This is a good point. I remember being appalled that someone I knew let his kids, who weren't even in their teens, watch "Rawhead Rex" and didn't think he was doing anything wrong.
It's a tragic flaw in the British judicial system that it's not (yet) illegal to be stupid.
Exactly. It's ok for people to say that it's the parents responsibilty what their children watch but you can never watch what your children are doing 100% of the time.
I wonder if these people have ever heard of peer pressure.
My daughter occationally goes to sleepovers at her friends houses, I have no idea or control of what she watches or does when she is at a sleep over. I can only hope and assume that her parents are of the same mind as me.
She would never tell me because she knows I would go balistic at the parents.
Of course not every person who watches horror films at an early age turns into an axe wheelding homicidal maniac but there have been quite a few crimes where the perpitrator has been heavily influenced by quite hardcore horror films.
Of course horror films should not be banned but I do think ones like the human centipede should be. There's horror films and there's horror films.
It's a sad world when some people have to watch stuff like that to get their kicks.
Strangely enough it was Ferman who passed DW uncut at the cinema.
And both DW and LHOTL remained cut or banned on home video many years after Ferman was long gone.
IIRC LHOTL was only passed uncut 2008/09, nearly a full decade after we bought the US dvd
IIRC they showed Last House to a representative sample of the British public in the early 2000's, who wanted it to be cut.
I justify my decision because I think that masturbation using sandpaper and penetrative sex using barbed wire is disgusting... Thats why I agree with the BBFC's decision
The citizens of the UK can make their own decisions but at the end of the day the BBFC classify films. Thats what they are there for. I don't tend to argue with them because I don't tend to think about them. I focus on other things in my life but after reading why they banned it, I had to agree with the decision
OK fair enough so far.
There are many films where a description of the content could sound disgusting but they don't get banned.
You've still not really said why you think British people need a state board to tell us what we can watch but other countries don't.
Why must the decision be taken away from us?
Why not be like other countries where the content and opinion of the board would be clearly noted - as in the US - but ultimately it is the persons right to make their own decision armed with all the info.
You have the info and you don't want to see it - fair enough.
Why should others not have the choice?
Sadly, when we have the likes of The Daily mail readers, mediawatch, mumsnet, denise fergus and serial complainers, you sometimes wonder!
You are aware that Denise Fergus' son, James Bulger was only a toddler when he was tortured and murdered by Thompson and Venables who were heavily influenced by the Childsplay films or are you just being ignorant and looking for a reaction?
You are aware that Denise Fergus' son, James Bulger was only a toddler when he was tortured and murdered by Thompson and Venables who were heavily influenced by the Childsplay films or are you just being ignorant and looking for a reaction?
There's no hard evidence they ever saw Child's Play 3.
Blaming violent films for that is just a way to try to explain the unexplainable.
The US has a film classification board for a start. I think Julie's point is a fair reason to have a board that censors stuff like Human Centipede because there is always that risk that some innocent minds could see it. I saw A Nightmare on Elm Street when I was 5 at a friend's house. My parents never found out until a few years later as they would have gone mental. I have seen many of the classics but I am the sort of person that prefers to be scared rather than disgusted. Obviously by my example the material can still be seen by the wrong people but that is down to the adults in charge. I just think that the BBFC helps with those sort of circumstances. We are not the only country to have a film classification board and I would assume that if a film is refused/not given a rating in the states then it too is essentially banned?
You are aware that Denise Fergus' son, James Bulger was only a toddler when he was tortured and murdered by Thompson and Venables who were heavily influenced by the Childsplay films or are you just being ignorant and looking for a reaction?
Funny you should use the word "ignorant".
There has never been any evidence whatsoever that showed that either of them saw any of the Childs Play films.
In fact the Judge who mentioned it during the trial was lambasted from all quarters for spouting such drivel
While like I said the bbfc are between a rock and a hard place, and I'm not sure the likes of HC2 is worth upsetting the Tory party apple cart over.
As we had with porn 11 years ago its time for the OPA to be challenged with non porn content.
Someone somewhere has to make a stand for our freedom.
We pay billions to Europe and we have to obey all the shit laws and other rubbish they force on us yet the one thing that would move the UK into the 21st century like most of the rest of Europe is conveniently left behind
Getting off topic but I can't believe anybody who wasn't already set to commit some horrible act of violence would be influenced by a Child's Play movie, which were very much aimed towards the young teen end of the horror market. That's if they saw the film.
When I was that age I'd seen the early movies from franchises such as Elm Street, Friday the 13th, Halloween, Child's Play, The Fly, Alien, Psycho etc. Most were considered quite a push forward in mainstream horror, but pale in comparison to modern horror filcks. I remember most other pre teens watching them too, and I don't know any murderers.
Exactly. It's ok for people to say that it's the parents responsibilty what their children watch but you can never watch what your children are doing 100% of the time.
I wonder if these people have ever heard of peer pressure.
My daughter occationally goes to sleepovers at her friends houses, I have no idea or control of what she watches or does when she is at a sleep over. I can only hope and assume that her parents are of the same mind as me.
She would never tell me because she knows I would go balistic at the parents.
Of course not every person who watches horror films at an early age turns into an axe wheelding homicidal maniac but there have been quite a few crimes where the perpitrator has been heavily influenced by quite hardcore horror films.
Of course horror films should not be banned but I do think ones like the human centipede should be. There's horror films and there's horror films.
It's a sad world when some people have to watch stuff like that to get their kicks.
You cant go around banning thing just because a child might see something that might not a appropriate for them.
And likewise for suggesting that some people are influenced by video nasties, someone could watch corrie and go an bury someone under a knicker factory floor, should that be taken off the air just in case some nut sees it and is "inspired" to do the same.
Getting off topic but I can't believe anybody who wasn't already set to commit some horrible act of violence would be influenced by a Child's Play movie, which were very much aimed towards the young teen end of the horror market. That's if they saw the film.
When I was that age I'd seen the early movies from franchises such as Elm Street, Friday the 13th, Halloween, Child's Play, The Fly, Alien, Psycho etc. Most were considered quite a push forward in mainstream horror, but pale in comparison to modern horror filcks. I remember most other pre teens watching them too, and I don't know any murderers.
Please tell me you were as bored as me watching Elm street? Its was quite fitting the film revolved around sleep
Getting off topic but I can't believe anybody who wasn't already set to commit some horrible act of violence would be influenced by a Child's Play movie, which were very much aimed towards the young teen end of the horror market. That's if they saw the film.
When I was that age I'd seen the early movies from franchises such as Elm Street, Friday the 13th, Halloween, Child's Play, The Fly, Alien, Psycho etc. Most were considered quite a push forward in mainstream horror, but pale in comparison to modern horror filcks. I remember most other pre teens watching them too, and I don't know any murderers.
I think its fair to say that any horror films will always pale in comparison to what comes 20 years later.
Psycho was considered shocking at the time - its a 15 now.
Some X films of the 50's are now U or PG.
All the Friday the 13th films were cut in the US.
Alien was cut in the UK on its tv broadcast.
You know what mllfap, I am sick of your attitude, your rudeness and your insults. You are pathetic. YES I agree with the BBFC's decision to ban the film... NO IT DOES NOT mean I support a nanny state and NO IT DOES NOT mean I regard the general public as unintelligent and unable to make the decision for themselves. I am allowed my opinion just like you are but you have no right to tell me that I am wrong because you believe otherwise. What is my theory? That we are becoming more desensitised? Well we are really when you look at what would be banned years ago is now more readily available and worse material is in circulation. It's not a theory, it's an observation. I am not saying that all horror films make people crazy. I am just saying that I think they were right with their decision... I am sorry if not wanting to see a film that has graphic scenes like that makes me in the minority... I shouldn't be made to feel like I am wrong because of it and yes I don't have to watch it but it doesn't mean I can't agree with the BBFC
I agree with you, having seen some of the first film, it is prob crap anyway, I won't waste anytime worrying about not being able to see it.
You cant go around banning thing just because a child might see something that might not a appropriate for them.
Believe it or not - one campaigner tried to do exactly that in the UK some years ago.
Can't recall the specifics but basically anything over a PG would be banned on home video.
Personally I'd rather meet a video nasties fan in a dark alley over any nutter who seriously believes in such a deluded policy
Please tell me you were as bored as me watching Elm street? Its was quite fitting the film revolved around sleep
:D
The first quarter of the movie is the closest a film has come to scaring me! But I was quite young. Then it fell apart and really shows its age now. Even at the time I thought the sequel was odd, which I now see is one of the most unintentionally homosexual horrors of all time.
But on topic, I think it's mad that the BBFC can ban a film. They can rate it, fair enough, rate it ''Do Not Watch'' if they want, but if someone wants to see it they should be allowed.
Comments
Exactly. It's ok for people to say that it's the parents responsibilty what their children watch but you can never watch what your children are doing 100% of the time.
I wonder if these people have ever heard of peer pressure.
My daughter occationally goes to sleepovers at her friends houses, I have no idea or control of what she watches or does when she is at a sleep over. I can only hope and assume that her parents are of the same mind as me.
She would never tell me because she knows I would go balistic at the parents.
Of course not every person who watches horror films at an early age turns into an axe wheelding homicidal maniac but there have been quite a few crimes where the perpitrator has been heavily influenced by quite hardcore horror films.
Of course horror films should not be banned but I do think ones like the human centipede should be. There's horror films and there's horror films.
It's a sad world when some people have to watch stuff like that to get their kicks.
IIRC they showed Last House to a representative sample of the British public in the early 2000's, who wanted it to be cut.
Wasn't that democracy in action?
OK fair enough so far.
There are many films where a description of the content could sound disgusting but they don't get banned.
You've still not really said why you think British people need a state board to tell us what we can watch but other countries don't.
Why must the decision be taken away from us?
Why not be like other countries where the content and opinion of the board would be clearly noted - as in the US - but ultimately it is the persons right to make their own decision armed with all the info.
You have the info and you don't want to see it - fair enough.
Why should others not have the choice?
You are aware that Denise Fergus' son, James Bulger was only a toddler when he was tortured and murdered by Thompson and Venables who were heavily influenced by the Childsplay films or are you just being ignorant and looking for a reaction?
"Representative sample of the British Public"?
You're having a laugh aren't you?
IIRC the film was passed with cuts and when it went to the Video Appeals committe they actually decided to add further cuts.
I would say that finding a "representative sample of the UK public" was nigh on impossible.
This is the sort of reasoning they used to ban Video Nasties
There's no hard evidence they ever saw Child's Play 3.
Blaming violent films for that is just a way to try to explain the unexplainable.
Well that was all Mark Kermode's fault.
The distributors should have got Kim Newman to do the arguing.
Funny you should use the word "ignorant".
There has never been any evidence whatsoever that showed that either of them saw any of the Childs Play films.
In fact the Judge who mentioned it during the trial was lambasted from all quarters for spouting such drivel
You beat me to it .
You're playing devils advocate here - I didn't realise:)
While like I said the bbfc are between a rock and a hard place, and I'm not sure the likes of HC2 is worth upsetting the Tory party apple cart over.
But their board has no powers to ban films.
Their classifications are not compulsory .
And films can be shown unrated.
They classify films pointing out content that needs highlighting with advice to parents and viewers.
Nobody disagrees with that .
As we had with porn 11 years ago its time for the OPA to be challenged with non porn content.
Someone somewhere has to make a stand for our freedom.
We pay billions to Europe and we have to obey all the shit laws and other rubbish they force on us yet the one thing that would move the UK into the 21st century like most of the rest of Europe is conveniently left behind
When I was that age I'd seen the early movies from franchises such as Elm Street, Friday the 13th, Halloween, Child's Play, The Fly, Alien, Psycho etc. Most were considered quite a push forward in mainstream horror, but pale in comparison to modern horror filcks. I remember most other pre teens watching them too, and I don't know any murderers.
You cant go around banning thing just because a child might see something that might not a appropriate for them.
And likewise for suggesting that some people are influenced by video nasties, someone could watch corrie and go an bury someone under a knicker factory floor, should that be taken off the air just in case some nut sees it and is "inspired" to do the same.
You cant blame film and tv for societies problems
Please tell me you were as bored as me watching Elm street? Its was quite fitting the film revolved around sleep
For the same reason any other film is released.
I think its fair to say that any horror films will always pale in comparison to what comes 20 years later.
Psycho was considered shocking at the time - its a 15 now.
Some X films of the 50's are now U or PG.
All the Friday the 13th films were cut in the US.
Alien was cut in the UK on its tv broadcast.
I agree with you, having seen some of the first film, it is prob crap anyway, I won't waste anytime worrying about not being able to see it.
Believe it or not - one campaigner tried to do exactly that in the UK some years ago.
Can't recall the specifics but basically anything over a PG would be banned on home video.
Personally I'd rather meet a video nasties fan in a dark alley over any nutter who seriously believes in such a deluded policy
The first quarter of the movie is the closest a film has come to scaring me! But I was quite young. Then it fell apart and really shows its age now. Even at the time I thought the sequel was odd, which I now see is one of the most unintentionally homosexual horrors of all time.
What were your favs back then?
As with video nasties , its not what you can't see its why you can't see them.
Who gives a shit about some sensationalist OTT piece of crap?
But I want to decide that for myself not have some Government appointed busybody telling me .
The fact we can import with simplicity does not change the matter.
I loved the first one, can't wait for this one.
But on topic, I think it's mad that the BBFC can ban a film. They can rate it, fair enough, rate it ''Do Not Watch'' if they want, but if someone wants to see it they should be allowed.
I'll downloading it anyway.