DS Forums

 
 

Reclassifying Films


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10-09-2010, 20:30
snotrageater
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 635
Nope it didn't. 30 Days Of Night (which was released just three years ago) was upgraded from 15 at the cinema to 18 when it was released on DVD.
Perhaps I should have said "routine or frequent upgrading" .
It was quite often when Ferman was there - but it's not been since he left.
Often the cinema release will be submitted as a cut version for the lower rating , so just because the BBFC say "This film was passed with no cuts made" does not mean it was uncut as cuts made prior to sumission are not taken into account.
Home video versions , especially in the US are likely to be a complete unrated version whereas the cinema version is cut to gain a lower rating

Die Hard 2 was originally released on VHS pan and scan only, and heavily butchered with a 15, with an uncut 18 rated widescreen version on VHS which followed later. I think the DVD/Bluray versions of Die Hard 2 have always been uncut with an 18.
Die Hard 2 also appeared on UK Laserdisc with the 18 rating and ice in the eye scene intact.

Die Hard 2 is uncut on dvd and Bluray in the UK .
Should Die Hard 3 ever appear on Bluray in the UK whether it's cut would be questionable.

And Die Hard 4 on Bluray is cut but not by the BBFC- its the studios theatrical version .
The stronger R version was part of a 2 disc dvd but remains unavailable on Bluray although suspicions abound about a forthcoming Australian Bluray re-release of the film .
My Australian Bluray boxset has the same DH4 as the UK Bluray
snotrageater is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 10-09-2010, 22:02
JCR
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland, UK
Posts: 16,707
30 Days Of Night was passed uncut for cinema and DVD release. The second time the BBFC watched it (for DVD release) they thought it was more appropriate at 18 rather than 15. I've never seen it so I can't say what rating I agree with.
18 is the more appropriate rating in my 'umble opinion.
JCR is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 17-09-2010, 00:42
JCR
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland, UK
Posts: 16,707
Guillermo Del Toro's film Cronos was downgraded from 18 to 15 yesterday, some what surprised at that, it's quite nasty IIRC.
JCR is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 08-08-2014, 01:43
JCR
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland, UK
Posts: 16,707
Are older films being resubmitted to the BBFC when they are released on DVD?

The reason I ask this is because the original Terminator, on VHS, was rated 18. I have yet to see an 18 rated version on DVD.

Apocalypse Now is another curious one.
I have the Redux version, which is 194 Minutes, and therefore I assume "Uncut", and is rated 15.
There is also the normal version, running for 153 Minutes and rated 18.

I also had on VHS, 18 rated versions of Terminator 2 and Die Hard 2, neither of which have ever shown up on DVD.

I'm not an anally retentive person who worries about this sort of thing, I'm just curious. I'm just a film buff who likes to see full films, not cut down versions.
The bbfc have just put an article online saying the examiners who first saw The Terminator wrote a report saying it should be 15, and then were overruled by James Ferman. Pretty much the moment Ferman left the bbfc it was down graded to 15.

http://www.bbfc.co.uk/sites/default/...Terminator.pdf
JCR is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2014, 22:14
Trevor_C7
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 173
The idiot Ferman and the BBC were jointly responsible for whipping up the media and the public in to a self serving frenzy over quite a few films. Without Ferman, there would never have been any "video nasties", simply because those films were never "nasty" in the first place, but it suited his and the BBC's agenda.

Anyone here old enough to remember the stink when the BBC first aired The Terminator in about 1989, well past 10pm, gave an extended warning about "graphic violence", and still cut at least 5 minutes from it? All from a film the BFFC examiners wanted to give a 15 because they thought the film, albeit for somewhat humourous reasons, had an important message for teenagers.

Despite him falling off his perch after he'd left the BBFC, Ferman did cinema and film watchers in the UK a huge favour by dying.
Trevor_C7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2014, 00:18
Kodaz
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,006
Stupid. I remember trying to buy it on VHS in a shop and being questioned (even though I was 19 at the time) on my age. I had a debate with the staff member that it was ridiculous them questioning my age when I was clearly well over 15, and had already *legally* seen the exact same film twice at the cinema.

That's the bonkers part of upgrading ratings for DVD releases.
The fact you were over 15 is irrelevant here, the video was rated 18. I'm pretty sure that wasn't their choice, and the assistant certainly had no power to bend or change the rules and decisions that made it so, regardless of whether or not it made sense.

And why are you surprised at being asked your age? 19 is barely above the age limit, and if you can find someone who can 100% reliably determine 16 and 17-year olds from 18, 19 and even 20-year olds every time just by looking... it's news to me. That's why pubs have the "under 25" rule.

When you say you had a "debate", it's unclear whether this was an intellectual discussion about how stupid the situation was (with which they may well have agreed while not being able to do anything about it) or whether you were complaining that they weren't bending or ignoring rules that they didn't make and were required to follow.
Kodaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2014, 00:36
rfonzo
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,640
I remember the old days where films that were classified as 12 at the cinema would go to 15 when they were released on VHS as they did not have 12 as a certification.
rfonzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2014, 02:03
Matt D
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 13,064
Seeing this thread bumped has reminded me of T2 on VHS.


IIRC...


When the extended cut of T2 was released on VHS, some of the original footage had to be cut for it to maintain a 15 certificate. Keeping the original footage plus adding the extra footage would have made it worthy (according the the BBFC) of being an 18, but at that time the BBFC would not allow a film to have more than one certificate for different versions.
Matt D is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2014, 18:49
stripedcat
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,719
I remember the old days where films that were classified as 12 at the cinema would go to 15 when they were released on VHS as they did not have 12 as a certification.
Yep - I remember that as well. Although, sometimes the film got cut and re-rated a PG for video release.

It's good that Ferman has gone from the BBFC - they seem a lot more sensible nowadays. It seems a lot harder to get an 18 nowadays.

Recently, some films that have had a cinematic re-release have been had their ratings changed. I am thinking of Jaws and Ghostbusters. I think that is probably right - as especially with Jaws - that was a very strong film for a PG! With Ghostbusters - I really knew it from the TV version, and when I watched it on DVD - whooah - that is one sweary film!
stripedcat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2014, 00:33
Callum_Brown
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 644
The Incredibles (2004) was recently declassified from a PG to U if anyone cares.
Callum_Brown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2014, 00:51
CLL Dodge
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: The Green Hills of Earth
Posts: 80,419
The Incredibles (2004) was recently declassified from a PG to U if anyone cares.
Think it was only a PG in the USA. The BBFC have only ever rated it U and uncut
CLL Dodge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-08-2014, 09:04
Nattie01
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,113
I recently bought The Towering Inferno on DVD and that was a 15. Yet I am sure I first saw it at the cinema when I was about 4
Nattie01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-08-2014, 10:05
pad_ehh
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 13,766
Think it was only a PG in the USA. The BBFC have only ever rated it U and uncut
Strange, I could have swore the DVD I have of it has a PG certificate on the front.

Pixar's 'PG' List is Toy Story, Cars and Brave. The rest are all U's.
pad_ehh is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 13-08-2014, 10:18
Fowl Fax
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,680
The rating systems have always been a bit off. Jurassic Park PG, that scene where the guy gets eaten when he in on the toilet, if I had seen that as a child I'm pretty sure I would have shat myself. Jaws is another movie that should have had a higher rating.

And what was the deal with slapping an 18 certificate on nearly every asian kung fu movie and cutting out all Nunchaku scenes because a few people were accidently hitting themselves with them.
Fowl Fax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-08-2014, 15:00
roger_50
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,411
Surprised they downgraded Last of the Mohicans from a 15 to a 12 certificate recently. It's full of gore, exit-wounds and blood.

The part at the end where Mugua gets that huge axe buried in his abdomen and you see a close up shot of it exiting through his spine and out his back. Wow...

Occasionally, I wonder if the BBFC try a little too hard to desperately alter every classification - when the original rating was actually perfectly fine. I know they say they have to re-rate each re-release, but it's like they're making up work for themselves or something.
roger_50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-08-2014, 21:24
stripedcat
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,719
Surprised they downgraded Last of the Mohicans from a 15 to a 12 certificate recently. It's full of gore, exit-wounds and blood.

The part at the end where Mugua gets that huge axe buried in his abdomen and you see a close up shot of it exiting through his spine and out his back. Wow...

Occasionally, I wonder if the BBFC try a little too hard to desperately alter every classification - when the original rating was actually perfectly fine. I know they say they have to re-rate each re-release, but it's like they're making up work for themselves or something.
Ahhh - well, the film was originally a 12 in the cinema - in the era when there was no 12 for video releases(only a cut PG or 15) - as I mentioned above in a previous posting.
stripedcat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-08-2014, 21:41
roger_50
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,411
I'm aware of that.

But I'm still surprised the DVD/Bluray was downgraded from a 15 to a 12, for the reasons specified.
roger_50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-08-2014, 00:37
CLL Dodge
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: The Green Hills of Earth
Posts: 80,419
30 Days Of Night was passed uncut for cinema and DVD release. The second time the BBFC watched it (for DVD release) they thought it was more appropriate at 18 rather than 15. I've never seen it so I can't say what rating I agree with.
18 is the more appropriate rating in my 'umble opinion.
BBFC explanation: "The Board did receive letters questioning the rating, and when the work came in for DVD release it was reconsidered and the rating raised to '18'."

That will encourage others to complain about all sorts of stuff.
CLL Dodge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-08-2014, 00:47
CLL Dodge
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: The Green Hills of Earth
Posts: 80,419
I recently bought The Towering Inferno on DVD and that was a 15. Yet I am sure I first saw it at the cinema when I was about 4
It was released theatrically (in 1974) as an A certificate (equivalent to a PG, i.e. "Those aged 5 and older admitted, but not recommended for children under 14 years of age").

Then on video as a 15 (1986 & 1999).
CLL Dodge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-08-2014, 11:12
Grabid Rannies
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,456
Having recently bought the DVD of Elvira, Mistress of the Dark, it struck me that it really should have been downgraded from 15 to 12. True, Elvira's appearance and behaviour are overtly sexualised, and she barely passes a sentence that doesn't contain some (quite crude) innuendo. But the former is comically over the top as opposed to erotic, and as for the latter, you hear (to say nothing of see) worse in some of the Carry On films. There's very little actual swearing (besides one 'visual' f-word, in a hilarious sight gag ), and the horror content is similarly comical and notably gore-free. I don't agree that it's less appropriate for 12 year olds to hear sexually-themed puns - many of which might go over their heads anyway - than to see actual nudity and sex eg Titanic and so forth.
Grabid Rannies is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-08-2014, 04:48
JCR
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland, UK
Posts: 16,707
Aliens was downgraded to 15 by the bbfc yesterday for cinema. Has always been 18 up to this point.
JCR is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 28-08-2014, 10:42
CLL Dodge
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: The Green Hills of Earth
Posts: 80,419
Aliens was downgraded to 15 by the bbfc yesterday for cinema. Has always been 18 up to this point.
That's actually the first time that the extended Director's cut has been certified for cinema screenings.

There's a re-issue coming.
CLL Dodge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-02-2015, 17:02
giratalkialga
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 238

At some point last month, Alien got re-rated on Blinkbox and iTunes from an 18 to a 15 (for both the director's cut and theatrical cut).
There was a commentary track which carried an '18' rating which bumped the rating up on the DVD and Blu-Ray; otherwise they would've been rated '15' (both the theatrical and director's cuts got a '15' rating all the way back in 2003). That must be why the digital release is a '15'; it doesn't contain the commentary tracks.
giratalkialga is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-02-2015, 17:11
giratalkialga
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 238
AFAIK, YouTube Movies is the only movie purchase site which carries the correct rating for Aliens and Alien3 (the former re-rated 15 in 2010, with the latter re-rated 15 in 2003).

Aliens: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anWz...ture=c4-search
Alien3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7_V...ture=c4-search

Alien carries a 15, while Alien Resurrection carries an 18 (the only film of the anthology which is still rated 18).
giratalkialga is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21-02-2015, 20:05
Irma Bunt
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,813
James Ferman's doing, no doubt. That man was an real moron.
Agreed. One of his most bonkers decision was to award Licence To Kill a 15 certificate - the same as the far more violent Lethal Weapon 2 at the same time.
Irma Bunt is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 22:01.