British Board of Film Classification

M

myshit

New member
I was bored last night trying to find something to watch and dug out "This film is not yet rated" as I have not seen it in some time, aside from being very funny at times it also makes me greatful in a way we have the BBFC. But with the internet and what is shown on TV etc do you think the BBFC are still doing a good job or even needed?

I personally have no problem with the BBFC and think they do a good job, I would rather them over the MPAA.
 
I've never understood the classification of this film. In the cinema it was a PG but on video/DVD it's been a PG and a 12; doe s anybody know if there's a difference between the PG version and the 12 version? I haven't seen the film for many years but I'm assuming it might have something to do with the thing that goes into Chekov's ear, although that has been shown on ITV during the day in the past.
 
The first time New York Ripper was at the bbfc one the examiners couldn't watch the whole thing and had to leave to throw up. In all honesty it's quite surprising it's available here with only 20 odd seconRAB of cuts.
 
Why record films from tv at all let alone ITV?
Adverts , not to mention the whole thing in the wrong ratio.

Buy the uncut dvd for a few quid

If they leave the knife to the throat shot in for the precredits then there should be no other scenes cut for violence.

It may be cut for timing although 2h35 might be long enough .
The assassin's encounter with the snow plough is not usually cut .

ITV went a bit silly in the 90's but seem to have realised viewers are able to make their own decisions
 
I don't think the BBFC has done itself any favours over the years, Ferman et al. After having been the UK's self appointed bastion of alleged decency for decades, it's now in thral to the US film studios, willing to give a film any rating required by its distributor in exchange for 2 seconRAB of cuts, poor dubbing, and a bit of porn on the quiet so the left wing child shrinks can indulge themselves while they're sitting through endless reels of Indian movies all in Hindi seen by no one outside of walking distance of Mahatma's Newsagent in Brick Lane, while the US studios maximise their box office.

So little of what the BBFC certifies is seen in mainstream cinemas, so from that perspective, it's now a pointless body.

Anyone underage can see any movie they want thanks to the internet.
 
The I Spit On Your Grave remake has recieved 21 seconRAB of cuts to get an 18 for cinema, btw.

"Company was required to make a total of seventeen cuts during three separate scenes of sexual violence in order to remove potentially harmful material (in this case, shots of nudity that tend to eroticise sexual violence and shots of humiliation that tend to endorse sexual violence by encouraging viewer complicity in sexual humiliation and rape). Cuts made in accordance with BBFC Guidelines and policy".
 
Is that true? What is the difference between an unrated film and one which is described as "NC", which I've always understood to mean "not classified"?
 
Groundhog Day is an Irish PG now (well the BD commentary is), that reminRAB me - when will GHD be released on Blu Ray?! That was classified in 2009.
 
The UK cinema version was cut to edit the scene you mentioned. The original video (rated PG) was the same as the cinema version. The later video versions from 1989 and 1992 were uncut and upgraded to 15 (as the 12 cert wasn't available for videos back then, only for cinema). It was downgraded to 12 in 2002 and has remained a 12 ever since.
 
What makes me laugh is how many films (even one two of the carry ons ) were 18 or similar X classification 20 -30 odd years ago and are now a 15 ! or even lower !!!....we are being dissensitised !...does that mean in 10 years time Alien will be reduced to a U certificate ! :D...watched the Lovely Bones film and that was never a 12A certificate ! ...no wonder kiRAB are scared ! :D
 
I'd rather have the BBFC than the MPAA, but i do think that they're both becoming fairly obsolete thanks to the internet. As has been mentioned, anybody underage can acquire a film that the BBFC deem to be unsuitable for them. Additionally, you can now guarantee that any film that the BBFC bans will be online even before they've banned it, for example: a disturbing horror film i watched recently called 'A Serbian Film' is highly likely to be banned or at least edited beyond recognition by the BBFC, and yet thanks to the internet anyone can watch it.

Then we get into the argument of who says that a responsible adult should have their viewing vetted by a ratings organisation? I'm all for protecting people under 18 from seeing films like 'A Serbian Film' (a strictly for adults film if ever there was one), but why can't a responsible, mentally sound adult watch it? In my opinion, the BBFC should only be allowed to provide in depth information on why a film has been given a particular rating, they shouldn't be allowed to ban things (unless a "film" features real killings or something, in which case it's understandable).

As for the MPAA, isn't it utterly pointless? Companies are allowed to release films on DVD as "Unrated", effectively bypassing any age restrictions.
 
Back
Top