tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20538142.post605910864014353399..comments2023-04-07T06:58:04.580-07:00Comments on Cinecism: "STOP THIS DEBASING FILM"Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20538142.post-68383629655802895612008-02-17T10:34:00.000-08:002008-02-17T10:34:00.000-08:00Hehehe. I've never seen Cape Fear, but it sounds n...Hehehe. I've never seen Cape Fear, but it sounds nasty - is there something about Crocodile Dundee I've forgotten?<BR/><BR/>Surely the opposite of banning a tasteless film because it has no redeeming features is allowing decent tasteless films through - i.e. Clockwork O - which, by virtue of being better movies, are far more likely to influence bad behavior? Just a thought, I'm still not entirely sure where I stand on this.<BR/><BR/>Oh, and the thing about Captive Women II is it implies its a sequel...<BR/><BR/>Just another thought: <BR/><BR/>When they finally classified Reservoir Dogs over here, it was after the Pulp Fiction boom and after QT had got big - they justified their decision to release it as an 18 by saying the film was notorious enough that people buying it would know what they were letting themselves in for. Surely the same thing can apply to any flick called SS Evperiment Camp?Unmutualhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06317682642911946981noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20538142.post-38669463126581730522008-01-30T03:25:00.000-08:002008-01-30T03:25:00.000-08:00I think the main problem with banning a tasteless ...I think the main problem with banning a tasteless film because it has no redeeming features is that the matter is too subjective.<BR/><BR/>Sure, the title <B>SS Experiment Camp</B> hardly inspires confidence in its quality, but still, who's to say what is a quality film or not. At this point, it stops being a judgment on its content and it attacks the film itself. Sure, it might be a piece of crap but if it's not doing anything illegal, than it should be allowed to be seen by those who want to.<BR/><BR/>And that's what it all comes down to; the complete right of freedom of speech. No matter how tacky, trashy, plain crappy or immoral the content of a film is, those who want to see it, should be able to see it. Until you start getting into the illegal, which is an entirely different matter.<BR/><BR/>As we know, there are many people who find things, that we don't batter an eyelid at, completely offensive and disgusting. Sometimes you can see why (<B>A Clockwork Orange</B> <I>does</I> sort of glorify rape), other times not so much.<BR/><BR/>Slightly off-topic: The current biggest film critic in Australia worked in the Australian film industry during the '70s and discovered that the classification board had been censoring films without telling anyone. So, for years, the public, and often the artists and production companies, were oblivious to the fact that the films being played weren't how they were originally meant to be seen. This was mainly happening with many of the art films coming out of Europe at the time. He was so angry at this that he used his position to change the laws, so that whenever a cut was made, the section of footage that had been cut had to be replaced by black film.<BR/><BR/>Pretty soon after this, people started figuring out what was going and got so pissed off that the board had to announce, and detail, any cuts that were being made to films. <BR/><BR/>That man also peed on Fellini once.<BR/><BR/>But yes, that story about Australian censorship is really only topped by when, in the early 1990s, the PM found out that <B>Crocodile Dundee</B> and <B>Cape Fear</B> were the same rating (M - No restriction, recommended for 15+) and said "We need a new rating!" and they created the MA15+ (Restricted to 15+, unless with a guardian).<BR/><BR/>Cape Fear and Crocodile Dundee both kept their rating of M.<BR/><BR/>Your post was a good read, and personally, I think they were much better off leaving the title as <B>Captive Women II: Orgies of the Damned</B>Robhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07056272087886564663noreply@blogger.com