BBFC decisions you agree/disagree with...

[chip75]

Originally Posted by chip75

In other oddities Disney+ rated the new Steve Martin, Martin Short "Only Murders in the Building" series a 12 and it's littered with F-Bombs and some sexual references.

It's 16+ now, I guess the Mouse caught some shit for that one.

[McCrutchy]

Originally Posted by Markgway

This film from only 10 years ago been upgraded to an '18'.

https://www.bbfc.co.uk/release/the-w...vlgtmtexmje5na

Wow, I completely forgot this film existed. It looks like it got a Fox BD as a new release in the US and happily I've been able to grab a copy for around $10. From reading the new Insight it sounds like the film shouldn't ever have been 15, but these days the writer(s) sometimes get a tad too descriptive and emotionally revealing when they arguably could be a little less so. I expect it's a film where the worst is actually not shown and instead heavily implied.

Originally Posted by koopabeach

https://animeuknews.net/2021/09/mvm-...****-cut-bbfc/

https://www.animenewsnetwork.com/new...y-bbfc/.177212

The BBFC cut over 2 minutes for an 18 rating for this title..
Seems appropriate. The scene is dialogue-driven. I don't think it is an overreaction?
'The scene in question occurs in the series’ third episode, when the male protagonist Haruka Shinozaki visits Kosaka’s home and ends up talking with her mother. The scene features multiple flashbacks depicting Kosaka as a toddler in situations that her mother ascribes se**al connotations to, including comparing Kosaka lying with a teddy bear on top of her to being in the “mi**ionary” position, as well as crude references to Kosaka’s ge*itals, and the strong implication that she was exposed to po***graphic material as a young child. Also a scene that shows Kosaka with liquid on her face shown alongside a crude reference'
I can't imagine this sort of stuff ever being written into a Western show or movie. Seems pretty stomach-churning so can understand the cuts - but this sort of thing doesn't seem to come up as an issue anymore. Anyway, what would the difference be between a dialogue-driven, cartoon scene and something like 'Cuties' where real actresses are victimised?

I get what's being said here and this kind of content is really unnecessary, but I still can't ever get behind cutting an 18 release. The BBFC have often justified this by saying that children have access to video versions, but in all honesty, that just proves the fatal flaw in their system, that--at least so far--the BBFC can't actually come into your home and enforce who watches what there. To me the point of an 18 is "18 and over", not "18, but maybe occasionally someone younger and impressionable". Is it possible for someone under 18 to watch an 18 video? Of course, but the target audience for this sort of thing is simply going to import the uncut version from the US anyway, so I would think that all this really does is harm sales of the cut UK video version.

EDIT: The presumably uncut version appears to have been passed MA15+ in Australia!

EDIT: Unfortunately, the forum software automatically censors the string "b i t c h" in the URL, so you will have to manually update it in the address bar or the page will not display.

[Killer Meteor]

Originally Posted by McCrutchy

I get what's being said here and this kind of content is really unnecessary, but I still can't ever get behind cutting an 18 release. The BBFC have often justified this by saying that children have access to video versions, but in all honesty, that just proves the fatal flaw in their system, that--at least so far--the BBFC can't actually come into your home and enforce who watches what there. To me the point of an 18 is "18 and over", not "18, but maybe occasionally someone younger and impressionable". Is it possible for someone under 18 to watch an 18 video? Of course, but the target audience for this sort of thing is simply going to import the uncut version from the US anyway, so I would think that all this really does is harm sales of the cut UK video version.

Normally, the BBFC only cuts 18 rated films now if they violate laws such as animal cruelty or underage sexual content (The recent banning of Gestapo's Last Orgy being a notable exception). I'm not sure if this falls under their interpretation of The Protection of Children Act, or if it's just one of their no-go areas.

Sexual content in anime is frequently queasy - even if the characters are women, they frequently look and sound very young. Midori Days for example.

[koopabeach]

Originally Posted by Killer Meteor

Normally, the BBFC only cuts 18 rated films now if they violate laws such as animal cruelty or underage sexual content (The recent banning of Gestapo's Last Orgy being a notable exception). I'm not sure if this falls under their interpretation of The Protection of Children Act, or if it's just one of their no-go areas.

Sexual content in anime is frequently queasy - even if the characters are women, they frequently look and sound very young. Midori Days for example.

I can't see how the material is illegal, per se. The guidelines at '18' suggest if the material is illegal it should be cut. It merely depicts non-explicit, animated activities and sexual references that aren't necessarily pornographic in nature. Seems a bit odd...
I guess it is about context. There are many films that mention this sort of thing in a more 'responsible' manner. Perhaps it is the sexualization of the character that was the problem. Remember the Jeremy Irons film 'Lolita' was passed except for an extra feature on the DVD (rejected).

[McCrutchy]

Originally Posted by Killer Meteor

Normally, the BBFC only cuts 18 rated films now if they violate laws such as animal cruelty or underage sexual content (The recent banning of Gestapo's Last Orgy being a notable exception). I'm not sure if this falls under their interpretation of The Protection of Children Act, or if it's just one of their no-go areas.

Sexual content in anime is frequently queasy - even if the characters are women, they frequently look and sound very young. Midori Days for example.

Originally Posted by koopabeach

I can't see how the material is illegal, per se. The guidelines at '18' suggest if the material is illegal it should be cut. It merely depicts non-explicit, animated activities and sexual references that aren't necessarily pornographic in nature. Seems a bit odd...
I guess it is about context. There are many films that mention this sort of thing in a more 'responsible' manner. Perhaps it is the sexualization of the character that was the problem. Remember the Jeremy Irons film 'Lolita' was passed except for an extra feature on the DVD (rejected).

Exactly. I believe there was another anime release a few years ago that was cut at 18 because it contained a suicide scene that could be deemed "instructive". The exact same thing happened with the fist season release of American Horror Story.

[ThisKid]

Originally Posted by McCrutchy

Exactly. I believe there was another anime release a few years ago that was cut at 18 because it contained a suicide scene that could be deemed "instructive". The exact same thing happened with the fist season release of American Horror Story.

That would be Satoshi Kon’s Paranoia Agent, which was thankfully passed at an 18 uncut when recently resubmitted for a new release.

[fatboyslim142]

Originally Posted by koopabeach

I can't see how the material is illegal, per se. The guidelines at '18' suggest if the material is illegal it should be cut. It merely depicts non-explicit, animated activities and sexual references that aren't necessarily pornographic in nature. Seems a bit odd...
I guess it is about context. There are many films that mention this sort of thing in a more 'responsible' manner. Perhaps it is the sexualization of the character that was the problem. Remember the Jeremy Irons film 'Lolita' was passed except for an extra feature on the DVD (rejected).

The Howling had also had an extra (something about porn from what I recall) rejected.

[koopabeach]

Originally Posted by fatboyslim142

The Howling had also had an extra (something about porn from what I recall) rejected.

Yes the 'Fake Porn Movie' in 'The Howling'.

I believe the BBFC censors some sexually violent material from '18' films because of the belief that vulnerable viewers might replay the footage and be harmed by it or encouraged to perform illegal acts.

[chip75]

Originally Posted by koopabeach

I believe the BBFC censors some sexually violent material from '18' films because of the belief that vulnerable viewers might replay the footage and be harmed by it or encouraged to perform illegal acts.

But like McCrutchy posted if you've got a certification in place then go and say you've got to remove whatever content because you don't actually believe in the power of said system because it isn't even enforced.

Don't get me wrong I'm all for content advisor and warnings as there are things I won't watch if I know certain things are present, but having adult ratings then enforcing cuts because you know younger viewers will see the material seems kind of funky.

[Rottweiler30]

Originally Posted by McCrutchy

Exactly. I believe there was another anime release a few years ago that was cut at 18 because it contained a suicide scene that could be deemed "instructive". The exact same thing happened with the fist season release of American Horror Story.

Which is something I don't understand. Either suicide scenes should be allowed at 15, for the visceral and emotional impact alone, or banned altogether for being instructive. Troubled 18 year olds are surely as likely to imitate as troubled 15 year olds? What are they saying? That if its instructive an adult at least has the right to take their own life?

Edit.. Sorry just noticed that in your examples there were cuts at 18. But my point stands for titles like The Invisible Man that had a dangerous suicide technique reinserted for 18. I think Elizabeth Moss was allowed to be shown stabbing at her wrist in the 15 rated version shown on Sky but on the 18 rated blu ray she's shown cutting downwards which is apparently more effecient and dangerous.

[minister_x]

Those examples were not cut to avoid getting an 18, but cut despite them already being an 18 (i.e., they were mandatory cuts regardless of age rating).

[Profondo]

Originally Posted by McCrutchy

Exactly. I believe there was another anime release a few years ago that was cut at 18 because it contained a suicide scene that could be deemed "instructive". The exact same thing happened with the fist season release of American Horror Story.

There's another graphic suicide scene in the current season of American Horror Story that will be guaranteed to be cut when this releases in the UK - this one has both arms cut down from the elbow to the wrist with gaping wounds and flowing blood. It makes the sequence in S1 pale in comparison

[drush9999]

Originally Posted by 017

Has the BBFC culled some information from their website since the update/new look? I seem to remember you could quickly and easily find out whether a film was cut or uncut. For example, an uncut film would state something along the lines of "all known works have passed uncut". I can't seem to find this any more. Has this been removed, or am I just overlooking it?

Yes it's been removed, the site is useless now.
They don't even tell you if something is pre-cut by the distributor either.
Have to rely on going to the melonfarmers with their work friendly sex toy ads and hope they know of any cuts nowadays.

[DTSBOY]

Originally Posted by drush9999

Have to rely on going to the melonfarmers with their work friendly sex toy ads and hope they know of any cuts nowadays.

dvdcompare is another useful resource for the cut/ not cut status of discs too.

[DTSBOY]

Originally Posted by DTSBOY

Looks like the latest Conjuring has been trimmed down by the distributor for a 15, an uncut 18 was available too.

Vertical wrist cut. Who'd have thunk.

https://www.melonfarmers.co.uk/latest.htm

4K is uncut.

https://www.melonfarmers.co.uk/latest.htm

[CelestialAgent]

Stray got an 18 rating for glue sniffing, which isn’t entirely explicit unless you know some of the context. I think the strongest the film gets is the suggestion of too dogs humping. The strongest rating I would probably give it considering the language is a 12, but I’m not even sure there would be harm in a child watching it.

There are sequences in which homeless youths breath into a plastic bag, which is subsequently referred to as 'glue sniffing'. The misuse of drugs is not condoned by the work as a whole.

There is strong language ('motherf**ker' and 'f**k'), accompanied by milder terms ('*******', 'shit' and 'God'). There are verbal references to people seeking asylum in Turkey from Aleppo, Syria.

[fatboyslim142]

Looks like the following films ratings have changed. The first two have gone from U to PG & the third one from PG to 12.

The Giant Claw (1957) - Originally rated X in 1957, rated U in 1996 & PG (Arrow release) in 2021.
Oliver! (1968) - BBFC doesn't give any helpful info for some reason other than it is now a PG.
Sense And Sensibility (1996) - Originally rated U in 1996, rated PG in 2008 & 12 in 2021.

[minister_x]

Originally Posted by fatboyslim142

Sense And Sensibility (1996) - Originally rated U in 1996, rated PG in 2008 & 12 in 2021.

At this rate, it'll be an 18 in 2050

[minister_x]

Originally Posted by fatboyslim142

Looks like the following films ratings have changed. The first two have gone from U to PG & the third one from PG to 12.

The Giant Claw (1957) - Originally rated X in 1957, rated U in 1996 & PG (Arrow release) in 2021.
Oliver! (1968) - BBFC doesn't give any helpful info for some reason other than it is now a PG.
Sense And Sensibility (1996) - Originally rated U in 1996, rated PG in 2008 & 12 in 2021.

Actually, on closer inspection, Oliver! appears to either be in an extended form or Sony submitted Oliver! + extra that warrants a PG in a single submission.

Also, Sense and Sensibility is still a PG - the 12 rated item is actually a 28-minute extra (despite being listed as a 'film'); it's just another casualty of the BBFC's complete garbage rework of their website.

[Markgway]

Originally Posted by fatboyslim142

Sense And Sensibility (1996) - Originally rated U in 1996, rated PG in 2008 & 12 in 2021.

Film still appears to be a PG.

It's this extra that's a '12'.

https://www.bbfc.co.uk/release/sense...vlgtmtewody1ma

Hard to tell given how shit the BBFC website is these days.

The "it's a glitch" thing was a lie. They've had almost a year to fix it.