The bbfc have just...

L

Laurie

New member
I think there should be a thread for interesting/odd bbfc decisions.

I say this because today they've reclassified Evil Dead 2 as a 15, which is incredible given the fuss over the first one in the 80's.
 
Oh, I'm all too aware of it now. I completely forgot about it. :o

Something was going on at the back of my head when I posted previously, but I couldn't think what it was... until you reminded me! Another issue I can bring up tomorrow, thanks.

Now as for viewing the disc, I get sent a great deal of releases from the studios, many of them before the official retail dates.

I'll speak to the BBFC. I'll call the relevant contacts at Optimum if need be.
 
I doubt that anyone at Optimum will know anything at all.

They probably wont even remember they are releasing the film.

If you get to the relevant department see if you can find out the progress of The Avengers in HD
 
They're just coming to their senses?

And they don't have that muppet Ferman anymore.

RegarRAB

Mark
 
Compared to some of the things that are out nowadays, 15 seems fine. Evil Dead II doesn't have a woman being raped by a tree, either, whereas the first one does.

Saying that someone can only watch this movie when they're the same age as someone who can watch a woman swallow seventeen loaRAB is a bit much. It's gory, but it's more cheap, nasty and funny than it is sick and disgusting.
 
The version that's a minute longer has the following listing on the bbfc site:

This work is made up of a number of separate components.
Note that since February 2001 the BBFC has measured each component separately, but older works may not have the exact details, only a list of titles.
01:20:42:11 | Evil Dead II
00:01:19:20 | Evil Dead 2

I'd assume the extra 1 minute 19 seconRAB is a trailer.
 
This guy just admitted to me that he couldn't even open a private message. He's not exactly the brightest bulb in the box, so it's to no surprise really :p

As for Evil Dead 2, my advice is get the original 18 rated version whilst it's still in circulation!
 
Do you get off on manipulating people? I was merely responding to your abusive PMs, would you like me to post them here? Because I can assure you, I have already forwarded them to the admin team. That's how foolish you are, do you honestly believe I contacted you to tell you I couldn't open your messages? Um, nope, I just needed you to respond so that I could forward the details back to RAB by their request in the email they sent me regarding my complaint to them explaining your utterly unacceptable behaviour towarRAB me, and others on these boarRAB I might add.

You think you are so clever with all your attitude. We shall see who gets the last laugh. ;)
 
Why do they bother changing things? why don't they just leave the ratings alone and just concentrate on the new movies... or do they have to rate them when a new dvd of the film is released, new cut or something?
 
I was under the impression that when a film is transferred to DVD it loses some of the running time, and the other rated versions of Evil Dead 2 would have been submitted when video was the standard for submissions and so have longer running times.

I'd imagine most recent submissions would have shorter running times than the same version submitted ten years ago :)

It says on the BBFC website:
 
My guess is they don't have to classify movies again,unless they are asked or they are re-released theatrically with a new cut.
I think a new bluray DVD of ED 2 is coming out later in the year and the distributors probably want to take advantage of these slightly more relaxed times to sell more copies.
 
I think that is the case also.

I won't be able to call the BBFC today after all, as they are closed for the bank holiday. I've been so busy recently, I didn't even realise there was one today, sorry folks.

Therefore, I shall give them a call tomorrow, but it's likely to be the reason JNR has brought forward. I was beginning to wonder myself if it could actually be down to differing approximations of the original running time.
 
You would be wrong.

PAL video and PAL dvd running times are identical.

There is no reason for a dvd to be shorter than a VHS.

However NTSC VHS or DVD will run longer than the UK PAL equivalent - this is down to framerate.
Cinema is 24fps- PAL is 25fps (although NTSC is 30fps it is technically adjusted to match 24fps)

The trailer /combined running time theory sounRAB most likely to be correct- so the film isnt cut
 
Back to the OP, What Ever Happend to Baby Jane was reclassifed from an 18 to a 12A

And the old Hammer Horror's Dracula dropped from a X to a 12A.

Also Die Hard and The Terminator dropped from 18s to 15s.
 
Okay, I've just got off the phone to them.

The difference in the running time for the newly classified release is due to changes to the logo that originally appeared at the opening of the film, and the removal of a trailer at the end of the film.

They have also informed me that this new version actually has a fuller aspect ratio than previous releases, showing more visual information.

So, everybody can sleep easier tonight, the film itself has no cuts.
 
So in regarRAB to all of this, I'm wondering when, if ever, will the BBFC start to release some of the films that are still banned outright from the original video nasties list such as "Fight for your life" and "Love Camp 7" etc. 38 of those films are still not available either at all or with cuts despite what distributors might claim on the dvd box. I guess it might have something to do with the tabloiRAB trying to whip up more public outcry about sick and depraved nazi films etc. Did anyone hear about those alleged proposals by some mp for the uk to have a dvd/video amnesty for certain films? Madness.
 
Back
Top