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

Follow @empiremagazine

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 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 9:01:55 PM

directorscut

Posts: 10021
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shifty Bench

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cloud Cuckoo

So ... will John McClane be saying "Yippee-ky-yay motherfucker!" or not? As long as we get that and a few spectacular explosions I don't really understand what all the fuss is about...

He will not be saying that in a 12A, no. The fuss is about Fox butchering a film to get a certificate it shouldn't have. It's like cutting the original Die Hard or Die Hard 2 (with its death by icicle scene) to get a 12 or essentially watching an edited for TV version of the movie on the big screen.

Except the TV cut of Die Hard is still a great movie with excellent performances, strong script and terrific direction.

_____________________________

Member of the TMNT 1000 Club.

(in reply to Shifty Bench)

Post #: 91

RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 9:09:01 PM

Shifty Bench

Posts: 14753
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: directorscut

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shifty Bench

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cloud Cuckoo

So ... will John McClane be saying "Yippee-ky-yay motherfucker!" or not? As long as we get that and a few spectacular explosions I don't really understand what all the fuss is about...

He will not be saying that in a 12A, no. The fuss is about Fox butchering a film to get a certificate it shouldn't have. It's like cutting the original Die Hard or Die Hard 2 (with its death by icicle scene) to get a 12 or essentially watching an edited for TV version of the movie on the big screen.

Except the TV cut of Die Hard is still a great movie with excellent performances, strong script and terrific direction.

But not really something you'd want to fork out a lot of money to see on the big screen with it's edited violence and very obvious dubbing to remove bad language. That's fine for TV.

_____________________________

Extended Edition- click (Ep 6:DSLR Film-making )

quote:

ORIGINAL: matty_b
You have a nice face, Shifty. A face I would have a cup of tea with.

(in reply to directorscut)

Post #: 92

RE: Die Hard 5 Earns 12A UK Rating - 11/2/2013 9:12:01 PM

Shifty Bench

Posts: 14753
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hood_Man

I imagine they could squeeze quite a lot into a 12A these days. I remember "Go fuck yourselves" in X-Men First Class for instance, and a lot of implied but grizzly moments.

Yeah, as I have pointed out a few times, the film still has 'four uses of strong language' which is great for a 12A. It is one of the reasons I defended the BBFC earlier

_____________________________

Extended Edition- click (Ep 6:DSLR Film-making )

quote:

ORIGINAL: matty_b
You have a nice face, Shifty. A face I would have a cup of tea with.

(in reply to Hood_Man)

Post #: 93

RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 9:21:11 PM

directorscut

Posts: 10021
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shifty Bench

quote:

ORIGINAL: directorscut

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shifty Bench

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cloud Cuckoo

So ... will John McClane be saying "Yippee-ky-yay motherfucker!" or not? As long as we get that and a few spectacular explosions I don't really understand what all the fuss is about...

He will not be saying that in a 12A, no. The fuss is about Fox butchering a film to get a certificate it shouldn't have. It's like cutting the original Die Hard or Die Hard 2 (with its death by icicle scene) to get a 12 or essentially watching an edited for TV version of the movie on the big screen.

Except the TV cut of Die Hard is still a great movie with excellent performances, strong script and terrific direction.

But not really something you'd want to fork out a lot of money to see on the big screen with it's edited violence and very obvious dubbing to remove bad language. That's fine for TV.

Well when I was younger I only had access to the TV edit and it was one of my favourite movies. Was it fun it see the uncut version? Sure. But did it necessarily make it that much better? Was the cut version that much inferior? Hmm. What makes Die Hard great is the directing, performances and story - true qualities of cinema - not the swearing and violence. Something a lot of Die Hard "fans" seem to be forgetting.

I would much rather watch the TV edit of Die Hard again than the uncut version of A Good Day to Die Hard.

_____________________________

Member of the TMNT 1000 Club.

(in reply to Shifty Bench)

Post #: 94

RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 9:21:35 PM

Cloud Cuckoo

Posts: 393
Joined: 7/2/2013
From: Mind your own

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shifty Bench

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cloud Cuckoo

So ... will John McClane be saying "Yippee-ky-yay motherfucker!" or not?

He will not be saying that, no.

Well in THAT case...

LET'S STORM THE MOTHERFUDGING BBFC AND FUDGE THOSE FUDGERS UP!!!

Just my little joke for everyone here not Drooch.

In all seriousness though, that is ridiculous. You can't have a Die Hard film without "Yippee-ky-yay motherfucker!" the same way you can't have Hamlet without "To be or not to be?" It is intrinsic to its formula, to its success; part of its genetic make-up.

So yeah, Fox are dicks.

_____________________________

In Thom we trust.

(in reply to Shifty Bench)

Post #: 95

RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 9:25:02 PM

directorscut

Posts: 10021
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cloud Cuckoo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shifty Bench

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cloud Cuckoo

So ... will John McClane be saying "Yippee-ky-yay motherfucker!" or not?

He will not be saying that, no.

Well in THAT case... LET'S STORM THE MOTHERFUDGING BBFC AND FUDGE THOSE FUDGERS UP!!!

Just my little joke for everyone here not Drooch.

In all seriousness though, that is ridiculous. You can't have a Die Hard film without "Yippee-ky-yay motherfucker!" the same way you can't have Hamlet without "To be or not to be?" It is intrinsic to its formula, to its success; part of its genetic make-up.

So yeah, Fox are dicks.

Please. The line's presence in the last two movies was completely shoehorned in, lame and served no purpose other than lazy fan service.

_____________________________

Member of the TMNT 1000 Club.

(in reply to Cloud Cuckoo)

Post #: 96

RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 9:41:27 PM

Cloud Cuckoo

Posts: 393
Joined: 7/2/2013
From: Mind your own

quote:

ORIGINAL: directorscut

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cloud Cuckoo

In all seriousness though, that is ridiculous. You can't have a Die Hard film without "Yippee-ky-yay motherfucker!" the same way you can't have Hamlet without "To be or not to be?" It is intrinsic to its formula, to its success; part of its genetic make-up.

Please. The line's presence in the last two movies was completely shoehorned in, lame and served no purpose other than lazy fan service.

It is his catchphrase. It is tradition. And maybe I'm a sad cow (definitely) but for me, a sweaty, grimy John McClane delivering THAT line, followed by a ridiculously large explosion, is the best part. It's the climax, the pay-off, the moment you punch the air. It defines that the film is Die Hard.

I'm not advocating that they shoehorn it in, but a Die Hard movie without it at all is unthinkable.

_____________________________

In Thom we trust.

(in reply to directorscut)

Post #: 97

RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 10:04:02 PM

Shifty Bench

Posts: 14753
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: directorscut
I would much rather watch the TV edit of Die Hard again than the uncut version of A Good Day to Die Hard.

Well, I haven't seen A Good Day to Die Hard so I can't make that judgement but you are right that the original, uncut or not will be the superior film. I just prefer seeing uncut versions of films, seeing them the way the director intended not the way the studio intends to make more cash from them. If it was made as an R rated film that is the version I want to see not some watered down version.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cloud Cuckoo
It is his catchphrase. It is tradition. And maybe I'm a sad cow (definitely) but for me, a sweaty, grimy John McClane delivering THAT line, followed by a ridiculously large explosion, is the best part. It's the climax, the pay-off, the moment you punch the air. It defines that the film is Die Hard.

I'm not advocating that they shoehorn it in, but a Die Hard movie without it at all is unthinkable.

Indeed although the line is still in the film, just not our version. Well, not the 'fucker' part anyway.

_____________________________

Extended Edition- click (Ep 6:DSLR Film-making )

quote:

ORIGINAL: matty_b
You have a nice face, Shifty. A face I would have a cup of tea with.

(in reply to directorscut)

Post #: 98

RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 11/2/2013 10:17:53 PM

joepeterwilson

Posts: 12
Joined: 11/2/2013
From: North London

Why are some people making out that Die Hard is supposed to be a big dumb action film? The franchise has slowly morphed into that, but even the third one wasn't that explosion-filled (especially considering it had bombs as a major plot point). The first film is some of the greatest filmmaking I've ever seen. The second had a bit less brains, but it still is most definitely Die Hard. The fourth was kind of a 'let's see if they'll eat this shit' project by Fox, and we did. But even that felt like Die Hard at times (like somebody has already said on here). This one doesn't look like a Die Hard. This one looks like a 'Bruce? Check. Guns? Check? Body count? Check. Explosions? Check. Let's call it Die Hard!' studio bollockfest.

Was the bodycount even that high in the first? It was a bit too high in the second, but this new thing has a line in it which is literally "Let's shoot some scumbags".

John McClane is an off-duty New York cop using his wits and limited resources, not a fucking mercenary.

(in reply to Shifty Bench)

Post #: 99

RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 12/2/2013 12:17:38 AM

Drooch

Posts: 129
Joined: 31/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shifty Bench

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

quote:

Firstly, I don't think that 'virtually every action film released during the 80's and 90's was cut in the UK'. Some were, some weren't, but I honestly don't have any stats to back up that kinda statement, I suspect you don't either.

Yes, I do. Pick an action film and check this website to see what was cut:
http://www.melonfarmers.co.uk

In addition to the Die Hard 2 and With A Vengeance, Cliffhanger was cut to pieces, Under Siege 2 was cut by 2 minutes, Eraser was cut by over 3 minutes, True Lies was cut, T2 was cut, Face/Off was cut, The Rock was cut, Commando was cut, Executive Decision was cut, Under Siege was cut, The Matrix was cut, Lethal Weapon 2 was cut. Virtually every Seagal and Van Damme film was cut, including Marked for Death, Hard To Kill and On Deadly Ground. In fact, it's difficult to think of an action film that wasn't cut during that period.

The point is though......most of them are now uncut. The others that aren't have yet to be resubmitted. That is what everyone is is saying, the BBFC have changed! And I gave a wee list of those not cut above, it wasn't that difficult to be honest.

OK but MY point was to correct your suspicion that I didn't have stats to back up what I told you about most 90's action films being cut. You were wrong and I wanted to set you straight.

(in reply to Shifty Bench)

Post #: 100

RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 12/2/2013 12:27:51 AM

Drooch

Posts: 129
Joined: 31/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: AxlReznor

You're hilarious. You should look up the meaning of arbritary, because the fact they have guidelines eliminates "arbritary" from your argument.

And if you think the BBFC are worse than the MPAA, you're beyond hilarious and moving into the delusional territory. In recent years, the only films that haven't passed with them have been the ones with absolutely no content worth seeing whatsoever (The Human Centipede sequel standing out), and most movies pass uncut. We received the uncut version of I Saw The Devil, for Christ's sake!

I'm referring to the arbitrary guidelines created by the BBFC as to what constitutes a 12A, 15, 18 etc., not the guidelines set for them by the government (although those are also problematically ambiguous, but that's a different discussion).

(in reply to AxlReznor)

Post #: 101

RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 12/2/2013 12:30:06 AM

Drooch

Posts: 129
Joined: 31/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: AxlReznor

First answer this question: Why aren't you listening to a word anybody is saying to you?

Which aspect of what has been said to me do you think I haven't listened to or adequately addressed?

(in reply to AxlReznor)

Post #: 102

RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 12/2/2013 12:35:12 AM

Drooch

Posts: 129
Joined: 31/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

Why do you think virtually every action film released during the 80's and 90's was cut in the UK and uncut elsewhere?

Virtually all? lol hyperbole.

Why is it hyperbolic? What evidence are you basing that on?

(in reply to MonsterCat)

Post #: 103

RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 12/2/2013 12:47:15 AM

MonsterCat

Posts: 6423
Joined: 24/3/2011
From: St. Albans, Hertfordshire

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

Why do you think virtually every action film released during the 80's and 90's was cut in the UK and uncut elsewhere?

Virtually all? lol hyperbole.

Why is it hyperbolic? What evidence are you basing that on?

Absolutely everything you've said on here is unfounded and hyperbole. Same thing with your "Empire are unfairly punishing good film making" rubbish from last year.

Basically you don't like the fact that this movie has been cut down to a 12A and you've jumped to this erroneous conclusion that the BBFC are somehow to blame for that.

_____________________________

"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 #: 104

RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 12/2/2013 1:13:56 AM

Drooch

Posts: 129
Joined: 31/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shifty Bench

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

We're hearing you loud and clear, Drooch, but you're still wrong.

The BBFC can't tell a studio not to cut their films.

Great, now answer this question:

Why are you absolving the BBFC of blame, and why do you think the UK ends up with such a comparatively huge list of butchered films? Why do you think virtually every action film released during the 80's and 90's was cut in the UK and uncut elsewhere?

Holy crap.

The UK no longer has a huge list of butchered films. We used to but the BBFC have changed a lot of their guidelines so many of those films from the 80s and 90s are uncut now.

Yes, the BBFC is much better than it was, and went through something of a golden age in the 2000's, but this decade has seen a slide back towards the scissor happy days of old. There are still far too many films coming through with butchered cinema versions:

Die Hard 5
Taken 2
Jack Reacher
The Woman in Black
The Expendables
The Hunger Games
Savages
The Inbetweeners Movie
The Three Stooges
The Knot
Now Is Good
The Cold Light Of Day
Twilight: Breaking Dawn, Part 1

My point being that other western countries don't have to put up with a cinema full of patronisingly butchered versions. The difference between them and us? The BBFC.

While the BBFC are not snipping films themselves, they are indirectly responsible for all of this by being happy to cater for greedy, audience-hating studios by offering cuts advice to those studios and failing to uphold freedom of expression by not forcing mandatory uncut versions for adults, which should be available on principle. As a cinephile I have absolutely no interest in watching neutered material. Other countries simply classify films and don't start colluding with the studios to create these mutated, ball-less versions. Slap a certificate on the film and go home, job done, stop fucking around with our films.

(in reply to Shifty Bench)

Post #: 105

RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 12/2/2013 1:17:15 AM

MonsterCat

Posts: 6423
Joined: 24/3/2011
From: St. Albans, Hertfordshire

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

Yes, the BBFC is much better than it was, and went through something of a golden age in the 2000's, but this decade has seen a slide back towards the scissor happy days of old. There are still far too many films coming through with butchered cinema versions:

Die Hard 5
Taken 2
Jack Reacher
The Woman in Black
The Expendables
The Hunger Games
Savages
The Inbetweeners Movie
The Three Stooges
The Knot
Now Is Good
The Cold Light Of Day
Twilight: Breaking Dawn, Part 1

My point being that other western countries don't have to put up with a cinema full of patronisingly butchered versions. The difference between them and us? The BBFC.

While the BBFC are not snipping films themselves, they are indirectly responsible for all of this by being happy to cater for greedy, audience-hating studios by offering cuts advice to those studios and failing to uphold freedom of expression by not forcing mandatory uncut versions for adults, which should be available on principle. As a cinephile I have absolutely no interest in watching neutered material. Other countries simply classify films and don't start colluding with the studios to create these mutated, ball-less versions. Slap a certificate on the film and go home, job done, stop fucking around with our films.

You are utterly insane. I mean really.

_____________________________

"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 #: 106

RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 12/2/2013 1:27:42 AM

Drooch

Posts: 129
Joined: 31/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

Why do you think virtually every action film released during the 80's and 90's was cut in the UK and uncut elsewhere?

Virtually all? lol hyperbole.

Why is it hyperbolic? What evidence are you basing that on?

Absolutely everything you've said on here is unfounded and hyperbole. Same thing with your "Empire are unfairly punishing good film making" rubbish from last year.

Basically you don't like the fact that this movie has been cut down to a 12A and you've jumped to this erroneous conclusion that the BBFC are somehow to blame for that.

Yeah but what evidence are you basing your statement that it's hyperbole to say that 'virtually every action film released during the 80's and 90's was cut in the UK' on?

(in reply to MonsterCat)

Post #: 107

RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 12/2/2013 1:32:52 AM

Drooch

Posts: 129
Joined: 31/5/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

Yes, the BBFC is much better than it was, and went through something of a golden age in the 2000's, but this decade has seen a slide back towards the scissor happy days of old. There are still far too many films coming through with butchered cinema versions:

Die Hard 5
Taken 2
Jack Reacher
The Woman in Black
The Expendables
The Hunger Games
Savages
The Inbetweeners Movie
The Three Stooges
The Knot
Now Is Good
The Cold Light Of Day
Twilight: Breaking Dawn, Part 1

My point being that other western countries don't have to put up with a cinema full of patronisingly butchered versions. The difference between them and us? The BBFC.

While the BBFC are not snipping films themselves, they are indirectly responsible for all of this by being happy to cater for greedy, audience-hating studios by offering cuts advice to those studios and failing to uphold freedom of expression by not forcing mandatory uncut versions for adults, which should be available on principle. As a cinephile I have absolutely no interest in watching neutered material. Other countries simply classify films and don't start colluding with the studios to create these mutated, ball-less versions. Slap a certificate on the film and go home, job done, stop fucking around with our films.

You are utterly insane. I mean really.

Why are you suddenly running away from this discussion and dropping a little rat-turd on the way out? I thought you had something valuable to add...

(in reply to MonsterCat)

Post #: 108

RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 12/2/2013 1:46:58 AM

directorscut

Posts: 10021
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

Slap a certificate on the film and go home, job done, stop fucking around with our films.

They are not your films, they are the studios films and they can do whatever they want with them.

_____________________________

Member of the TMNT 1000 Club.

(in reply to Drooch)

Post #: 109

RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 12/2/2013 1:48:26 AM

MonsterCat

Posts: 6423
Joined: 24/3/2011
From: St. Albans, Hertfordshire

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

Why are you suddenly running away from this discussion and dropping a little rat-turd on the way out? I thought you had something valuable to add...

It's not the BBFC's job to prevent distributors from cutting their films, it's just simply not within their remit to do so. If it was, they could have cut Human Centipede 2 themselves and forced Tom Six to release it that way. But they can't do that, Six refused to cut it and the film was denied a rating. They're not censors, they're a classification board. Big difference

Ultimately, the BBFC has nothing to gain from forcing Fox to cut DH5. As I understand it they charge a flat rate fee for submissions, and they don't even get a cut of the ticket sales. And I doubt they sit in their boardrooms, twirling their moustaches whilst thinking of ways to piss off the internet.

All they can do is watch the film that's been submitted, inform the distributor of the certificate they feel is appropriate, and then based on the BBFC's findings the distributor can choose to run with the BBFC's initial decision or ask for advice on what they can cut to secure a lower rating. Any final decision to cut a film rests solely with the distributor. The BBFC doesn't force their hand in anyway.

I know this because my views are based on logic, research, an interest in the inner workings of the BBFC and having worked within the film industry for almost twelve years.

Your views are specious and ill-informed ramblings - same as your accusations of Empire "unfairly punishing" Scream 4. You don't like the fact that DH5 has been bumped down to a 12A rating, and when something rubs you up the wrong way, you throw your toys out of the pram and fling around this utterly absurd accusations.

Now, I'm not saying that the BBFC haven't fucked up in the past, but in this instance (and the ones you just listed) it's not their fault. It all comes down to the distributors seeking cuts in order to maximize ticket sells.

Now go to bed and pop your pacifier in your mouth. It's almost 2am and you tend to get cranky when you're up this late.

< Message edited by MonsterCat -- 12/2/2013 2:07:12 AM >

_____________________________

"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 #: 110

RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 12/2/2013 1:56:48 AM

Cloud Cuckoo

Posts: 393
Joined: 7/2/2013
From: Mind your own

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

Why are you suddenly running away from this discussion and dropping a little rat-turd on the way out? I thought you had something valuable to add...

While I do not know enough about the subject of film cuts and who enforces them to make meaningful comment, I can offer an outsider's opinion on the above question.

You keep blaming the BBFC for cuts made to Die Hard 5 and other films. Literally everyone else who has commented has said that this is wrong and that the BBFC are not culpable; it is the grasping studios who make the cuts in order to squeeze more money out of their films.

Every time someone points this out, you reply with the same arguments as before, except you start highlighting chunks of text in bold as if this is going to make them more pertinent. This has been going on for pages now. You seem utterly convinced of your rectitude despite the fact not one single person has agreed with you and everyone thinks you are a) overreacting, and b) inherently wrong.

Instead of stopping to consider this, you come back again, seemingly blind to the reasoned argument and logic presented to you.

Now, why would a person continue to debate a point with someone who has shown themselves to be indefatigably unreasonable and beyond logic? Well, they wouldn't.

So that, I am guessing, is why.

_____________________________

In Thom we trust.

(in reply to Drooch)

Post #: 111

RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 12/2/2013 2:00:30 AM

MonsterCat

Posts: 6423
Joined: 24/3/2011
From: St. Albans, Hertfordshire

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cloud Cuckoo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

Why are you suddenly running away from this discussion and dropping a little rat-turd on the way out? I thought you had something valuable to add...

While I do not know enough about the subject of film cuts and who enforces them to make meaningful comment, I can offer an outsider's opinion on the above question.

You keep blaming the BBFC for cuts made to Die Hard 5 and other films. Literally everyone else who has commented has said that this is wrong and that the BBFC are not culpable; it is the grasping studios who make the cuts in order to squeeze more money out of their films.

Every time someone points this out, you reply with the same arguments as before, except you start highlighting chunks of text in bold as if this is going to make them more pertinent. This has been going on for pages now. You seem utterly convinced of your rectitude despite the fact not one single person has agreed with you and everyone thinks you are a) overreacting, and b) inherently wrong.

Instead of stopping to consider this, you come back again, seemingly blind to the reasoned argument and logic presented to you.

Now, why would a person continue to debate a point with someone who has shown themselves to be indefatigably unreasonable and beyond logic? Well, they wouldn't.

So that, I am guessing, is why.

I'm just a glutton for punishment, I guess.

_____________________________

"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 Cloud Cuckoo)

Post #: 112

RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 12/2/2013 2:23:18 AM

MonsterCat

Posts: 6423
Joined: 24/3/2011
From: St. Albans, Hertfordshire

http://www.bbfc.co.uk/releases/good-day-die-hard-2013-6

Above is a link to the BBFC's consumer advice for DH5. Usually in these blurbs they're pretty upfront about when they've advised a distributor about cuts, but in this instance there's no mention of that.

I'm guessing Fox performed pre-cuts before submission, because in the blurb it says that the motherfucker line was cut short.

EDIT - Missed this part from the blurb: "During post-production, the distributor sought and was given advice on how to secure the desired classification. Following this advice, certain changes were made prior to submission."

< Message edited by MonsterCat -- 12/2/2013 2:33:14 AM >

_____________________________

"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 MonsterCat)

Post #: 113

RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 12/2/2013 2:37:38 AM

Cloud Cuckoo

Posts: 393
Joined: 7/2/2013
From: Mind your own

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

I'm just a glutton for punishment, I guess.

Allow me to put some spin on that for you - a tenacious and passionate reformer, keen to enlighten the ill-informed...

_____________________________

In Thom we trust.

(in reply to MonsterCat)

Post #: 114

RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 12/2/2013 2:38:27 AM

MonsterCat

Posts: 6423
Joined: 24/3/2011
From: St. Albans, Hertfordshire

I'll take it.

_____________________________

"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 Cloud Cuckoo)

Post #: 115

RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 12/2/2013 3:03:48 AM

Cloud Cuckoo

Posts: 393
Joined: 7/2/2013
From: Mind your own

quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

"During post-production, the distributor sought and was given advice on how to secure the desired classification. Following this advice, certain changes were made prior to submission."

Even an ignoramus on these matters such as me can see that this is utterly conclusive. The BBFC didn't precipitate the cut, and didn't influence it at all other than by providing information upon request (he likes bold) as to how the studio could achieve their desired rating.

Case closed. *crosses fingers*

MonsterCat who is that in your avatar? I know her but cannot place her...

_____________________________

In Thom we trust.

(in reply to MonsterCat)

Post #: 116

RE: RE: - 12/2/2013 8:37:01 AM

Sutty

Posts: 3541
Joined: 6/6/2006
From: the front row

quote:

ORIGINAL: AxlReznor

quote:

ORIGINAL: Whistler

I know the rating doesn't necessarily dictate how good the film will be, but come on. It's Die Hard. This shit needs to be an 18, or at least a 15.

Any film needs to be whatever it needs to be. Previous films in a franchise should not be a consideration.

So you would be quite happy if you went to see Die Hard 5 as a Die Hard fan and found they had turned it in to a musical?
People go to see franchise movies expecting certain things, and these expectations are brought about by the previous installments. An incredibly sanitised, 12a movie with off screen killings and naught swear words cut off before they're mentioned is not what a majority of Die Hard fans want.

Any film needs to be whatever it needs to be? I don't get that? Any film needs to be good or why bother? And some films need to be faithful to the franchise that allowed then to get made in the first place.

I said it from the start, John Moore would screw this movie royally.

_____________________________

"Lord, make me your instrument of peace. Where there is hatred, let me bring love.
Where there is darkness, light."

"When you're pushed, killin's as easy as breathin'"

(in reply to AxlReznor)

Post #: 117

RE: RE: - 12/2/2013 8:51:12 AM

AxlReznor

Posts: 1095
Joined: 2/12/2010
From: Great Britain

It would obviously have to be an action movie. But you're an absolute if you think that swearing and blood is what makes a Die Hard movie a Die Hard movie.

John McClane. That's what makes it a Die Hard movie. If he's there, then that's all you need. Like I said, if the film's shit, it would have been shit anyway, and if it's great, the rating it's given shouldn't matter.

PS - There are four uses of the word 'fuck'. In a 12A movie.

< Message edited by elab49 -- 13/2/2013 4:24:29 PM >

_____________________________

"It's amazing how many supposed 'plot holes' turn out to now be plot holes if you'd just pay attention", Me

(in reply to Sutty)

Post #: 118

RE: 12A ?????????????? Why ?????? - 12/2/2013 8:57:38 AM

AxlReznor

Posts: 1095
Joined: 2/12/2010
From: Great Britain

quote:

ORIGINAL: Drooch

quote:

ORIGINAL: AxlReznor

First answer this question: Why aren't you listening to a word anybody is saying to you?

Which aspect of what has been said to me do you think I haven't listened to or adequately addressed?

All of it!

_____________________________

"It's amazing how many supposed 'plot holes' turn out to now be plot holes if you'd just pay attention", Me

(in reply to Drooch)

Post #: 119

RE: RE: - 12/2/2013 9:34:21 AM

FoximusPrime

Posts: 230
Joined: 11/12/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: AxlReznor

It would obviously have to be an action movie. But you're an absolute retard if you think that swearing and blood is what makes a Die Hard movie a Die Hard movie.

John McClane. That's what makes it a Die Hard movie. If he's there, then that's all you need. Like I said, if the film's shit, it would have been shit anyway, and if it's great, the rating it's given shouldn't matter.

PS - There are four uses of the word 'fuck'. In a 12A movie.

This is the issue I had with DH4 and it looks like it has been repeated on this new one: Willis' character just doesn't seem to be John McClane any more. He's become some Generic Action Hero (TM). No wise-cracking and no real peril, just a grumpy old man with a gun.

Incidentally, I saw this on Twitter the other week which kind of takes the edge of some of the disappointment in the direction of the series: Why �Unbreakable� is the Secret Meta Sequel to �Die Hard� (click). It basically offers a theory as to why JC seemingly can't be killed now...

< Message edited by FoximusPrime -- 12/2/2013 9:35:27 AM >

(in reply to AxlReznor)

Post #: 120