What do you think of the BBFC / MPA?

[stigdu]

To tie in with the other BBFC discussion, I wondered what people's opinions were about the BBFC and MPA in general? Are you glad they exist? Are they useful?

[side__on]

I've never been impressed with either of them,they should never have been formed in the first place.

[Rottweiler30]

I think the BBFC are in the best form ever in as much as films are rarely cut anymore. In the 90s they was a shambles. I think they have always been required even if only as a guideline. The idea of a 8 year old being able to walk into a shop and buy anything doesnt sit right with me.

I have always felt the MPAAs R rating is ridiculous though. A 17 year old can take his 5 year old sister to watch Saw, Goodfellas, Basic Instinct and others in the eyes of the MPAA

[RossyG]

I don’t mind age classification, but there’s very little I’d censor when it comes to fictional films.

It’s not so bad now, but the BBFC were ridiculous in the 80s and 90s. Cutting stunts and special effects from films that had 18 certificates got my goat on those days. The one that angered me the most was the train hitting the car scene from Eraser, seen at the very end of this video.

Eraser: all explosions, destruction & car crashes - YouTube

It still blows my mind almost thirty years later that people looked at that shot and decided that no adult would be allowed to see it.

And I also hated that they’d use weasel tricks to get the public to support them. Whenever they consulted with the public (and how were these people selected?) they’d always frame the question not as “do you feel corrupted by this?” But as “do you think this could potentially corrupt others?” And people usually think the worst of others so the answer came back as yes.

I remember seeking out repertory screenings of The Exorcist and Straw Dogs as they were banned on video. I suppose they did me a favour in that sense as it was fun seeing them on film on a big screen (albeit via very ropey prints) and it gave me a sense of tasting forbidden fruit, but their banning made no sense. Especially as Man Bites Dog, which I saw the same year, was way more disturbing than both and got an uncut 18 at the cinema and on VHS.

But they always were more lenient on subtitled films because they thought only middle-class sophisticates would watch them and not working class oiks. And they openly said this, which was another reason I disliked them at the time.

I also think BBFC costs can hamper boutique labels. They should be allowed to self-rate for free using similar classifications. For example, I’m sure Radiance knew that Viva La Muerte was always destined for an 18, so why not let them label it “adults only” and avoid the costs?

[CompleteCount]

A useful device when trying to get re-elected.

thaferm.jpg

[CrockettandTubbs]

The cuts to the dvd of Eraser:

(dvdcompare.net) This film has been cut by 3:22:

The cinema release flopped in the UK so the distributor opted for a 15 release. The BBFC felt that they had removed the sadistic edge from most of the violence and revealed a good action thriller which proved to have far greater audience appeal.

[Show spoiler]

• In the opening sequence where Kruger rescues Johnny C, 0:17 of punches were removed along with the post punch dialogue: "Get me some ice, I think I broke my goddam hand".
• Also in the opening scene, a scene with a bound and gagged woman being doused with petrol has been removed. Also a thug with a petrol can saying "Sure, boss" has been deleted.
• A close up of a man in a noose being lifted up has been cut.
• A scene where they attempt to remove Johnny's tongue was cut along with the line: "See if it sings on its own".
• 0:04 cut where Kruger breaks a mans neck in a fridge door.
• 0:01 missing of a scene which has a close up of Kruger as he pumps a second bullet into the body of the dead bad guy to frame them.
• As the hero ignites the pretrol on the floor, the sight of the flames engulfing a corpse has gone.
• 0:03 cut in William Donough's office. He points the gun at Lee and shouts "You have no ****ing idea". In the 15 video all that remains is "You".
• In William Donough's office, 0:01 is cut where he puts the gun into his mouth and fires. Also, the close up of the man with blood coming out of his mouth.
• Close up of man with a blade in his neck after Kruger stabs him through the door is missing.
• We fail to see the guy he then kills flying through the air into a wall.
• In the video, we see Samaritan hold his witness and appear to smother her. It should show Samaritan shoot her and then pretend to give her mouth to mouth resuscitation as she dies.
• Samaritan actually shoots Monroe twice, one of those shots has been cut.
• Inside the alligator park, the first bad guy gets an arm ripped off.
• The hero pursues and pistol whips a SWAT man which we don't see.
• The villain grabs a woman and pistol whips her, we don't see this.
• Neither do we see the hero erase the swat team in a lift by removing the pins from a SWAT man's belt and then throwing him down the shaft.
• 0:03 cut when Kruger runs out to see the helicopter fly away. In the NSTC Laserdisc, he punches a man and breaks his neck.
• A Russian guard is seen slapping a woman ... or rather isn't.
• In the shipyard, 0:04 is missing when Kruger finishes off two guards after an impressive aerial acrobatics display. The impact shot of a third man being shot and thrown through a window has gone.
• A close up of a knife blade used to threaten a woman has gone.
• 0:01 missing when Lee kicks her Russian captor in the face after escaping.
• The hero gets the upper hand but we dont see the impact shot of three men being thrown into the air along with gun shots and impacts.
• 0:01 missing when Sall shoots a bad guy in the eye. We should see a close up of the man falling back without an eye.
• The villain's pistol blow to the woman has gone, along with gunfire and impacts in the gun battle around the crane.
• 0:04 are cut from the fight between Kruger and Samaritan, when Samaritan hits Kruger with an iron bar.
• 0:45 of the train ploughing into the car but we don't see the Baddies screaming and thumping as they try to escape. Kruger stands and watches and when it is over but we dont see the satisfied look on his face nor do wee the smoking car wreck in the ruins of the train

[doomgen]

I don't really think this is a distinct enough topic from the other BBFC thread to require a new one. there's been lots of talk there about people's thoughts on the ratings boards themselves, and it's clear the topic has broadened to incorporate thoughts on other international rating systems like the MPA and the ACB.

[Nitroes]

Originally Posted by stigdu

Are they useful?

Yes, like chemotherapy is for face cancer.


I've never taken the MPAA seriously really although they damaged filmmaking and film distribution for decades by essentailly stopping them advertise their films in newspapers if it was an "X".

The BBFC would function perfectly in a Nazi state. They can -and have been- be a witness to your criminal court case for selling product they've not censored (ie charged a fee for). I hate them. Lots of Uncle Toms on the Internet think they do a good job and are needed. They'd also fit right into a Nazi state. And they're a private company. Disgusting.

Saying all that there's worse things in life and I can bypass the BBFC anytime I like. For now.

And it's better than living in Russia or Iran or [enter other dictatorship here].

[The Hornets]

Think labels should be allowed to self certify at 18, as know the boutique labels have said this is a detriment to them with video extras as increases costs. Also, why they don’t tend to get the feature films re-rated as no need unless a different cut of the film. Very different to the Hollywood studios who seem happy to spend money at BBFC every time a film returns to the cinema or reissued on disc.

There’s always the fall back of the law if you include something illegal with self certification and I’m sure the labels know better what is legal and illegal than the BBFC.

Where the BBFC really get me is go back 5 and 10 years where the Hollywood studios regularly cut films which should have been 15 to get down to 12A and a bigger potential cinema audience.

Don’t see as much today but not sure if that because the BBFC allow more violence at 12A (superhero and fantasy films anything seems to go these days) or the Hollywood studios are making tamer films.

[chip75]

I don't think there's anything wrong with age ratings or content advisories. The BBFC makes a bit more sense compared to the MPA, but the former has a spotted history to plain old madness (the back and forth with Ken Russell or Michael Winner and their scripts is just laughable).

The MPA's R rating has always seemed wacky, allowing kids in if they're with an adult, but from some perspectives it's just the same as us lot watching the latest '80s action flick at home on video with our Dads.

Probably far more films should have been NC-17 or whatever, in hope that you'd get a mature audience, but age is no guarantee of sitting down and not annoying your fellow patrons by eating a cake and checking your messages...

Probably my biggest gripe is with studios, if you trim something for a 15 or 12A, at least release the home video version uncut. Because age restrictions have always been useless and probably make little difference to sales.

[Silanda]

No real opinion on the MPA, but I object slightly to the BBFC in its current form, and always have.

I don't believe the BBFC should be able to enforce cuts at 18 ratings. If they believe that something is plain illegal, they can refuse to issue a classification, but outside of that circumstance there should be no cuts unless the distributor chooses to cut to obtain a lower rating.

I don't believe that classification should be legally mandated though. Certainly not when it costs money to have titles classified. Every other artistic medium (other than video games) gets along just fine without having to be approved by a government censorship, *cough*, sorry, classification body.

I believe that unrated releases should be allowed, perhaps with the proviso that they're treated as if they are 18 rated. If there is anything legally questionable in a release, and the distributor choses to release without a certificate or after BBFC rejection, they do so at their own risk.

Plus, while they're nowhere near as bad as they were in the '80s and '90s, the BBFC still has a slight whiff of an organisation that sees itself as protecting the proles from themselves.

[Number 28]

Originally Posted by side__on

I've never been impressed with either of them,they should never have been formed in the first place.

+1

The people at the BBFC who watch and review uncut video nasties do they sometimes end up in A&E with deep shock or with other injuries? Do they eventually become unhinged and turn into axe wielding maniacs?

[pferreira]

I have no problem with the BBFC as an organisation but they're changing of ratings for movies because of modern audiences is kind of frustrating. I mean why is The Last Starfighter a 12 now? At least a lot of cuts for stuff from the 80s and 90s have now been waived. The other thing that really bugs me no end is the changing of the BBFC logos. The current ones look terrible. I know why they changed them but for physical media couldn't they have left them alone? I so much prefer the previous logos or the late 80's to early 2000's logos. My physical media looks more dignified somehow.

Originally Posted by CrockettandTubbs

The cuts to the dvd of Eraser:

How do you get detailed notes like this? Whenever I look for a film on the BBFC for its notes I'm lucky to find out when it's been rated.

[dominicmgm]

BBFC: Make reasonable decisions at times (such as giving The King's Speech a 12A as opposed to the R it got in the States), but make quite baffling decisions as well. (How are Five Nights at Freddy's and Men the same rating?) Honestly I'd love if the 15 rating was split into 15A and 16 ratings like in Ireland.
MPA: A really broken system, too lenient on violence yet too strict on language and nudity (Nomadland's R is highly questionable as the nudity is completely non-sexual), not to mention two of their ratings (G and NC-17) are practically nonexistent. Even the PAW Patrol sequel was rated PG, like what?

[dominicmgm]

Originally Posted by RossyG

I also think BBFC costs can hamper boutique labels. They should be allowed to self-rate for free using similar classifications. For example, I’m sure Radiance knew that Viva La Muerte was always destined for an 18, so why not let them label it “adults only” and avoid the costs?

Exactly. I'd love there to be an "Unrated 18" rating which allows films to be released without a BBFC submission as long as the film is restricted to adults only. It'd save a lot of money for independent film distributors.

Films not rated by the BBFC have been screened with the permission of local authorities for things like film festivals and such (this is how I was able to see Mad God and The Room, both screenings had a de-facto 18 rating, the former got a real 18 once it hit video whereas the latter I feel is 15 territory), so an "unrated 18" rating would be cutting out the middleman.

[jmbe]

The British Board of Fascist Censors.

Every time they cut a film or deny a certificate it just gives me a reason to seek them out from abroad. Streisand effect and all that.

[dominicmgm]

Originally Posted by jmbe

Every time they cut a film or deny a certificate it just gives me a reason to seek them out from abroad. Streisand effect and all that.

No wonder I had to import the 4K of The Abyss from the US!

[Nitroes]

I think the MPAA (never trust an organization that changes its name) does deserve a bit of pity as after the Hays Code's collapse the big studios had to cough up something for the authoritarian US politicians at the time. This was later repeated with forced restrictions on the video porn industry.

I suppose the BBFC has a similar history but they definitely extinguish business for small distribution companies. That may well of been part of the plan originally since it was set up by large companies which already had an extraordinary monopoly in distribution and projection.


Either way, 'classification' is obviously a good thing (just like the label "DOES NOT CONTAIN NUTS" if companies want it. If they don't then there may be civil liabilities.

If it's something criminal the courts can take a look.


The damage done by the initially illegal VRA to the developement to home video in the UK is incalculable. Not to mention the people and businesses who ended up in court and made personally bankrupt or fighting winding up orders to their livelihoods.

Total scandal lost in the sands of time.

[The Hornets]

Originally Posted by dominicmgm

No wonder I had to import the 4K of The Abyss from the US!

The problem for The Abyss dates back long before the BBFC existed as it’s down to animal cruelty legislation from IIRC the 1920s which applied to cinemas and was never repealed.

Okay they could have said this doesn’t apply to home video as that didn’t exist when the legislation was enacted a reason it doesn’t apply to TV broadcasts.

Cameron took the decision with the UHD unlike the DVD of The Abyss that he wouldn’t allow the UHD to have the scene censored so he refused to allow its release although the cut DVD is still available here.

[Marv Inc.]

It annoyed me that in most cases the version that the MPAA approved was the version that was then sent around the rest of the world.
Instead of sending an uncut version to each classification body and letting them judge weather cuts were necessary.