Drooch
Posts: 129
Joined: 31/5/2006
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: peter
quote:
ORIGINAL: Discodez
quote:
ORIGINAL: peter
quote:
ORIGINAL: Discodez
quote:
ORIGINAL: Drooch
Point two: If you are not disputing this is how the BBFC works then what are you actually saying? why are you so against the BBFC and how come you agreed so wholeheartedly with "peter" above (by the way, i think he was taking the piss out of you, not agreeing with you, have a read again), or was this a sarcastic double bluff?
To clarify, it's between the two. I diagree with Drooch, but wasn't trying to take the piss. Was hoping that to discuss the opinion a bit more might make its flaws apparent, which i think was partly done through the fact that no-one could come up with a preferred 'third' alternative.
What's wrong with the way things are though Peter? I really don't see what the problem is. There are virtually no films banned these days and films that are edited are either edited by direction of the BBFC because they breach rules on violence or violent sexual content (and these rules are changed every few years on line with public opinion) or the studio does it to make the most money they can.
As to the question of whether one agrees with censorship or not is another discussion entirely (for the record I think it's moot, as in this day and age you can get any film you want anyway with a bit of shopping around).
Oh, I don't think there's anything wrong with the way things are at all. Like I say, I disagree with Drooch, but hoped that taking his arguments further down the line might give new ways to discuss the issue rather than the same points circling around.
My argument is that I don't see any sort of system where the BBFC can prevent a studio making cuts to its own property, which I think was one of the things Drooch was saying they should be doing.
The solution is for the BBFC to adopt the same system that equivalent countries employ, which doesn't result in their cinemas being littered with censored films.
Exactly how that is achieved needs to be researched, but my strong suspicion is that those countries simply don't offer that 'cuts advice service' so the studio don't bother asking. They hand in the film and accept whatever the board of that country decides. Once you dangle the possibility of increased profits, with a cuts advice service, to a greedy studio guess what happens...
If the BBFC stopped this service and made freedom of expression a principle to be upheld, as they claim they do already, then censored films would start to evaporate from our screens. The studio wouldn't waste time and money fiddling their films to achieve a rating if they didn't know exactly what needed to be cut to get that juicy 12A, it would be too costly a gamble with a release date looming.
While the UK market is a significant one, it's relatively tiny compared to other countries that enjoy uncensored material, it's not worth the studio's effort and time tweaking a separate version for the little UK unless they know it'll pay off. The BBFC should deny them that knowledge and just concern themselves with being classifiers, as their equivalent bodies in other countries do.
|
Printable Version
RE: RE: - 
... did I mention that this was 15A in Ireland?
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