The BBFC have just banned 'The Bunny Game'

Page 2 of 4 [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Prof_Pretorius
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,985
Location: Hiding in the attic of the Arkham Library

13 Oct 2011, 11:16 am

Tequila wrote:
Prof_Pretorius wrote:
The Bunny Game is nothing more than torture-porn, the trailer makes it look like there is no plot whatsoever.


The 'plot' is as mentioned. A woman is kidnapped and tortured by a trucker. For real. That is the film.

And Prof_Pretorius: may I ask where you have been? We haven't seen you round for ages, mate! :)



Blimey ! ! I've been posting in the movie a day by jory, and other film threads. Thanks for the acknowledgment ! ! Love ya, mate ! !!


_________________
I wake to sleep, and take my waking slow. I feel my fate in what I cannot fear. I learn by going where I have to go. ~Theodore Roethke


Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 29,603
Location: Lancashire, UK

13 Oct 2011, 11:55 am

Of the films listed, most have been submitted for classification.

#10 - Irreversible was passed '18' uncut in 2003.

#9 - Men Behind the Sun was passed '18' after two minutes of BBFC cuts in 1991 on the understanding that the video would only be available on a very limited release in London-based Chinese video shops. Hasn't been before the BBFC in any form since 1991.

#8 - Saló has a complex censorship history in the UK. The film originally submitted for a cinema release in 1976 and was rejected outright on the grounds of gross indecency. Salo was first screened in Britain at the Old Compton Street cinema club in 1977. It was shown uncut, to members only, without a certificate from the BBFC. After a few days, the cinema was raided by the police, who confiscated the print and threatened action against the cinema owners under the offence of common law indecency. The cinema appealed, explaining that the film was screened uncut only after taking advice from the then Secretary of the BBFC, James Ferman. However, the offence of common law indecency took no account of the film as a whole - i.e. if some of the film was illegal then all of it was. Ferman campaigned for films to be brought under the jurisdiction of the Obscene Publications Act which later took place. Ferman then went back and made six minutes of cuts to the film and also adding on a warning to explain the film. This version was then shown, without a certificate, in cinema clubs in the latter part of the 1970s and throughout the 1980s. By the end of the 1980s, the print of the film was looking very rough indeed - in fact, club cinemas had to apologise because the picture quality was so poor. This version was last shown at the Electric Cinema in 1993. In 2000, the BFI resubmitted the film and, after considerable deliberation, the film was passed '18' uncut for cinema and later video/DVD release after coming to the conclusion that, whilst the film was shocking and disgusting, it was not obscene.

#7 - Ichi the Killer was submitted in 2003 by a subsidiary of the now-defunct Hong Kong Legends label for an '18' certificate and was passed after three minutes of cuts to the rape and sexual assault of women.

#6 - The NC-17 version of Murder Set Pieces was rejected outright when submitted to the Board in 2008. The BBFC stated that their reason for rejecting the film was the continous scenes of rape and sexual torture along with the fact that young children were among those being killed (including a notorious scene where a toddler is shown his dead mother). I don't suppose using a 13-year-old girl as the target of the antagonist's attentions in the final third of the film played particularly well with the censors either. The distributor didn't bother attempting cuts.

#4 - Cannibal Holocaust was never submitted for a cinema certificate here in the UK. However, a very heavily pre-cut version of the film, missing over half an hour of footage, was released uncertificated in the 1980s by GO Video - with vividly gruesome artwork. This film (along with The Last House on the Left, SS Experiment Camp and I Spit On Your Grave) was placed on the DPP's infamous list of 39 "Video Nasties" in 1982-1984 and was later prosecuted for obscenity, remaining 'banned' for many years although never officially been rejected by the BBFC. In 2001, Vipco submitted the film to the BBFC for a video release and were able to release the film after some five-and-three-quarter minutes of cuts, removing almost all of the animal deaths and most of the sexual violence as well. This release remained the only one on the video shelves here until the budget grindhouse label Shameless sent the film to the BBFC, in its uncut form, in 2011 in the hope of getting as many of the cuts waived as possible for a brand-new DVD/BD release featuring a new cut by director Ruggero Deodato. The BBFC waived all of the cuts to the (not particularly graphic in 2011) sexual violence and almost all the edits to the animal deaths too, only insisting that one cruel killing - that of a coatimundi near the beginning of the film - remain removed from the release. The film was therefore classified '18' after one cut of fourteen seconds' duration was made.

None of the others on the list have ever been submitted to the BBFC in any form although almost all the rest are on the Melon Farmers' unofficial "banned for other reasons" list.



DC
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Aug 2011
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,477

13 Oct 2011, 12:40 pm

Tequila wrote:
This isn't much of a surprise as the BBFC take a very dim view of films like this. I don't like censorship - a civilised country would pass stuff like this '18' without cuts - but I can see why the BBFC would not pass things like this.


The rape scene in Girl with a Dragon Tattoo passed uncut because it shows the rape as a horrific act of abuse, the BBFC have a policy of banning the glorification of rape, not the display of rape placed in the approved of context.



auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 66,633
Location: the island of defective toy santas

13 Oct 2011, 9:59 pm

crmoore wrote:
At the risk of catching some heat for this, I gotta say I wish the MPAA would take some notes from the BBFC and other international ratings boards regarding their determiner for ratings. I agree that rape should be at or near the top of determiners for strict R or borderline NC17 films, but not consential sex (should be an R, but not NC17) or the number of f-bombs dropped (the rating should reflect the context in which the profanity is used). Naturally though, this is just the tip of the iceberg regarding my issues with the MPAA.


the MPAA merely reflects the petty hypocrisies of american culture, at the intersection of bible belt and commerce. language is still a bugaboo here due to our infantile commercial culture. i mean, on oprah the censors [nervous sponsors] made her say "va-jay-jay," [instead of vagina] for christ's sake. you'd think we were just a bunch of virgin-eared kindergarteners instead of a nation of adults entrusted with the vote. a nation that gets its collective dander up at the sight of janet jackson's anatomy on tv, is a nation that needs a nanny-like MPAA protecting its childish sensibilities.



Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 29,603
Location: Lancashire, UK

14 Oct 2011, 10:26 am

The British distributor of The Bunny Game, Trinity X, have commented on the BBFC's banning of the film. Mark Sandell, the co-director of the Trinity has said: "We knew the film was challenging and confrontational, but also felt, as a independent filmmaker, Adam Rehmeir (the director), had a highly original filmic eye and had elicited powerful performances from the cast. We did imagine that the BBFC might ask for cuts but an outright ban gives the film a twisted notoriety that, quite frankly, it doesn't warrant."



Todesking
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Apr 2010
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,088
Location: Depew NY

14 Oct 2011, 8:22 pm

Does anyone know where to download the complete film at? If they ban it in the UK just download it. Scew them who are they to say you can or cannot watch it. It is no worse than a BSDM DVD porn you can buy at some seedy sex shop.


_________________
There he goes. One of God's own prototypes. Some kind of high powered mutant never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die -Hunter S. Thompson


Prof_Pretorius
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,985
Location: Hiding in the attic of the Arkham Library

15 Oct 2011, 6:20 am

Todesking wrote:
Does anyone know where to download the complete film at? If they ban it in the UK just download it. Scew them who are they to say you can or cannot watch it. It is no worse than a BSDM DVD porn you can buy at some seedy sex shop.


It's a sad testament to our society that this sort of film exists.


_________________
I wake to sleep, and take my waking slow. I feel my fate in what I cannot fear. I learn by going where I have to go. ~Theodore Roethke


Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 29,603
Location: Lancashire, UK

15 Oct 2011, 6:52 am

Todesking wrote:
Does anyone know where to download the complete film at? If they ban it in the UK just download it. Scew them who are they to say you can or cannot watch it. It is no worse than a BSDM DVD porn you can buy at some seedy sex shop.


For the first answer: no, but the filmmakers intend to release the film on the Web themselves if they don't get anywhere with the censors. From the sounds of this BBFC rejection the title would almost certainly receive a refusal in Australia and a prohibition in the Republic of Ireland too.

The BBFC ban hardline BDSM titles also - see the rejections of NF713 and Severe Punishment (for example) over the past couple of years.



Prof_Pretorius
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,985
Location: Hiding in the attic of the Arkham Library

18 Oct 2011, 1:49 pm

Perhaps I'm just getting old, but I truly believe that there are movies that are such gory sadistic rubbish that they should be banned. A genre film website recently posted the trailer for The Bunny Game, and frankly, I don't think a graphic rape and torture of a young prostitute needs to be screened.


_________________
I wake to sleep, and take my waking slow. I feel my fate in what I cannot fear. I learn by going where I have to go. ~Theodore Roethke


auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 66,633
Location: the island of defective toy santas

18 Oct 2011, 2:07 pm

i find it ridiculous that CARA gives adult ratings to movies with only profanity in them and nothing else. it was an international embarrassment that because of 13 expletives, only in america was a restricted rating given to "The King's Speech." americans are a nation of hypocritical hysterical prudes. :roll:



Prof_Pretorius
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,985
Location: Hiding in the attic of the Arkham Library

18 Oct 2011, 3:32 pm

auntblabby wrote:
i find it ridiculous that CARA gives adult ratings to movies with only profanity in them and nothing else. it was an international embarrassment that because of 13 expletives, only in america was a restricted rating given to "The King's Speech." americans are a nation of hypocritical hysterical prudes. :roll:


Yes, but it was the "F Bomb" after all. They can't let little Johnny hear that at the movies.


_________________
I wake to sleep, and take my waking slow. I feel my fate in what I cannot fear. I learn by going where I have to go. ~Theodore Roethke


auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 66,633
Location: the island of defective toy santas

18 Oct 2011, 4:35 pm

Prof_Pretorius wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
i find it ridiculous that CARA gives adult ratings to movies with only profanity in them and nothing else. it was an international embarrassment that because of 13 expletives, only in america was a restricted rating given to "The King's Speech." americans are a nation of hypocritical hysterical prudes. :roll:


Yes, but it was the "F Bomb" after all. They can't let little Johnny hear that at the movies.


other more mature people in other western nations have no issues with profanity, it's only in nambypamby america that we pretent to swoon when we hear cursing or see a little boob.



Prof_Pretorius
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,985
Location: Hiding in the attic of the Arkham Library

19 Oct 2011, 4:36 pm

auntblabby wrote:
Prof_Pretorius wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
i find it ridiculous that CARA gives adult ratings to movies with only profanity in them and nothing else. it was an international embarrassment that because of 13 expletives, only in america was a restricted rating given to "The King's Speech." americans are a nation of hypocritical hysterical prudes. :roll:


Yes, but it was the "F Bomb" after all. They can't let little Johnny hear that at the movies.


other more mature people in other western nations have no issues with profanity, it's only in nambypamby america that we pretent to swoon when we hear cursing or see a little boob.


A "little boob"? Are you referring to a politician? Not sure who you're talking about?


_________________
I wake to sleep, and take my waking slow. I feel my fate in what I cannot fear. I learn by going where I have to go. ~Theodore Roethke


Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 29,603
Location: Lancashire, UK

19 Oct 2011, 4:44 pm

Prof_Pretorius wrote:
Perhaps I'm just getting old, but I truly believe that there are movies that are such gory sadistic rubbish that they should be banned. A genre film website recently posted the trailer for The Bunny Game, and frankly, I don't think a graphic rape and torture of a young prostitute needs to be screened.


It's not technically totally banned; the BBFC have just refused to give it a certificate, which means that distributing and selling the film to a home audience is illegal, because it's uncertified. The law wouldn't take too kindly to someone illegally selling a movie that had been denied classification!

So, while it's not in the truly technical sense 'banned' it's so close to being so as to make little practical difference.

That said, the film may break the Dangerous Pictures Act and other laws depending on the content - and more to the point, what the jury thinks - but it's not truly 'banned', as the distributors could esily submit the film to local councils - they have ultimate jurisdiction over theatrical releases, as the BBFC's word is advisory - as Blue Underground did in 2000 with The Last House on the Left, where the film was passed '18' uncut by several local councils (but a submission for a cinema certificate ended up being rejected that year after the distributor refused to make the required cuts).



Last edited by Tequila on 19 Oct 2011, 4:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 29,603
Location: Lancashire, UK

19 Oct 2011, 4:48 pm

auntblabby wrote:
i find it ridiculous that CARA gives adult ratings to movies with only profanity in them and nothing else.


The same pertains in the UK too. A film with one or two 'F'-words will get a '12A'/'12'. A lot of them will get it a '15' and if the 'C'-word is used repeatedly and especially aggressively towards women you're looking at an '18' rating but of course there will be other reasons for giving it such a rating. At '18', there are no restrictions whatsoever on swearing.