Killers of the Flower Moon Censored in Australia

[shireguy]

Originally Posted by Rick Grimes

I’m glad others get it. It’s the principle of the whole censorship issue.

I mentioned the censorship of KOTFM to my neighbour and he said “That’s not bad”, which started me on a diatribe about censorship in Australia, ....................

Then I went on about Kill Bill and how no Unrated version exists outside of Japan ...........................

Surprised how your neighbour lasted so long for his rant

Look - go and see the film.. then.. when it's on Apple TV - watch it again, and advise us what those 3 secs were.

[Aunt Peg]

I don't know why Paramount didn't appeal the MA rating. It would have been more likely than not overturned to an M.

[cochon]

Originally Posted by Rick Grimes

I swear they do this shit to justify their increasingly irrelevant jobs.

That likely applies to many regulatory entities.

[13school]

Annoyingly, this is fairly standard in Australia - there's a long history of films getting minor cuts here to grab a lower rating. Everything from the first Men in Black to Lady Bird (the first two examples that came to mind) have been cut here, and it seems to be something of a standard practice.

That said, there have been few major cinema releases of any kind in this country over the last few months. Combined with the fact that teenagers make up a pretty large percentage of all cinema-goers these days, and I can understand the commercial imperatives behind it. I'm definitely not happy about having this happen yet again, but there'd be a lot of cinemas and cinema chains out there not happy that they'd be expected to turn away paying customers for one of the few recent films with any kind of awareness and publicity behind it

[Aunt Peg]

Manchester by the Sea is another. Cut for cinema but thankfully released uncut for physical media.

I think the OFLC is running scared. The current Government (although I think it started with the former Government) is looking at overhauling the entire system to a self regulated one. Basically, like streaming services, TV networks and film festivals do now, allow the dlisbrutiors self classify. However, as we all know the wheels of Government work very slowly.

It is a win-win situation. You don't need an OFLC (and the staff, work place costs, insurance & superannuation payments that come with that), and save the distributors the cost of submitted their films which could result in independent distributors picking up the Australian rights to more films.

One downside if/when the new regulations apply. Get a conservative Government in any of the states and they have the right to set up the own local OFLC. Back in the Joe era of Queensland politics the Queensland Government were known for banning numerous films (the M rated Pretty Baby being a primary example).

[PT Ryan]

I’ve only knowingly chosen to pay to see two locally censored films ever. One was Three Kings, as part of a movie marathon (with woefully clumsy cuts to the two bullet in the head shots) and the other was a screening of Pink Flamingos a couple of years later (and I didn’t actually know what was cut at the time, though the infamous final shot certainly wasn’t).

I’m certainly not going to leave the comfort of my home to travel to a cinema to pay to watch a censored version of a film that will be uncut when it arrives on the streaming service that funded it (and which I already subscribe to). I am greatly amused that in order to see Martin Scorsese’s unsullied artistic vision, I’ll have to skip it at the cinema and wait for streaming, though.

[Rick Grimes]

Originally Posted by 13school

Annoyingly, this is fairly standard in Australia - there's a long history of films getting minor cuts here to grab a lower rating. Everything from the first Men in Black to Lady Bird (the first two examples that came to mind) have been cut here, and it seems to be something of a standard practice.

Other examples of censorship to get a lower rating: Instant Family, Bumblebee, John Wick 3, all Paramount.

Originally Posted by Aunt Peg

I don't know why Paramount didn't appeal the MA rating. It would have been more likely than not overturned to an M.

I too don’t get why Paramount didn’t push for an M, without any cuts, make a resubmission, a written application and an oral submission and argue the case.

Rocketman, X-Men: Apocalypse and Ghostbusters: Apocalypse all won their appeals.

Rocketman argued the use of the C-word was self-deprecating and not in any way misogynistic. Getting an M (originally MA15+).

X-Men: Apocalypse argued that the violence in the film did not justify an MA15+ (earning an M rating, winning it’s appeal).

Ghostbusters: Afterlife managed to get 3 categories (out of 6), bumped down from an M to a PG.

It seems that Paramount has a history of simply censoring their films, rather than making a case for a lower rating.

Will skip KOTFM in the cinema, and I will wait to watch it uncut, however that may be (BD/4K, stream or BD bootleg).
If it was uncensored, I’d see it in a heartbeat. But since I only get to the cinema with my wife 2-3 times per year, I’ve decided that Napoleon will be more of a big screen experience than KOFTM: yet another film that has theatrical distribution and will then end up on Apple Pus: With no 4K/BD likely.

[Gaffer]

Originally Posted by Rick Grimes

Other examples of censorship to get a lower rating: Instant Family, Bumblebee, John Wick 3, all Paramount.



I too don’t get why Paramount didn’t push for an M, without any cuts, make a resubmission, a written application and an oral submission and argue the case.

Rocketman, X-Men: Apocalypse and Ghostbusters: Apocalypse all won their appeals.

Rocketman argued the use of the C-word was self-deprecating and not in any way misogynistic. Getting an M (originally MA15+).

The irony is that Rocketman is from Paramount so they have argued down the rating before, despite their recent history of going for cuts instead. (And while it doesn’t really matter John Wick 3 wasn’t from Paramount - it was Studiocanal here - but the point is valid that a few seconds of violence was the difference between R and MA - interestingly they didn’t cut the scene in question per se - they zoomed the frame in so the worst part of the violent act was off screen).

[CelestialAgent]

I assume maybe one of the murders is what was cut for the rating but there’s nothing in the film that stood out as that grisly and would require a higher age rating. The BBFC giving it a 15 makes sense to me. The higher intensity stuff more comes from characters voicing their evil intent. There’s no moment in the film where if you missed 3 seconds it would feel like you’re missing anything important (people who left for a few minutes for a bathroom break definitely did though.) I bet a lot of people miss a few seconds anyway by looking down or blinking during a film.

Streaming compression isn’t going to be the same as a DCP with 100s of GB, it’s a 2.39:1 film so would be letterboxed at home and there are so many wide shots with vast streets or Osage members gathered together in ritual, or seeing the suspense of the story play out, and hearing Robertson’s score I can’t imagine it will have the same impact at home. Also there isn’t a streaming date for Apple TV+ set yet, could even not be until next year.

Sometimes I see a film cut for an age rating like The Avengers, Aquaman, Bumblebee, The Invisible Man and I feel somewhat used to it. Or films cut for animal cruelty by the Cinematograph Act.

[Zombie Kermit]

Yeah, I'm never a fan of seeing something that's been censored, but... three seconds? I'd miss more than that if I sneezed during a movie.

[vinny98]

Watched this today (a bit too long but great), but there is some pretty violent scenes throughout it,

[Show spoiler]including an autopsy and dismembered body parts

. I didn't notice any weird cuts to any of those scenes but even then 3 seconds is a blink and you miss it moment.

Edit: noticed this in the first forum post

Originally Posted by Rick Grimes

From the BBFC website, the cuts made will have been to some of the following:

[Show spoiler]There is sight of dead bodies and blood in the aftermath of violence. There is gory detail of a crushed skull and a severed hand in the wake of an explosion. A man has a violent fit while foaming at the mouth, and a woman's body is callously dismembered during an autopsy.

Everything mentioned above is present in our version.

[Cephalopod]

https://twitter.com/JellicleJim/stat...83091683778717

not from Australia, but apparently the Australian Classification Board were originally advised to issue an MA15+, but ultimately settled with an M.

Nothing was cut.

[Gaffer]

Originally Posted by Cephalopod

https://twitter.com/JellicleJim/stat...83091683778717

not from Australia, but apparently the Australian Classification Board were originally advised to issue an MA15+, but ultimately settled with an M.

Nothing was cut.

Well that’s great news if true - only part that’s bothersome is that the OFLC lists the second submission with the M rating as “Modified”

The full breakdown on the OFLC site for both versions are nearly identical however the M rated submission actually adds a lot of further detail missing from the MA breakdown:

MA rated submission details:

“Themes
The film contains themes of systemic racism, corruption, greed, family violence and injury detail.”
Violence
The film depicts murder, gun violence, stabbing, physical beatings and verbal threats.
Sex
The film contains verbal sexual innuendo.
Language
The film contains the use of the words "f**k", "shit", "*****", "bastard", "ass", "damn" and "hell".

M rated submission details:

Themes
The film contains themes of systemic racism, organised crime and corruption, suicide, autopsy and family violence. There is injury detail depicted.
Violence
The film contains violence including murder using guns and knives, physical beatings and verbal threats.
Sex
The film contains scenes of discreet, implied sexual activity and verbal sexual innuendo.
Language
The film contains the use of the words "f**k", "shit", "*****", "bastard", "ass", "damn" and "hell”.

[Rick Grimes]

Originally Posted by Cephalopod

https://twitter.com/JellicleJim/stat...83091683778717

not from Australia, but apparently the Australian Classification Board were originally advised to issue an MA15+, but ultimately settled with an M.

Nothing was cut.

Originally Posted by Gaffer

Well that’s great news if true - only part that’s bothersome is that the OFLC lists the second submission with the M rating as “Modified”

The full breakdown on the OFLC site for both versions are nearly identical however the M rated submission actually adds a lot of further detail missing from the MA breakdown:

What I’ve noticed, is the lack of information regarding the resubmission, like the public got with Ghostbusters: Afterlife, explaining the dizzy is appealing the M rating, and then they have a link to the document that states the applicant argued their case successfully. And was granted a PG:

https://www.classification.gov.au/se..._api_relevance

AND the fact that the ACB site states the version is “modified” is confusing, if KOTFM isn’t censored and a real f*ck up by the ACB.

While Ghostbuster: Afterlife is not censored, I found that the listing for Ghostbusters: Afterlife states that the DVD/BD were modified, and the listing under the “review sale/hire”, the ACB list the version as “Not Specified”.

To be sure about GB: Afterlife, I chucked in the Aussie Blu-Ray last night to check runtimes vs. the Australian 4K disc, which is definitely an international copy (none of the discs have ratings, appear to be the same as the UK discs).
The BBFC did not make any cuts to the film. Hence, it appears someone inputting the “version” for Ghostbusters: Afterlife BD and DVD simply put in misinformation stating it is modified.

https://www.classification.gov.au/se..._api_relevance

Ghostbusters: Afterlife was not censored, it was just argued that an M rating is an overreaction. Interesting perspective, and they argued their point well.

https://www.classification.gov.au/ab...-classified-pg

While something like the successful review document for Ghostbusters: Afterlife (in the link above), is not being made available to the public, on the ACB website, regarding KOTFM, does not necessarily mean that there isn’t one. And thusly, the new M rating for KOTFM may be in response to an application by Paramount, for a review AND NOT a submission of a new DCP, that has been censored.

Henceforth, if people are reporting they are seeing all the graphic violence mentioned in the BBFC report AND the MA15+ and M submission details are pretty much identical, then perhaps Paramount actually appealed the KOTFM MA15+ and got the M rating upon review by the ACB. If that is the case, the confusion about censorship has been due to some clerk fracking up by putting “Version: Modified” in the M rated section of KOTFM, even though it wasn’t.

But, to play devil’s advocate, regarding the Facebook communication above, I wouldn’t put it past some Paramount employee would use Twitter to bullshit in a tweet, just to try and stop some of the negative criticism regarding actual censorship.

If Killers of the Flower Moon didn’t receive cuts, and the M rating was a classification review, the ACB needs to get their shit together and start reporting correctly on their website. They need to make available press releases regarding classification reviews, as they did with Ghostbusters: Afterlife, Rocketman and X-Men: Apocalypse.

While still being skeptical, if there is confirmation from the ACB that the resubmission was in fact “an application from the original applicant, Paramount Pictures Releasing, to review the decision made by the Classification Board” and not a resubmission of a modified DCP, I’ll gladly go see the film (obviously). I will also be quite piss off, knowing that the controversy about cuts made to the film was due to poor and misleading information, on the ACB’s website itself.

[13school]

Just to point out that run times aren't always a guide to censorship / modification - as mentioned above, with John Wick 3 the scene wasn't cut, just zoomed in. It's more than possible to modify a scene (remember the CGI figures added to the orgy scene in Eyes Wide Shut) without having to cut it out entirely.