BBFC bans a violent DVD

I thought hostel 2 was pretty gruelsome, I wonder if they will ban that as well.

I also finally watched Rambo tonight & loved every
limb blowing
moment :D.

But yeh I agree with what others say on here, the film will no doubt become a cult classic & if people are sick enough to want to see it then they will find a way.

Either by obtaining a copy via the usual suspects or by purchasing a region 1 version from a company across the pond which they are legally allowed to do & most people have multi region dvd players now or players that can be hacked with a simple remote code to become multi region.
 
Yes and clearly whilst our moral superiors at the BBFC are happy to show their mates any graphic material, they couldn't possibly let the public at large view it :rolleyes:
 
Their job should be to classify, not censor, but they are bound by a century of often daft legislation.

They do themselves no favours by being so fastidious. e.g. "The Knights of the Teutonic Order" was passed uncut in 1961 but in 2006 was deemed unacceptable in any category without 27 seconRAB of cuts. You can see it uncut everywhere else in the world.
 
Cuts required to instances of horses being tripped to fall forwarRAB, to obtain a 'PG' in accordance with BBFC Guidelines and policy on animal cruelty. - how the cuts are explained by the BBFC.
 
ReminRAB me of something that was cut in the UK to get a PG (otherwise it was a 15 I think) but it's been shown on Cartoon Network in the US, probably uncut. That films classification page is here. Seems like it was cut even more on it's DVD release, here (it's got more cut, and movies are shorter on DVD anyway because of the film transfers).

Also, the BBFC page on the movie this thread is about is here. I actually was looking though the recent BBFC ratings, and that's where I saw it first.
 
That's what one person who interviewed it said. Ha Ha.

I've seen clips and it looks utter rubbish and will not be wasting my time watching it. It's from the guy who made Nutbag/Nutjob(can't remember title), so what do you expect.

Is there anymore official stuff on the thing about the children put in harms way during filming? can someone go into that if it's true. That's the only thing that could ban it imo, if no one was hurt/consent stuff/everyone who took part happy with it, then I see no reason to ban it.
 
The problem with the BBFC using spurious logic that children may have been harmed during the production of the film (which is highly unlikely), is it requires them to use subjective judgement to interpret the law, rather than, as it should be, left to the decision of real judges in an open court.
 
I take your point, but surely the most common reason for making cuts is to increase revenue for the distributors by making the film available to a wider audience? Therefore there is no incentive for distributors to fight a BBFC decision in court unless they can expect their income to increase significantly as a result.
 
i've just watched the first half an hour of the film and it's the most tediously boring pile of drivel i've ever seen.

i think, personally, that the reason it's been banned is that it doesn't really present any kind of dramatic story.

it's simply about a neo-nazi serial killer who hates women and kills lots of them.

there's nothing yet to indicate that there will be any kind of retribution or justice for what the character is doing, so I would say that the fact the film just depicts women being killed and nothing else is probably what got it banned.

i've seen gorier and more violent films over the years, so I think the overall tone is probably what did for it.
 
Back
Top