The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
In the last few weeks I have seen a few films that are currently banned in the UK. As most people know, the BBFC is far more draconian and strict than the ratings boards of other countries, so I thought I would comment on what I think it is that has caused these films to fall foul of the BBFC and to be refused a certificate.
Firstly, I have to say that I am totally against censorship as it currently exists in this country. Giving certificates to films makes perfect sense (we've got to protect our kiddies!) but I can see no good reason for censoring films for adults. Obviously if a film's makers have broken the law in order to make a film (by abusing non-concenting adults, children or animals) then they should be prosecuted and the film should not be released. But I don't believe that any film that does not break these laws should be censored. It is insulting to suggest that adults are going to be corrupted by a bit of hardcore sex or gore make-up. It is debatable as to whether films can have a corrupting effect on children (I really don't believe that James Bulger's killers commited murder as a result of seeing Child's Play 3) but even if they are harmful there is no reason that they can't be sold to adults. Like knives, razor blades, guns (for sports), alcohol, matches and pornographic magazines, it is up to adults to keep unsuitable films away from their children.
Anyway, the banned films that I have recently seen (all on imported DVD) are Maniac, Straw Dogs and Deadbeat at Dawn.
Maniac (1980)
Maniac is an almost plotless film about a deranged pervert who struggles with his lust for violent murder. The film was banned in the UK due to the relentless violence (which includes slit throats, scalping, stabbing, decapitation and brains being blown out). Make up effects were done by the excellent Tom Savini (Dawn of the Dead, From Dust Till Dawn, etc) so they are very realistic. Unlike films such as Braindead, Maniac is not played for laughs -this is a gritty and sadistic film that graphically depicts realistic killings.
The charge that is most often made about Maniac is that it is entirely mysoginistic and 'promotes violence towards women'. I would argue that this is not the case at all. It is a fact that most serial killers are men who prey on women. It is therefore to be expected that most film serial killers are men who prey on women. Whilst the violence is exceedingly grisly and depraved, and is shown in full, close-up detail, it is never treated lightly. The viewer is not asked to relish the killings (or to side with the killer as in Friday the 13th) but is a passive witness to the brutal events.
I'm not going to pretend that Maniac is a wonderful film -because it isn't. It's 'raison d'etre' is to show graphic, unflinching violence, without which the film would be nothing. But to dismiss it as mysoginistic trash is, in my opinion, wrong. Maniac is a study in violence, and in the kind of person that would commit such hideous crimes.
As for the make-up effects, I think they are entirely justified. WHEN YOU ARE STABBED YOU BLEED. If you are squeemish about these kind of things then don't watch a film about a serial killer called Maniac!
Straw Dogs (1971)
An American mathmatician and his wife move into a house outside an isolated English village. They soon start to have problems with the locals who break into their home and try to run them off the road. The film ends with a prolonged confrontation that results in numerous deaths.
Straw Dogs is banned in the UK due to a rape scene that was deemed unacceptable. The distributors are unable to release the film with the scene cut because it is a pivotal moment in the narrative. The BBFC have two problems with this scene. Firstly, it contains female nudity that the audience may find titillating. Secondly, and more problematically, the woman is shown to eventually enjoy the rape (ie. a rapists fantasy).
I agree with the BBFC that this scene is morally dubious. Whilst nudity in a rape situation is inevitable, I felt that the film makers were aiming to titillate. No male nudity is shown (presumably because the predominantly male audience would not like it) whereas there is plenty of female nudity. I also felt that the way that the woman comes to enjoy the rape was insensitive and completly out of character.
However, I do not think that this scene, or the film as a whole should be banned. Any reasonably intelligent person can understand that this scene is insensitive and unrealistic, and even if someone did find it exciting, I don't believe that it would make them want to commit rape. Anyone who has any empathy for others will understand what a degrading and ugly crime rape is, and no film will change that.
Deadbead at Dawn (1988)
Deadbeat at Dawn is cult director Jim VanBebber's only released movie. The film is a simple story about a gang member who seeks revenge for the death of his girlfriend, who was murdered by a rival gang. The film is banned in the UK due to graphic violence, and in particular, the use of knives.
Despite the film's ultra low budget (it was filmed on 16mm with non-professional actors) many of the make up effects are very convincing. However, the BBFC's biggest concern was undoubtedly the frequent use of knives. Obviously a lot of films depict violence with knives but this is usually by psycopathic killers or by people who are defending themselves. The characters in Deadbeat at Dawn are just normal young men who continually fight with knives. I can picture the BBFC board members getting hot and bothered at the thought of adolescents running around parks stabbing each other with kitchen knives.
As I said before, there is a possibility that children may immitate film violence, but for a film like this that would clearly warrant an 18 certificate the use of knives should not result in a ban. It is very hard to imagine that adults would watch this film and feel compelled to raid the kitchen drawers and attack each other with knives! Like the other two films I have reviewed here, I believe that this film should recieve a release in the UK. It is an insult to the intelligence of the British public that films that contain violence, sex (including simulated rape) and gore should be censored or banned. It should be up to the audience to decide what they find morally wrong rather than the government.
Has anyone else seen any banned films that they could comment on? I would be interested to know whether others think films like these should be banned.
Firstly, I have to say that I am totally against censorship as it currently exists in this country. Giving certificates to films makes perfect sense (we've got to protect our kiddies!) but I can see no good reason for censoring films for adults. Obviously if a film's makers have broken the law in order to make a film (by abusing non-concenting adults, children or animals) then they should be prosecuted and the film should not be released. But I don't believe that any film that does not break these laws should be censored. It is insulting to suggest that adults are going to be corrupted by a bit of hardcore sex or gore make-up. It is debatable as to whether films can have a corrupting effect on children (I really don't believe that James Bulger's killers commited murder as a result of seeing Child's Play 3) but even if they are harmful there is no reason that they can't be sold to adults. Like knives, razor blades, guns (for sports), alcohol, matches and pornographic magazines, it is up to adults to keep unsuitable films away from their children.
Anyway, the banned films that I have recently seen (all on imported DVD) are Maniac, Straw Dogs and Deadbeat at Dawn.
Maniac (1980)
Maniac is an almost plotless film about a deranged pervert who struggles with his lust for violent murder. The film was banned in the UK due to the relentless violence (which includes slit throats, scalping, stabbing, decapitation and brains being blown out). Make up effects were done by the excellent Tom Savini (Dawn of the Dead, From Dust Till Dawn, etc) so they are very realistic. Unlike films such as Braindead, Maniac is not played for laughs -this is a gritty and sadistic film that graphically depicts realistic killings.
The charge that is most often made about Maniac is that it is entirely mysoginistic and 'promotes violence towards women'. I would argue that this is not the case at all. It is a fact that most serial killers are men who prey on women. It is therefore to be expected that most film serial killers are men who prey on women. Whilst the violence is exceedingly grisly and depraved, and is shown in full, close-up detail, it is never treated lightly. The viewer is not asked to relish the killings (or to side with the killer as in Friday the 13th) but is a passive witness to the brutal events.
I'm not going to pretend that Maniac is a wonderful film -because it isn't. It's 'raison d'etre' is to show graphic, unflinching violence, without which the film would be nothing. But to dismiss it as mysoginistic trash is, in my opinion, wrong. Maniac is a study in violence, and in the kind of person that would commit such hideous crimes.
As for the make-up effects, I think they are entirely justified. WHEN YOU ARE STABBED YOU BLEED. If you are squeemish about these kind of things then don't watch a film about a serial killer called Maniac!
Straw Dogs (1971)
An American mathmatician and his wife move into a house outside an isolated English village. They soon start to have problems with the locals who break into their home and try to run them off the road. The film ends with a prolonged confrontation that results in numerous deaths.
Straw Dogs is banned in the UK due to a rape scene that was deemed unacceptable. The distributors are unable to release the film with the scene cut because it is a pivotal moment in the narrative. The BBFC have two problems with this scene. Firstly, it contains female nudity that the audience may find titillating. Secondly, and more problematically, the woman is shown to eventually enjoy the rape (ie. a rapists fantasy).
I agree with the BBFC that this scene is morally dubious. Whilst nudity in a rape situation is inevitable, I felt that the film makers were aiming to titillate. No male nudity is shown (presumably because the predominantly male audience would not like it) whereas there is plenty of female nudity. I also felt that the way that the woman comes to enjoy the rape was insensitive and completly out of character.
However, I do not think that this scene, or the film as a whole should be banned. Any reasonably intelligent person can understand that this scene is insensitive and unrealistic, and even if someone did find it exciting, I don't believe that it would make them want to commit rape. Anyone who has any empathy for others will understand what a degrading and ugly crime rape is, and no film will change that.
Deadbead at Dawn (1988)
Deadbeat at Dawn is cult director Jim VanBebber's only released movie. The film is a simple story about a gang member who seeks revenge for the death of his girlfriend, who was murdered by a rival gang. The film is banned in the UK due to graphic violence, and in particular, the use of knives.
Despite the film's ultra low budget (it was filmed on 16mm with non-professional actors) many of the make up effects are very convincing. However, the BBFC's biggest concern was undoubtedly the frequent use of knives. Obviously a lot of films depict violence with knives but this is usually by psycopathic killers or by people who are defending themselves. The characters in Deadbeat at Dawn are just normal young men who continually fight with knives. I can picture the BBFC board members getting hot and bothered at the thought of adolescents running around parks stabbing each other with kitchen knives.
As I said before, there is a possibility that children may immitate film violence, but for a film like this that would clearly warrant an 18 certificate the use of knives should not result in a ban. It is very hard to imagine that adults would watch this film and feel compelled to raid the kitchen drawers and attack each other with knives! Like the other two films I have reviewed here, I believe that this film should recieve a release in the UK. It is an insult to the intelligence of the British public that films that contain violence, sex (including simulated rape) and gore should be censored or banned. It should be up to the audience to decide what they find morally wrong rather than the government.
Has anyone else seen any banned films that they could comment on? I would be interested to know whether others think films like these should be banned.
There have been no replies to this thread yet.
In the last few weeks I have seen a few films that are currently banned in the UK. As most people know, the BBFC is far more draconian and strict than the ratings boards of other countries, so I thought I would comment on what I think it is that has caused these films to fall foul of the BBFC and to be refused a certificate.
Firstly, I have to say that I am totally against censorship as it currently exists in this country. Giving certificates to films makes perfect sense (we've got to protect our kiddies!) but I can see no good reason for censoring films for adults. Obviously if a film's makers have broken the law in order to make a film (by abusing non-concenting adults, children or animals) then they should be prosecuted and the film should not be released. But I don't believe that any film that does not break these laws should be censored. It is insulting to suggest that adults are going to be corrupted by a bit of hardcore sex or gore make-up. It is debatable as to whether films can have a corrupting effect on children (I really don't believe that James Bulger's killers commited murder as a result of seeing Child's Play 3) but even if they are harmful there is no reason that they can't be sold to adults. Like knives, razor blades, guns (for sports), alcohol, matches and pornographic magazines, it is up to adults to keep unsuitable films away from their children.
Anyway, the banned films that I have recently seen (all on imported DVD) are Maniac, Straw Dogs and Deadbeat at Dawn.
Maniac (1980)
Maniac is an almost plotless film about a deranged pervert who struggles with his lust for violent murder. The film was banned in the UK due to the relentless violence (which includes slit throats, scalping, stabbing, decapitation and brains being blown out). Make up effects were done by the excellent Tom Savini (Dawn of the Dead, From Dust Till Dawn, etc) so they are very realistic. Unlike films such as Braindead, Maniac is not played for laughs -this is a gritty and sadistic film that graphically depicts realistic killings.
The charge that is most often made about Maniac is that it is entirely mysoginistic and 'promotes violence towards women'. I would argue that this is not the case at all. It is a fact that most serial killers are men who prey on women. It is therefore to be expected that most film serial killers are men who prey on women. Whilst the violence is exceedingly grisly and depraved, and is shown in full, close-up detail, it is never treated lightly. The viewer is not asked to relish the killings (or to side with the killer as in Friday the 13th) but is a passive witness to the brutal events.
I'm not going to pretend that Maniac is a wonderful film -because it isn't. It's 'raison d'etre' is to show graphic, unflinching violence, without which the film would be nothing. But to dismiss it as mysoginistic trash is, in my opinion, wrong. Maniac is a study in violence, and in the kind of person that would commit such hideous crimes.
As for the make-up effects, I think they are entirely justified. WHEN YOU ARE STABBED YOU BLEED. If you are squeemish about these kind of things then don't watch a film about a serial killer called Maniac!
Straw Dogs (1971)
An American mathmatician and his wife move into a house outside an isolated English village. They soon start to have problems with the locals who break into their home and try to run them off the road. The film ends with a prolonged confrontation that results in numerous deaths.
Straw Dogs is banned in the UK due to a rape scene that was deemed unacceptable. The distributors are unable to release the film with the scene cut because it is a pivotal moment in the narrative. The BBFC have two problems with this scene. Firstly, it contains female nudity that the audience may find titillating. Secondly, and more problematically, the woman is shown to eventually enjoy the rape (ie. a rapists fantasy).
I agree with the BBFC that this scene is morally dubious. Whilst nudity in a rape situation is inevitable, I felt that the film makers were aiming to titillate. No male nudity is shown (presumably because the predominantly male audience would not like it) whereas there is plenty of female nudity. I also felt that the way that the woman comes to enjoy the rape was insensitive and completly out of character.
However, I do not think that this scene, or the film as a whole should be banned. Any reasonably intelligent person can understand that this scene is insensitive and unrealistic, and even if someone did find it exciting, I don't believe that it would make them want to commit rape. Anyone who has any empathy for others will understand what a degrading and ugly crime rape is, and no film will change that.
Deadbead at Dawn (1988)
Deadbeat at Dawn is cult director Jim VanBebber's only released movie. The film is a simple story about a gang member who seeks revenge for the death of his girlfriend, who was murdered by a rival gang. The film is banned in the UK due to graphic violence, and in particular, the use of knives.
Despite the film's ultra low budget (it was filmed on 16mm with non-professional actors) many of the make up effects are very convincing. However, the BBFC's biggest concern was undoubtedly the frequent use of knives. Obviously a lot of films depict violence with knives but this is usually by psycopathic killers or by people who are defending themselves. The characters in Deadbeat at Dawn are just normal young men who continually fight with knives. I can picture the BBFC board members getting hot and bothered at the thought of adolescents running around parks stabbing each other with kitchen knives.
As I said before, there is a possibility that children may immitate film violence, but for a film like this that would clearly warrant an 18 certificate the use of knives should not result in a ban. It is very hard to imagine that adults would watch this film and feel compelled to raid the kitchen drawers and attack each other with knives! Like the other two films I have reviewed here, I believe that this film should recieve a release in the UK. It is an insult to the intelligence of the British public that films that contain violence, sex (including simulated rape) and gore should be censored or banned. It should be up to the audience to decide what they find morally wrong rather than the government.
Has anyone else seen any banned films that they could comment on? I would be interested to know whether others think films like these should be banned.
Firstly, I have to say that I am totally against censorship as it currently exists in this country. Giving certificates to films makes perfect sense (we've got to protect our kiddies!) but I can see no good reason for censoring films for adults. Obviously if a film's makers have broken the law in order to make a film (by abusing non-concenting adults, children or animals) then they should be prosecuted and the film should not be released. But I don't believe that any film that does not break these laws should be censored. It is insulting to suggest that adults are going to be corrupted by a bit of hardcore sex or gore make-up. It is debatable as to whether films can have a corrupting effect on children (I really don't believe that James Bulger's killers commited murder as a result of seeing Child's Play 3) but even if they are harmful there is no reason that they can't be sold to adults. Like knives, razor blades, guns (for sports), alcohol, matches and pornographic magazines, it is up to adults to keep unsuitable films away from their children.
Anyway, the banned films that I have recently seen (all on imported DVD) are Maniac, Straw Dogs and Deadbeat at Dawn.
Maniac (1980)
Maniac is an almost plotless film about a deranged pervert who struggles with his lust for violent murder. The film was banned in the UK due to the relentless violence (which includes slit throats, scalping, stabbing, decapitation and brains being blown out). Make up effects were done by the excellent Tom Savini (Dawn of the Dead, From Dust Till Dawn, etc) so they are very realistic. Unlike films such as Braindead, Maniac is not played for laughs -this is a gritty and sadistic film that graphically depicts realistic killings.
The charge that is most often made about Maniac is that it is entirely mysoginistic and 'promotes violence towards women'. I would argue that this is not the case at all. It is a fact that most serial killers are men who prey on women. It is therefore to be expected that most film serial killers are men who prey on women. Whilst the violence is exceedingly grisly and depraved, and is shown in full, close-up detail, it is never treated lightly. The viewer is not asked to relish the killings (or to side with the killer as in Friday the 13th) but is a passive witness to the brutal events.
I'm not going to pretend that Maniac is a wonderful film -because it isn't. It's 'raison d'etre' is to show graphic, unflinching violence, without which the film would be nothing. But to dismiss it as mysoginistic trash is, in my opinion, wrong. Maniac is a study in violence, and in the kind of person that would commit such hideous crimes.
As for the make-up effects, I think they are entirely justified. WHEN YOU ARE STABBED YOU BLEED. If you are squeemish about these kind of things then don't watch a film about a serial killer called Maniac!
Straw Dogs (1971)
An American mathmatician and his wife move into a house outside an isolated English village. They soon start to have problems with the locals who break into their home and try to run them off the road. The film ends with a prolonged confrontation that results in numerous deaths.
Straw Dogs is banned in the UK due to a rape scene that was deemed unacceptable. The distributors are unable to release the film with the scene cut because it is a pivotal moment in the narrative. The BBFC have two problems with this scene. Firstly, it contains female nudity that the audience may find titillating. Secondly, and more problematically, the woman is shown to eventually enjoy the rape (ie. a rapists fantasy).
I agree with the BBFC that this scene is morally dubious. Whilst nudity in a rape situation is inevitable, I felt that the film makers were aiming to titillate. No male nudity is shown (presumably because the predominantly male audience would not like it) whereas there is plenty of female nudity. I also felt that the way that the woman comes to enjoy the rape was insensitive and completly out of character.
However, I do not think that this scene, or the film as a whole should be banned. Any reasonably intelligent person can understand that this scene is insensitive and unrealistic, and even if someone did find it exciting, I don't believe that it would make them want to commit rape. Anyone who has any empathy for others will understand what a degrading and ugly crime rape is, and no film will change that.
Deadbead at Dawn (1988)
Deadbeat at Dawn is cult director Jim VanBebber's only released movie. The film is a simple story about a gang member who seeks revenge for the death of his girlfriend, who was murdered by a rival gang. The film is banned in the UK due to graphic violence, and in particular, the use of knives.
Despite the film's ultra low budget (it was filmed on 16mm with non-professional actors) many of the make up effects are very convincing. However, the BBFC's biggest concern was undoubtedly the frequent use of knives. Obviously a lot of films depict violence with knives but this is usually by psycopathic killers or by people who are defending themselves. The characters in Deadbeat at Dawn are just normal young men who continually fight with knives. I can picture the BBFC board members getting hot and bothered at the thought of adolescents running around parks stabbing each other with kitchen knives.
As I said before, there is a possibility that children may immitate film violence, but for a film like this that would clearly warrant an 18 certificate the use of knives should not result in a ban. It is very hard to imagine that adults would watch this film and feel compelled to raid the kitchen drawers and attack each other with knives! Like the other two films I have reviewed here, I believe that this film should recieve a release in the UK. It is an insult to the intelligence of the British public that films that contain violence, sex (including simulated rape) and gore should be censored or banned. It should be up to the audience to decide what they find morally wrong rather than the government.
Has anyone else seen any banned films that they could comment on? I would be interested to know whether others think films like these should be banned.