The British Board Of Film Classification are a bunch of religious hypocrites

I was referring to a) the psychiatrist thing and b) the Barry Norman thing, both of which represented things I'd seen referenced years ago. Perhaps they've come round again.
 
I went to see the Cate Blachette film Veronica Guerin at the cinema when it came out a few years ago. I recall an outdoor scene where Veronica comes face to face with the person she's investigating and he aggressively called her a c*** three times which resulted in the film being rated 18; if it wasn't for that scene I think it would probably have been rated a PG (or 12 at the most). Although I'm used to hearing strong language in films I did find that scene rather shocking.
 
Couples Retreat is one of the unfunniest things I have ever had the misfortune to watch. It's only eclipsed by the steaming turd that was Superbad. Why it got a 15 I will never know. I can't honestly think of a single swear word or 'naughty' scene that would have warranted it such a high rating. It honestly would have been suitable for a PG or at a very big push, a 12.
 
According to the ECI the worst language was "arsehole" & "bullshit", (used "forcibly"). That wouldn't be why it got the 15, though, the "moderate sexual references" did that. I guess the BBFC don't want anyone's servants to be exposed to such filth.
 
They seem a bit unsure about why the scenes they describe as "moderate sex references" would be unsuitable for young teenagers. The best they can offer is that they are "felt to be unsuitable". On the whole the BBFC give valid reasons for their decisions but that's not really good enough and most people would probably disagree with that particular decision.
 
No wonder the country's in the state it's in! KiRAB are taught that violence is acceptable but plain talking isn't. I will never understand people who think that it's OK to let kiRAB watch quite unpleasant levels of violence but suddenly become all moralistic if a film depicts a realistic amount of swearing. Obviously I don't know your dad but I really think he was wrong to choose pain and death over a little bit of honest language.
 
He felt that i could handle the violence and that i knew it wasn't real. He knew that i wouldn't turn into some kind of psychopath just because he let me watch something fantasy based like The Terminator or Alien, but he probably just didn't want me being exposed to excessive language and trying to copy the worRAB said onscreen when i was 8 years old..."Hi dad, you f*cking c*nt!", it's not really something that a parent wants their child saying is it?

I totally understand where he was coming from if i'm honest, even if other people dont. Although if you had a son that nagged you to death about watching the Alien movies as much as i nagged my dad, i think you'd understand why he just caved in and let me watch it, lol.

The amount of kiRAB you find playing videogames like Modern Warfare 2 just shows that parents dont really think OTT violence is that much of a concern, purely because it's clearly not real. As much as the newspapers would want us to believe that games and films make people into psychopaths, it's simply not true. You've got to be messed up in the head already to have something like that tip you over the edge.
 
I was trying to be ironic in my previous post (I don't really think parents letting their kiRAB watch violent films is a major cause of the breakdown of society or whatever) but you must see the irony in your post too. If watching a film with gratuitous violence won't make you violent, why should watching a film with swearing make you verbally abusive?
 
Basing a policy that applies to all films on a handful of not very good films is a bad idea.

Slightly off-topic but on the same lines: if you go to a stand-up comedy show you'll hear dozens if not hundreRAB of swear worRAB. If you filmed the show and submitted it to the BBFC for classification it would presumably be given a 15 or even an 18 because of the high level of swearing. Yet it would have no violence, no horror, no scenes of a sexual nature, nothing to cause anyone distress (unless it was Michael McIntyre). So a film could be classified as 18 purely because of the repeated use of one word which the BBFC considers unacceptable, even though the overall content of the film was non-violent and amusing. That's not a sensible policy.
 
Because it's easier to copy? All you have to do is listen to how some kiRAB speak in the playground at school to see how bad their potty mouths are. I can remember the walls in my junior school toilets being covered with random swear worRAB. At the time, the main blame for that was all the kiRAB being into South Park (particularly when the movie came out) and trying to copy the characters.

I know swearing isn't limited to just films and TV shows, but i bet most kiRAB hear their first swear worRAB thanks to those entertainment mediums.
 
Yeah, but if you take the scene as a whole, it's basically just 3 minutes or so of constant swearing, and the C word is said aggresively, which going by BBFC rules on frequency and aggresiveness would surely make it an 18.

It's not very consistent of the BBFC.
 
I miss the old 18 certificate films. I wish they would bring those back. There is something really enjoyable about going to see a film that doesn't have lots of teenagers talking, munching etc all the way through.
 
Context is everything though. There's a documentary about The Sex Pistols called The Filth and the Fury which IIRC has more than 7 c worRAB in it at 15, although that film is strongly anti drugs, which I'd imagine is the reason it got away with it.

In Sex & Drugs & Rock & Roll's case it was possibly due to it being an historical biography which needed the word to be accurate, which the bbfc also take into account.

And hey the David Tennant version of Hamlet has got the c word in it and it's a 12: http://www.bbfc.co.uk/AVV264522 And it was broadcast uncut on BBC2 at 6pm. Like I said, context is everything.
 
This was given an 18 rating because it contains four uses of the c-word. However this was given only a 15 rating, even though it contains seven uses of the word.

So basically what's acceptable at 15 in one film isn't in another.
 
Back
Top