joined: 24/3/2011
From: St. Albans, Hertfordshire
quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

Absolute DISGRACE. I hope many of you will join me in boycotting this atrocity. I'm trying very hard to avoid piracy but Fox are forcing UK viewers to avoid censored kiddy crap the only way we know with this cynical, audience-hating move.

DH4 was an offence to the excellent Die Hard Trilogy, and this looks set to be as bad, possibly worse (the UK version at least). This project was doomed the moment John Moore and Skip Woods signed on to a Rothman project, but I was prepared to reward Fox for going R rated by buying a ticket and encouraging other folk to join me in doing so, now I'm forced to reimplement the boycott.

What a shame. Yep, gonna have to go there - Fox have raped McClane's corpse with this despicable move. Oh, and the BBFC can go fuck themselves for failing to allow adults access to uncensored material. They claim they strive to 'balance freedom of expression with the possibility of harm' well the balance is horribly in favour of the latter. If they were serious about this they'd release an uncut version for adults, as a mandatory way of preserving freedom of expression, and whatever butchered version they want kiddies to placate the greedy, but misguided, studio. But I guess it comes down to who's buttering their bread - and it sure ain't the British public they supposedly exist to serve...






Fox asked the BBFC for advice in terms of cuts, the BBFC advised them what they needed to do and Fox did it. I don't think the BBFC can be held accountable for this.

Stop UNFAIRLY PUNISHING the BBFC, bro.





< Message edited by MonsterCat -- 11/2/2013 3:40:59 PM >


_____________________________

"I am a writer, a doctor, a nuclear physicist and a theoretical philosopher. But above all, I am a man, a hopelessly inquisitive man, just like you."

Films watched in 2013

(in reply to Drooch)
Post #: 33
RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 3:42:04 PM   
Drooch

 

Posts: 152
Joined: 31/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat


quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

Absolute DISGRACE. I hope many of you will join me in boycotting this atrocity. I'm trying very hard to avoid piracy but Fox are forcing UK viewers to avoid censored kiddy crap the only way we know with this cynical, audience-hating move.

DH4 was an offence to the excellent Die Hard Trilogy, and this looks set to be as bad, possibly worse (the UK version at least). This project was doomed the moment John Moore and Skip Woods signed on to a Rothman project, but I was prepared to reward Fox for going R rated by buying a ticket and encouraging other folk to join me in doing so, now I'm forced to reimplement the boycott.

What a shame. Yep, gonna have to go there - Fox have raped McClane's corpse with this despicable move. Oh, and the BBFC can go fuck themselves for failing to allow adults access to uncensored material. They claim they strive to 'balance freedom of expression with the possibility of harm' well the balance is horribly in favour of the latter. If they were serious about this they'd release an uncut version for adults, as a mandatory way of preserving freedom of expression, and whatever butchered version they want kiddies to placate the greedy, but misguided, studio. But I guess it comes down to who's buttering their bread - and it sure ain't the British public they supposedly exist to serve...






Fox asked the BBFC for advice in terms of cuts, the BBFC advised them what they need to do and Fox did it. I don't think the BBFC can be held accountable for this.

Stop UNFAIRLY PUNISHING the BBFC, bro.







The studio are 'choosing' to censor within the BBFC's ridiculously strict guidelines and willingness to bend over for studios, rather than preserve the right to freedom of expression the UK supposedly has. This is why other countries don't end up with butchered versions the whole time - the difference? The BBFC.

In what way am I 'UNFAIRLY PUNISHING' the BBFC?


(in reply to MonsterCat)
Post #: 34
RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 3:49:03 PM   
joepeterwilson

 

Posts: 20
Joined: 11/2/2013
From: North London

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch


quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat


quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

Absolute DISGRACE. I hope many of you will join me in boycotting this atrocity. I'm trying very hard to avoid piracy but Fox are forcing UK viewers to avoid censored kiddy crap the only way we know with this cynical, audience-hating move.

DH4 was an offence to the excellent Die Hard Trilogy, and this looks set to be as bad, possibly worse (the UK version at least). This project was doomed the moment John Moore and Skip Woods signed on to a Rothman project, but I was prepared to reward Fox for going R rated by buying a ticket and encouraging other folk to join me in doing so, now I'm forced to reimplement the boycott.

What a shame. Yep, gonna have to go there - Fox have raped McClane's corpse with this despicable move. Oh, and the BBFC can go fuck themselves for failing to allow adults access to uncensored material. They claim they strive to 'balance freedom of expression with the possibility of harm' well the balance is horribly in favour of the latter. If they were serious about this they'd release an uncut version for adults, as a mandatory way of preserving freedom of expression, and whatever butchered version they want kiddies to placate the greedy, but misguided, studio. But I guess it comes down to who's buttering their bread - and it sure ain't the British public they supposedly exist to serve...






Fox asked the BBFC for advice in terms of cuts, the BBFC advised them what they need to do and Fox did it. I don't think the BBFC can be held accountable for this.

Stop UNFAIRLY PUNISHING the BBFC, bro.







The studio are 'choosing' to censor within the BBFC's ridiculously strict guidelines and willingness to bend over for studios, rather than preserve the right to freedom of expression the UK supposedly has. This is why other countries don't end up with butchered versions the whole time - the difference? The BBFC.

In what way am I 'UNFAIRLY PUNISHING' the BBFC?




What part are you having trouble understanding? The BBFC have said that based on what they saw, the film was likely to earn a 15 certificate. Fox asked what they should cut in order to attain a 12A rating and BBFC gave them a list of what would need to be cut in order to get the rating desired by Fox. The film wasn't officially submitted to the BBFC until the 12A cut was done, and they then gave the rating. Although the BBFC have had some questionable decisions in the past, this is most certainly not one of them. BBFC aren't bending over for studios - in fact, Fox is bending over for BBFC if anything. The US don't get a butchered version because they've got the R rating. Do you have any idea how hard it would be to introduce the same ratings system over here? I've worked in cinemas for nearly 6 years now and people are still struggling to understand the 12A certificate!
Don't hate on the BBFC for this - not their fault whatsoever. It is entirely Fox and Moore's decision.

(in reply to Drooch)
Post #: 35
RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 3:50:52 PM   
MonsterCat


Posts: 7938
Joined: 24/3/2011
From: St. Albans, Hertfordshire

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

The studio are 'choosing' to censor within the BBFC's ridiculously strict guidelines and willingness to bend over for studios, rather than preserve the right to freedom of expression the UK supposedly has. This is why other countries don't end up with butchered versions the whole time - the difference? The BBFC.

In what way am I 'UNFAIRLY PUNISHING' the BBFC?



The BBFC is actually fairly relaxed in terms of the criteria which is required to secure a particular rating. The MPAA, for example, is borderline puritanical in comparison. These days you have to push really hard to secure an 18 or 15 certificate, and they very rarely refuse a classifcation

At the end of the day, if the BBFC are asked to advise on what cuts a studio need to secure a 12A, they will impart that advice. I mean, why shouldn't they?

They're not there to preserve the artisic merits of a film, they're there to govern the ratings of films as per the law.

Also: the UNFAIRLY PUNISHING remark was a callback to your unhinged rants about Scream 4 and Cabin in the Woods.


_____________________________

"I am a writer, a doctor, a nuclear physicist and a theoretical philosopher. But above all, I am a man, a hopelessly inquisitive man, just like you."

Films watched in 2013

(in reply to Drooch)
Post #: 36
RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 3:51:06 PM   
DancingClown


Posts: 4307
Joined: 8/1/2006
From: The Lot
quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

In what way am I 'UNFAIRLY PUNISHING' the BBFC?



By blaming them. I don't think the guidelines are that strict, they're certainly more liberal than they used to be. They don't force studios to censor their work.

EDIT: Yeah, what MC said.

_____________________________

Astronomic Tune Boy

'The town knew darkness, and darkness was enough.'

"Storm just bleeewwww me away..."

(in reply to Drooch)
Post #: 37
RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 3:52:20 PM   
joepeterwilson

 

Posts: 20
Joined: 11/2/2013
From: North London
You do make some good points, might I point out. I just think you're directing your frustrations at the wrong people. The BBFC haven't cut a single second - it's out of their hands!

(in reply to Drooch)
Post #: 38
RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 3:53:10 PM   
directorscut


Posts: 10891
Joined: 30/9/2005
Well reading the description it should be a 15s. Letting four f-words pass you might as well just say any amount is acceptable in a 12s movie.

Either-way the movie looks crap. Even worse than Die Hard 4.

_____________________________



Member of the TMNT 1000 Club.

(in reply to joepeterwilson)
Post #: 39
RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 3:55:52 PM   
MonsterCat


Posts: 7938
Joined: 24/3/2011
From: St. Albans, Hertfordshire

quote:

ORIGINAL: directorscut

Well reading the description it should be a 15s. Letting four f-words pass you might as well just say any amount is acceptable in a 12s movie.

Either-way the movie looks crap. Even worse than Die Hard 4.


Did you see Willis' appearance on The One Show?

That was the behavior of a man who knew the film he was promoting was a bit rubbish.

_____________________________

"I am a writer, a doctor, a nuclear physicist and a theoretical philosopher. But above all, I am a man, a hopelessly inquisitive man, just like you."

Films watched in 2013

(in reply to directorscut)
Post #: 40
RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 3:57:16 PM   
Drooch

 

Posts: 152
Joined: 31/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: joepeterwilson


quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch


quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat


quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

Absolute DISGRACE. I hope many of you will join me in boycotting this atrocity. I'm trying very hard to avoid piracy but Fox are forcing UK viewers to avoid censored kiddy crap the only way we know with this cynical, audience-hating move.

DH4 was an offence to the excellent Die Hard Trilogy, and this looks set to be as bad, possibly worse (the UK version at least). This project was doomed the moment John Moore and Skip Woods signed on to a Rothman project, but I was prepared to reward Fox for going R rated by buying a ticket and encouraging other folk to join me in doing so, now I'm forced to reimplement the boycott.

What a shame. Yep, gonna have to go there - Fox have raped McClane's corpse with this despicable move. Oh, and the BBFC can go fuck themselves for failing to allow adults access to uncensored material. They claim they strive to 'balance freedom of expression with the possibility of harm' well the balance is horribly in favour of the latter. If they were serious about this they'd release an uncut version for adults, as a mandatory way of preserving freedom of expression, and whatever butchered version they want kiddies to placate the greedy, but misguided, studio. But I guess it comes down to who's buttering their bread - and it sure ain't the British public they supposedly exist to serve...






Fox asked the BBFC for advice in terms of cuts, the BBFC advised them what they need to do and Fox did it. I don't think the BBFC can be held accountable for this.

Stop UNFAIRLY PUNISHING the BBFC, bro.







The studio are 'choosing' to censor within the BBFC's ridiculously strict guidelines and willingness to bend over for studios, rather than preserve the right to freedom of expression the UK supposedly has. This is why other countries don't end up with butchered versions the whole time - the difference? The BBFC.

In what way am I 'UNFAIRLY PUNISHING' the BBFC?




What part are you having trouble understanding? The BBFC have said that based on what they saw, the film was likely to earn a 15 certificate. Fox asked what they should cut in order to attain a 12A rating and BBFC gave them a list of what would need to be cut in order to get the rating desired by Fox. The film wasn't officially submitted to the BBFC until the 12A cut was done, and they then gave the rating. Although the BBFC have had some questionable decisions in the past, this is most certainly not one of them. BBFC aren't bending over for studios - in fact, Fox is bending over for BBFC if anything. The US don't get a butchered version because they've got the R rating. Do you have any idea how hard it would be to introduce the same ratings system over here? I've worked in cinemas for nearly 6 years now and people are still struggling to understand the 12A certificate!
Don't hate on the BBFC for this - not their fault whatsoever. It is entirely Fox and Moore's decision.


What you're not understanding is that the studio are 'choosing' to censor within the BBFC's ridiculously strict and completely arbitrary guidelines and willingness to bend over for studios, rather than preserve the right to freedom of expression the UK supposedly has. This is why other countries don't end up with butchered versions the whole time - the difference? The BBFC.


(in reply to joepeterwilson)
Post #: 41
RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 3:57:29 PM   
AxlReznor

 

Posts: 1623
Joined: 2/12/2010
From: Great Britain
I'd be almost impressed if it actually turned out to be worse than Cop Out. After being in that piece of shit, he should be happy to ever get work again.

(in reply to MonsterCat)
Post #: 42
RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 4:00:40 PM   
Drooch

 

Posts: 152
Joined: 31/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: joepeterwilson

You do make some good points, might I point out. I just think you're directing your frustrations at the wrong people. The BBFC haven't cut a single second - it's out of their hands!


Thanks, Joe. The reason I also blame the BBFC is that the studio are 'choosing' to censor within the BBFC's ridiculously strict and completely arbitrary guidelines and willingness to bend over for studios, rather than preserve the right to freedom of expression the UK supposedly has. This is why other countries don't end up with butchered versions the whole time - the difference? The BBFC.


(in reply to joepeterwilson)
Post #: 43
RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 4:01:20 PM   
directorscut


Posts: 10891
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat


quote:

ORIGINAL: directorscut

Well reading the description it should be a 15s. Letting four f-words pass you might as well just say any amount is acceptable in a 12s movie.

Either-way the movie looks crap. Even worse than Die Hard 4.


Did you see Willis' appearance on The One Show?

That was the behavior of a man who knew the film he was promoting was a bit rubbish.


To be fair I think he was just shell-shocked by how crap the show was, how stupid the questions and how annoying the presenters were.

_____________________________



Member of the TMNT 1000 Club.

(in reply to MonsterCat)
Post #: 44
RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 4:01:45 PM   
AxlReznor

 

Posts: 1623
Joined: 2/12/2010
From: Great Britain
quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch


quote:

ORIGINAL: joepeterwilson


quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch


quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat


quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

Absolute DISGRACE. I hope many of you will join me in boycotting this atrocity. I'm trying very hard to avoid piracy but Fox are forcing UK viewers to avoid censored kiddy crap the only way we know with this cynical, audience-hating move.

DH4 was an offence to the excellent Die Hard Trilogy, and this looks set to be as bad, possibly worse (the UK version at least). This project was doomed the moment John Moore and Skip Woods signed on to a Rothman project, but I was prepared to reward Fox for going R rated by buying a ticket and encouraging other folk to join me in doing so, now I'm forced to reimplement the boycott.

What a shame. Yep, gonna have to go there - Fox have raped McClane's corpse with this despicable move. Oh, and the BBFC can go fuck themselves for failing to allow adults access to uncensored material. They claim they strive to 'balance freedom of expression with the possibility of harm' well the balance is horribly in favour of the latter. If they were serious about this they'd release an uncut version for adults, as a mandatory way of preserving freedom of expression, and whatever butchered version they want kiddies to placate the greedy, but misguided, studio. But I guess it comes down to who's buttering their bread - and it sure ain't the British public they supposedly exist to serve...






Fox asked the BBFC for advice in terms of cuts, the BBFC advised them what they need to do and Fox did it. I don't think the BBFC can be held accountable for this.

Stop UNFAIRLY PUNISHING the BBFC, bro.







The studio are 'choosing' to censor within the BBFC's ridiculously strict guidelines and willingness to bend over for studios, rather than preserve the right to freedom of expression the UK supposedly has. This is why other countries don't end up with butchered versions the whole time - the difference? The BBFC.

In what way am I 'UNFAIRLY PUNISHING' the BBFC?




What part are you having trouble understanding? The BBFC have said that based on what they saw, the film was likely to earn a 15 certificate. Fox asked what they should cut in order to attain a 12A rating and BBFC gave them a list of what would need to be cut in order to get the rating desired by Fox. The film wasn't officially submitted to the BBFC until the 12A cut was done, and they then gave the rating. Although the BBFC have had some questionable decisions in the past, this is most certainly not one of them. BBFC aren't bending over for studios - in fact, Fox is bending over for BBFC if anything. The US don't get a butchered version because they've got the R rating. Do you have any idea how hard it would be to introduce the same ratings system over here? I've worked in cinemas for nearly 6 years now and people are still struggling to understand the 12A certificate!
Don't hate on the BBFC for this - not their fault whatsoever. It is entirely Fox and Moore's decision.


What you're not understanding is that the studio are 'choosing' to censor within the BBFC's ridiculously strict and completely arbitrary guidelines and willingness to bend over for studios, rather than preserve the right to freedom of expression the UK supposedly has. This is why other countries don't end up with butchered versions the whole time - the difference? The BBFC.




The BBFC's guidelines aren't ridiculously strict or arbritary at all. They have a very clear list of guidelines that very rarely changes... that's the opposite of arbritary. And out of the world's rating boards, the BBFC is actually one of the least strict, as has already been pointed out to you by someone you obviously didn't read.
The most surprising thing about this, is that they were okay with an R rating from the MPAA, when they are ridiculously strict.

(in reply to Drooch)
Post #: 45
RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 4:03:26 PM   
Shifty Bench

 

Posts: 15398
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Land of the Scots
quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

Oh, and the BBFC can go fuck themselves for failing to allow adults access to uncensored material.


It isn't their fault, they can't tell the studio 'no, release it uncut as a 15'. If the studio wants a 12A, they'll get one, it's not the BBFC's decision. Their guidelines aren't that strict, they are still allowing 'four uses of strong language' which is a big deal for a 12A.

The film is rated R, and from what I've heard, there was absolutely no way in hell that it would have passed uncut as a 12A anyway, 'strict' guidelines or not. They offered an uncut 15 which Fox should have accepted but they wanted more cash, it is entirely Fox's fault.

< Message edited by Shifty Bench -- 11/2/2013 4:07:13 PM >


_____________________________

Extended Edition Podcast- Episode 46:Threads Of Destiny (Star Wars Fan Film)

(in reply to Drooch)
Post #: 46
RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 4:03:52 PM   
AxlReznor

 

Posts: 1623
Joined: 2/12/2010
From: Great Britain
quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch


quote:

ORIGINAL: joepeterwilson

You do make some good points, might I point out. I just think you're directing your frustrations at the wrong people. The BBFC haven't cut a single second - it's out of their hands!


Thanks, Joe. The reason I also blame the BBFC is that the studio are 'choosing' to censor within the BBFC's ridiculously strict and completely arbitrary guidelines and willingness to bend over for studios, rather than preserve the right to freedom of expression the UK supposedly has. This is why other countries don't end up with butchered versions the whole time - the difference? The BBFC.




If you are going to post multiple times in a thread, could you at least not copy and paste the exact same rant over and over again?
I just don't see how giving a rating to the film submitted is "bending over for the studios". Bending over for the studios would be saying "just submit whatever you want, and we'll give you the certificate you ask for".

(in reply to Drooch)
Post #: 47
RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 4:03:58 PM   
musht


Posts: 1883
Joined: 21/1/2009
From: Oireland
15A in Ireland

_____________________________

"SAVE ME, BARRY!!"

"What the hell are Regionals!?"

"color=#F1F1F1" Spoiler text "/color"

(in reply to AxlReznor)
Post #: 48
RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 4:07:16 PM   
joepeterwilson

 

Posts: 20
Joined: 11/2/2013
From: North London

quote:

ORIGINAL: AxlReznor

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch


quote:

ORIGINAL: joepeterwilson


quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch


quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat


quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

Absolute DISGRACE. I hope many of you will join me in boycotting this atrocity. I'm trying very hard to avoid piracy but Fox are forcing UK viewers to avoid censored kiddy crap the only way we know with this cynical, audience-hating move.

DH4 was an offence to the excellent Die Hard Trilogy, and this looks set to be as bad, possibly worse (the UK version at least). This project was doomed the moment John Moore and Skip Woods signed on to a Rothman project, but I was prepared to reward Fox for going R rated by buying a ticket and encouraging other folk to join me in doing so, now I'm forced to reimplement the boycott.

What a shame. Yep, gonna have to go there - Fox have raped McClane's corpse with this despicable move. Oh, and the BBFC can go fuck themselves for failing to allow adults access to uncensored material. They claim they strive to 'balance freedom of expression with the possibility of harm' well the balance is horribly in favour of the latter. If they were serious about this they'd release an uncut version for adults, as a mandatory way of preserving freedom of expression, and whatever butchered version they want kiddies to placate the greedy, but misguided, studio. But I guess it comes down to who's buttering their bread - and it sure ain't the British public they supposedly exist to serve...






Fox asked the BBFC for advice in terms of cuts, the BBFC advised them what they need to do and Fox did it. I don't think the BBFC can be held accountable for this.

Stop UNFAIRLY PUNISHING the BBFC, bro.







The studio are 'choosing' to censor within the BBFC's ridiculously strict guidelines and willingness to bend over for studios, rather than preserve the right to freedom of expression the UK supposedly has. This is why other countries don't end up with butchered versions the whole time - the difference? The BBFC.

In what way am I 'UNFAIRLY PUNISHING' the BBFC?




What part are you having trouble understanding? The BBFC have said that based on what they saw, the film was likely to earn a 15 certificate. Fox asked what they should cut in order to attain a 12A rating and BBFC gave them a list of what would need to be cut in order to get the rating desired by Fox. The film wasn't officially submitted to the BBFC until the 12A cut was done, and they then gave the rating. Although the BBFC have had some questionable decisions in the past, this is most certainly not one of them. BBFC aren't bending over for studios - in fact, Fox is bending over for BBFC if anything. The US don't get a butchered version because they've got the R rating. Do you have any idea how hard it would be to introduce the same ratings system over here? I've worked in cinemas for nearly 6 years now and people are still struggling to understand the 12A certificate!
Don't hate on the BBFC for this - not their fault whatsoever. It is entirely Fox and Moore's decision.


What you're not understanding is that the studio are 'choosing' to censor within the BBFC's ridiculously strict and completely arbitrary guidelines and willingness to bend over for studios, rather than preserve the right to freedom of expression the UK supposedly has. This is why other countries don't end up with butchered versions the whole time - the difference? The BBFC.




The BBFC's guidelines aren't ridiculously strict or arbritary at all. They have a very clear list of guidelines that very rarely changes... that's the opposite of arbritary. And out of the world's rating boards, the BBFC is actually one of the least strict, as has already been pointed out to you by someone you obviously didn't read.
The most surprising thing about this, is that they were okay with an R rating from the MPAA, when they are ridiculously strict.


I understand Fox are CHOOSING to censor their film within the BBFC's guidelines, but BBFC really don't bend over for studios. It's quite the opposite. The studios are happy to cut for a lower certificate. There'd be no benefit to BBFC bending over for studios - they'd get nothing out of it! Studios have everything to gain for falling within the guidelines. If you think BBFC is bad, I urge you to watch THIS FILM IS NOT YET RATED. The MPAA are horrible and make very little sense, but we've actually got a great ratings board. I think a lot of people are still hung up over the whole video nasty thing. It was handled terribly but they've come leaps and bounds since then.

(in reply to AxlReznor)
Post #: 49
RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 4:10:34 PM   
MonsterCat


Posts: 7938
Joined: 24/3/2011
From: St. Albans, Hertfordshire

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

What you're not understanding is that the studio are 'choosing' to censor within the BBFC's ridiculously strict and completely arbitrary guidelines and willingness to bend over for studios, rather than preserve the right to freedom of expression the UK supposedly has. This is why other countries don't end up with butchered versions the whole time - the difference? The BBFC.



What you're not understanding is arguments predicated on facts and logic.

When A Good Day to Die Hard was first submitted to BBFC, they awarded it a 15 certificate. Fox wanted a 12A and the BBFC advised them on what cuts should be implemented. If the BBFC was willing to let Fox take them up the chuff, they would have thrown away all the criteria required for a 12A and given the flick that certificate without touching a single frame of film.

It's not really the BBFC's fault. You want to direct your hilariously OTT anger at someone else? Direct it at Fox.



_____________________________

"I am a writer, a doctor, a nuclear physicist and a theoretical philosopher. But above all, I am a man, a hopelessly inquisitive man, just like you."

Films watched in 2013

(in reply to Drooch)
Post #: 50
What just happened? - 11/2/2013 4:11:47 PM   
Deacon Frost

 

Posts: 93
Joined: 20/1/2008
From: West Midlands
So, we have leapt from this film being rated R in the states, to following suit with 4.0 with a muted, watered down Die Hard, which, if you were a profficient Fox executive in the least, would have shown you that this is not the approach to take with this franchise.

My interest levels have dropped considerably. Part of the attraction for the franchise now, is purely one of nostalgia value.
Factor in that John Moore and Skip Words have pretty crummy track records and the whole thing is beginning to look like a cash grab, pure and simple.

This film is out Thursday, any chance of a review Empire? Unless I see a solid 3-4 star, I think I may be giving this a big swerve.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 51
- 11/2/2013 4:13:27 PM   
BenTramer

 

Posts: 938
Joined: 18/3/2009
Ah, that rating says it all unfortunately. This is a watered-down, cynical sequel with no balls designed to make money by bringing in the kiddies. It's not a film that wants to tell a gritty story for adults. I didn't have high expectations for this and even those minimal expectations have now evaporated. Bilge.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 52
RE: What just happened? - 11/2/2013 4:14:34 PM   
Dead Mike

 

Posts: 54
Joined: 7/7/2011
End result, film that will undoubtedly be sh!t anyway is now a few minutes shorter. Fans of Die Hard 4.0 will probably still dig it, fans of the original will likely have given up years ago.

(in reply to Deacon Frost)
Post #: 53
RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 4:14:35 PM   
Shifty Bench

 

Posts: 15398
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Land of the Scots

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat


quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

What you're not understanding is that the studio are 'choosing' to censor within the BBFC's ridiculously strict and completely arbitrary guidelines and willingness to bend over for studios, rather than preserve the right to freedom of expression the UK supposedly has. This is why other countries don't end up with butchered versions the whole time - the difference? The BBFC.



What you're not understanding is arguments predicated on facts and logic.

When A Good Day to Die Hard was first submitted to BBFC, they awarded it a 15 certificate. Fox wanted a 12A and the BBFC advised them on what cuts should be implemented. If the BBFC was willing to let Fox take them up the chuff, they would have thrown away all the criteria required for a 12A and given the flick that certificate without touching a single frame of film.

It's not really the BBFC's fault. You want to direct your hilariously OTT anger at someone else? Direct it at Fox.




Quoted for truth and in the hope that Drooch will actually read it and that it will sink in......


_____________________________

Extended Edition Podcast- Episode 46:Threads Of Destiny (Star Wars Fan Film)

(in reply to MonsterCat)
Post #: 54
RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 4:15:23 PM   
directorscut


Posts: 10891
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat


quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

What you're not understanding is that the studio are 'choosing' to censor within the BBFC's ridiculously strict and completely arbitrary guidelines and willingness to bend over for studios, rather than preserve the right to freedom of expression the UK supposedly has. This is why other countries don't end up with butchered versions the whole time - the difference? The BBFC.



What you're not understanding is arguments predicated on facts and logic.

When A Good Day to Die Hard was first submitted to BBFC, they awarded it a 15 certificate. Fox wanted a 12A and the BBFC advised them on what cuts should be implemented. If the BBFC was willing to let Fox take them up the chuff, they would have thrown away all the criteria required for a 12A and given the flick that certificate without touching a single frame of film.

It's not really the BBFC's fault. You want to direct your hilariously OTT anger at someone else? Direct it at Fox.




It's amazing how juvenile the Die Hard fanbase appears to be.

They really should have gone after a U certificate.


_____________________________



Member of the TMNT 1000 Club.

(in reply to MonsterCat)
Post #: 55
RE: What just happened? - 11/2/2013 4:16:05 PM   
AxlReznor

 

Posts: 1623
Joined: 2/12/2010
From: Great Britain
Die Hard 4.0 was rated 15. Something else that's been said repeatedly from people saying the situation is the same as that film. (Die Hard 4.0 is also my favourite of the franchise so far, with the other three being different levels of overrated, but that's a different issue).

I assume that I'm the only person who doesn't give a shit what rating a film is given, as long as I like it, then. Seriously... if it's shit, it would be shit with a 15 or 18 rating, too. And if it's great, then a 12A rating shouldn't matter, either.

(in reply to Deacon Frost)
Post #: 56
RE: - 11/2/2013 4:17:04 PM   
Shifty Bench

 

Posts: 15398
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Land of the Scots

quote:

ORIGINAL: BenTramer

Ah, that rating says it all unfortunately. This is a watered-down, cynical sequel with no balls designed to make money by bringing in the kiddies. It's not a film that wants to tell a gritty story for adults. I didn't have high expectations for this and even those minimal expectations have now evaporated. Bilge.


Wait until the uncut version gets released, that is a film for adults. Not saying it'll be any good but at least it'll be the R rated version we should have got over here in the first place.

_____________________________

Extended Edition Podcast- Episode 46:Threads Of Destiny (Star Wars Fan Film)

(in reply to BenTramer)
Post #: 57
RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 4:17:39 PM   
AxlReznor

 

Posts: 1623
Joined: 2/12/2010
From: Great Britain
quote:

ORIGINAL: directorscut


quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat


quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

What you're not understanding is that the studio are 'choosing' to censor within the BBFC's ridiculously strict and completely arbitrary guidelines and willingness to bend over for studios, rather than preserve the right to freedom of expression the UK supposedly has. This is why other countries don't end up with butchered versions the whole time - the difference? The BBFC.



What you're not understanding is arguments predicated on facts and logic.

When A Good Day to Die Hard was first submitted to BBFC, they awarded it a 15 certificate. Fox wanted a 12A and the BBFC advised them on what cuts should be implemented. If the BBFC was willing to let Fox take them up the chuff, they would have thrown away all the criteria required for a 12A and given the flick that certificate without touching a single frame of film.

It's not really the BBFC's fault. You want to direct your hilariously OTT anger at someone else? Direct it at Fox.




It's amazing how juvenile the Die Hard fanbase appears to be.

They really should have gone after a U certificate.



Whatever happened to the Uc rating? Haven't seen a kiddy show with that rating for years.

(in reply to directorscut)
Post #: 58
RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 4:19:32 PM   
Shifty Bench

 

Posts: 15398
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Land of the Scots
quote:

ORIGINAL: directorscut
It's amazing how juvenile the Die Hard fanbase appears to be.

They really should have gone after a U certificate.



You know, with you up there on your pedestal, I can see right up your nose......



< Message edited by Shifty Bench -- 11/2/2013 4:21:26 PM >


_____________________________

Extended Edition Podcast- Episode 46:Threads Of Destiny (Star Wars Fan Film)

(in reply to directorscut)
Post #: 59
RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 4:20:41 PM   
AxlReznor

 

Posts: 1623
Joined: 2/12/2010
From: Great Britain
It's a valid point, though. If you want to see people have a childish hissy fit, just see what happens when someone tries to make something less "adult".

(in reply to Shifty Bench)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Movie News >> RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.156