BBFC decisions you agree/disagree with...

[Azizi23]

Originally Posted by j bird

Its funny seeing films from the mid 2000s are now changing classification upon re-relase showing how the board has changed in the last 20 years.

Their justification for initially giving it an 18 from the 2005 annual report:

"A strong sense of genuine threat and the sadistic terrorisation of the female characters were additional factors that reinforced the ‘18’ classification. The Descent, a popular British film about a group of women on a caving holiday in the Appalachians where they encounter some murderous creatures, lacked any sexual threat, but the strong gory horror and focus on the victims’ pain and injury made the ‘18’ appropriate"

Maybe net year we'll see The Departed downgraded to a 15 (even my very squeamish mother remarked how tame the violence was compared to Scorsese's usual, and she frequently complains at how lenient the modern 15 is)

Yes, The Departed is another one that's going to be a 15 downgraded. Which other films from the 2000s-2010s could be downgraded to a 15 in a few years? I can see Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street, The Expendables and Daybreakers getting this treatment. At this point, I won't even be surprised if 28 Weeks Later gets this treatment too (impossible, but...you never know with the BBFC).

[Azizi23]

Originally Posted by caib2003

I disagree, both Descent movies deserve their 18 ratings thanks to their intensity in tone alongside the graphic, gory violence in both. Plus they have scenes of sustained dwelling on infury. But you never know with the BBFC.

Well...the first one is now a 15

[doomgen]

honestly, these days the BBFC might have more of a problem at 15 with the scene in the Departed where Jack Nicholson is seen masturbating a dildo at a porno theatre, given it looks if you’re not paying attention like he has his actual penis out. I don’t remember if you see much of the porn on screen though.

[PurpleDynamite2]

Originally Posted by Azizi23

Yes, The Departed is another one that's going to be a 15 downgraded. Which other films from the 2000s-2010s could be downgraded to a 15 in a few years? I can see Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street, The Expendables and Daybreakers getting this treatment. At this point, I won't even be surprised if 28 Weeks Later gets this treatment too (impossible, but...you never know with the BBFC).

I don’t think Sweeney Todd would get downgraded. It quite clearly focuses on the infliction of wounds with lingering detail. Whereas The Descent is gory but more fast paced in its presentation from what I remember.

[Azizi23]

Originally Posted by PurpleDynamite2

I don’t think Sweeney Todd would get downgraded. It quite clearly focuses on the infliction of wounds with lingering detail. Whereas The Descent is gory but more fast paced in its presentation from what I remember.

What other movies from the 2000s-2010s do you predict would be downgraded to a 15? I can see why its an 18, but the BBFC is quite unpredictable at times.

[PurpleDynamite2]

Originally Posted by Azizi23

What other movies from the 2000s-2010s do you predict would be downgraded to a 15? I can see why its an 18, but the BBFC is quite unpredictable at times.

I thought that Zatoichi from 2003 would probably go down to 15 now when I saw it. It’s very bloody but it occurs in the context of fight scenes with highly stylized blood effects. Not certain thought.

[Azizi23]

Originally Posted by PurpleDynamite2

I thought that Zatoichi from 2003 would probably go down to 15 now when I saw it. It’s very bloody but it occurs in the context of fight scenes with highly stylized blood effects. Not certain thought.

Having seen the kill counts for that film, I'm surprised its an 18. Maybe the BBFC were quite strict with samurai films back then? Idk if Freddy vs Jason would get the downgraded to a 15 treatment, it's quite gory from what I remember. But then again, this is is the same organisation that re-rated Fight Club to a 15 despite the violence is quite sadistic at times.

[Markgway]

Fight Club may be the most ridiculous downgrade in recent years.

[Azizi23]

Originally Posted by Markgway

Fight Club may be the most ridiculous downgrade in recent years.

I agree. I saw it on Netflix when it was still an 18. Felt like an 18 back then, and it still does now.

[Azizi23]

Originally Posted by PurpleDynamite2

I don’t think Sweeney Todd would get downgraded. It quite clearly focuses on the infliction of wounds with lingering detail. Whereas The Descent is gory but more fast paced in its presentation from what I remember.

The Raven has lots of lingering detail of wounds and grisly images, and yet that was a 15.

[PurpleDynamite2]

Originally Posted by Azizi23

The Raven has lots of lingering detail of wounds and grisly images, and yet that was a 15.

I haven’t seen The Raven but Sweeney Todd has multiple close-ups of throats being cut with blood gushing and spraying everywhere, as well as repeated violence like

[Show spoiler] Sweeney repeatedly stabbing a man’s neck before cutting his throat

. That’s basically a textbook example of the “focus on the infliction of pain and injury that the BBFC doesn’t usually pass at 15.

[Azizi23]

Originally Posted by PurpleDynamite2

I haven’t seen The Raven but Sweeney Todd has multiple close-ups of throats being cut with blood gushing and spraying everywhere, as well as repeated violence like

[Show spoiler] Sweeney repeatedly stabbing a man’s neck before cutting his throat

. That’s basically a textbook example of the “focus on the infliction of pain and injury that the BBFC doesn’t usually pass at 15.

I think its the musical aspect that makes me think it should be a 15, but I've seen the film few years ago, and it's pretty bloody (which is why I understand its an 18). But the BBFC and new film distributors can get unpredictable...

I have a feeling Ghost Ship could be next getting downgraded to a 15.

[grim_tales]

Watched Weapons (2025) today and thought the 18 certificate was harsh except maybe for

[Show spoiler]The ending with the children

It's unsettling and creepy for sure, but the rest of the movie isn't worth an 18 IMO, definitely 15.

[PurpleDynamite2]

Originally Posted by grim_tales

Watched Weapons (2025) today and thought the 18 certificate was harsh except maybe for

[Show spoiler]The ending with the children

It's unsettling and creepy for sure, but the rest of the movie isn't worth an 18 IMO, definitely 15.

It’s a bit funny since most of Weapons feels like a 15 rated supernatural horror, but the

[Show spoiler] repeated face smashing and the witch’s head and body being torn apart in close-up

is clear 18 material in my opinion.

[Markgway]

Saw 18-cert horror Heart Eyes last night.

Mostly a '15' except for (IMO) the sadistic crushing near the beginning (which culminates in a head exploding) and a few bits during the protracted finale.

The arrow gags are brief and don't dwell on pain or suffering.

[DukeTogo84]

I'm not too familiar with this, but is there any prospect of horse falls ever being removed from being edited in the UK? I'm also curious about the history of what started this censorship?

[GaryCouzens]

Originally Posted by DukeTogo84

I'm not too familiar with this, but is there any prospect of horse falls ever being removed from being edited in the UK? I'm also curious about the history of what started this censorship?

Not without a change in the law, specifically the Cinematograph (Animals) Act 1937, which disallows cruelty to animals (not necessarily the killing of them) where it is in the control of the filmmakers.

When the BBFC began at the start of 1913, animal cruelty was one of many reasons for cutting films that the Board listed. I'm rereading James C. Robertson's book The Hidden Cinema at the moment, and one of the twenty-two films banned in the first year was A Spanish Bull Fight.

The Animals Act was brought onto the statute books following complaints about the likes of the arena scenes in The Sign of the Cross (1932) and the cavalry charge in The Charge of the Light Brigade (1936). Films such as the latter and Jesse James (1939) led to US laws and the setting-up of the American Humane Association to oversee animal action on film sets, so the concern was not limited to the UK. However, as the UK has this law, the BBFC is not allowed to pass anything that breaches it, according to their legal advice. (See also the Protection of Children Act (POCA). In both cases, artistic merit is not a defence under the laws.)

To amend or repeal the Animals Act, you'd have to lobby your MP, but I can't imagine many MPs wanting to get behind something like that.

[Azizi23]

Originally Posted by PurpleDynamite2

It’s a bit funny since most of Weapons feels like a 15 rated supernatural horror, but the

[Show spoiler] repeated face smashing and the witch’s head and body being torn apart in close-up

is clear 18 material in my opinion.

The face smashing scene imo is 15/18 borderline, because the victim is

[Show spoiler] mostly covered in that black vomit. Is Glady’s death really 18 level?

It’s pretty graphic I can’t lie, but maybe I’m used to seeing graphic content in modern 15s these days.

Also, Weapons has more of a comedic tone whereas The Descent, although its rapid and shot in the dark, is more sadistic in nature.

[KernowKnight]

Originally Posted by DukeTogo84

I'm not too familiar with this, but is there any prospect of horse falls ever being removed from being edited in the UK? I'm also curious about the history of what started this censorship?

There is next to zero sentiment in the UK for allowing film-makers to make animals suffer for their art. Very stringent animal cruelty laws in the UK compared to many countries.

So if you're waiting for it to be reversed here, you'll probably be waiting forever.

[dominicmgm]

Originally Posted by KernowKnight

There is next to zero sentiment in the UK for allowing film-makers to make animals suffer for their art. Very stringent animal cruelty laws in the UK compared to many countries.

So if you're waiting for it to be reversed here, you'll probably be waiting forever.

I had hoped the controversy behind The Abyss' 4K not getting a UK release over the rat scene would have triggered some backlash over how the Act is implemented, but I guess physical media is too niche for that to happen. Those who wanted it would have imported from the US (like I did before tariffs) or Germany.

While the law is reasonable as it helps prevent modern animal cruelty in film, I feel a "30+ year exception" would make a good compromise.