LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksOk, that's good enough for meOriginally Posted by Stewart
Ok, that's good enough for me
For 2 reasons.Interesting, but I'm missing the thing about the players being put there by who we elect - it's the end of the day and I just can't see it
I can read that it treads carefully and doesn't want to piss off govt. and that its choice of president is done trying to keep the home office/ofcom happy.. but that's not the same thing has govt (and thus who we elect) actually putting someone there.
The council has a direct say on what can, and can not be shown. I don't have in-depth knowledge on how they are run, but as I understand it they are largely supported / ran by the government, even if not in a direct manor.
Secondly, the fact that the government (who are elected by us) allows the BBFC to decide ratings on means that they have control over how these are rated (although 'arguably' not the exact ratings themselves). There is no reason why they government couldn't make its own body to do the job the BBFC does.
By electing governments that keep this arrangement with the BBFC in place, in my eyes, we are keeping the rating system where it is.
That's what I don't understand - the BBFC is self-funded and self-ran as far as I know, to maintain independance. There's no govt. support at all.
Yeah I agree with this bit - hence the not pissing the govt. off, but that's not the same as being run by them. I try and post on Hexus in a way that doesn't piss other users off, and I could be banned from posting if I did, but that doesn't make the users have any input in what I say.Secondly, the fact that the government (who are elected by us) allows the BBFC to decide ratings on means that they have control over how these are rated (although 'arguably' not the exact ratings themselves). There is no reason why they government couldn't make its own body to do the job the BBFC does.
Yeah, enjoy your cookie, Mr out of context.Ok, that's good enough for me
Didn't say the BBFC - the councils
Who controls film censorship in the UK?
In theory, local councils - borough and county councils for the most part - have the power to allow any cinema to show any film.
OK, would a game that featured a graphic rape of a woman be ok?
In my opinion - no, but I dont set the rules.
Furthermore, that post is even more mad
The entire point I was making for the last 4 posts was that you simply can not take a comment about a subject such as violence, then apply the same statement to something like child abuse. So then you go and try and apply it to raping a woman....
This is exactly the same as before. You have taken what was said entirely out of context
The "we're adults, we can handle it" that Stu was implying was with regards to how much violence is in a video game, in a thread titled "Rockstar set to appeal against ManHunt 2 ban?".
No other subject such as child abuse or rape were brought up in his posts.
Last edited by Agent; 22-06-2007 at 09:01 PM.
Maybe we should make a game where you campaign against a violent game and you have to try and survive till you win, any false move you get kissed to death by some over eager nanny state supremo
TiG
...Pulp Fiction?In my opinion - no, but I dont set the rules.
Furthermore, that post is even more mad
The entire point I was making for the last 4 posts was that you simply can not take a comment about a subject such as violence, then apply the same statement to something like child abuse. So then you go and try and apply it to raping a woman....
I cannot recall any complaints about Pulp Fiction, despite its a) violence, b) anti-Christian nature, c) homophobic stature, d) multiple murders, and d) graphic depiction of a man being raped by another man. ?!?!?
If all that IS ok, then what isn't? (In my mind, and the censor's minds, that's all OK.)
Pulp fiction, while an award winning and critically acclaimed film met with quite the backlash upon its release, it was heavily criticised for excessive violence and gore as well as the many profanities used in the script, the rape scene was also criticised but I'd hardly call it graphic considering the angle used, it was even insinuated in the press that the film was racist
Pulp fiction is actually not as violent a film as it's reputation suggests when you look at the facts, much of the violence is accompanied by an underlying dark humour, that is of course what little violence you see, I really can't be bothered to type it all out myself, so I'll quote a man that did...
If nothing else the fact that people think pulp fiction is an exceedingly violent film is a credit to how well Tarantino directed it.The first time I saw the movie, in May 1994 at the Cannes Film Festival, I thought it was very violent. As I saw it a second and third time, I realized it wasn't as violent as I thought -- certainly not by the standards of modern action movies. It SEEMS more violent because it often delays a payoff with humorous dialogue, toying with us. Our body count at Virginia turned up only seven major deaths. (Read no further if you do not want to know major plot details.) The dead:
-- Three guys in the apartment -- one in the chair, one on the couch, and one in the bathroom -- are killed by Vincent (John Travolta) and Jules (Jackson).
-- Marvin, the fourth guy from the apartment, is accidentally killed while sitting in the backseat of Jules' and Vincent's car.
-- Vincent Vega is killed by Butch (Bruce Willis).
-- Two men are killed at the pawn shop: Maynard, the store owner, and his friend Zed.
-- In addition, there are two unseen or implied deaths, of the boxer killed in the ring by Butch, and of "the Gimp," dressed in leather in the pawn shop basement.
Against this body count, there are several people who are saved in the movie. Mia (Uma Thurman) is brought back from the dead after an overdose; Marcellus Wallace (Ving Rhames) is saved by Butch in the basement; and many potential victims in the coffee shop are saved after Jules talks Honey Bunny (Amanda Plummer) and Pumpkin (Tim Roth) into calling off their stickup. And, of course, the lives of Jules and Vincent are saved, when a volley of shots in the apartment misses them. Jules chooses to call this a miracle, a sign from God, and retires from crime. Vincent shrugs it off, and pays the price. There is also an important, hilarious, subplot about the saving of Butch's gold watch.
One thing we kept noticing during our shot-by-shot odyssey was that much of the violence is off-screen. When the guys in the apartment are shot, the camera is on Jules or Vincent, not on the victims. When the hypodermic needle goes into Mia's chest, the camera cuts away at the last instant to a reaction shot (instant comic relief from Rosanna Arquette, who is into body-piercing, and is delighted to have witnessed the ultimate piercing). The gunshot in the backseat of the car is offscreen. The violence in the pawn shop basement is graphic, but within the boundaries of standard movie fights.
You asked, if that is ok, what isn't?
That brings us into films that feature rape or child abuse...
(Just to clarify, I do not consider the two acts to be even similar)
Rape scenes have appeared in movies as early as the 70's, there are actually several films which depict rape as graphically as the ratings boards will allow, and I'll be honest with you, its something that unless you are a twisted individual that is extremely hard to watch. Rape is not purely a violent act it’s extremely psychological and possibly one of the most degrading things you can ever do to another human being, is that really a subject that should be realistically portrayed in any medium?
You can argue that if an adult so chooses to watch a rape scene he or she should be able to, but what purpose would it serve? Let’s be fair, rape rarely features as a plot device, and if it does there's no need for it to be extremely graphic for it to achieve the desired effect upon the audience.
That leaves only two rational explanations for the inclusion of a highly graphic rape scene in a film (or for that matter a computer game) and they are -
1. Your target audience is people that would enjoy watching a realistically portrayed rape scene, in other words, rapists, would be rapists and the generally twisted.
2. Morbid curiosity.
Morbid curiosity is no reason to graphically depict something as nasty as rape, let alone use it in interactive software, simple as.
Films that feature child abuse come under the same banner with regards to their place in the media, there have been very few films to go further than to include child abuse in the plot using anything but a single hinting scene or flashback (to the best of my knowledge at least), the only recent one that comes to mind is Hard Candy and that was met with quite the backlash.
How many people do you think are strong enough of mind to sit in a movie theatre and watch a child be realistically abused for ninety minutes without it having affected them pyschologically in some way?
Censorship exists for a reason, admittedly much of the time it is extremely heavy handed and unnecessary but it’s built on a strong ideal and is there for a good reason.
Last edited by Knoxville; 23-06-2007 at 06:28 AM. Reason: Typo
Agent (23-06-2007)
Mate, not being funny, but have you even read the thread?
1) Pulp fiction is a film, not a game - They differ hugely in regards to ratings and releases (The fact that Manhunt 2 is banned, yet something like Hostel is allowed proves this)- which strangely enough is what the thread is about
2) We are talking about if the Manhunt 2 game should be banned, not if we should ban Pulp Fiction
3) At no point have I called for game censoring or implied what people should or should not watch. The only thing I hinted at is that I personally wouldn't think that a woman being raped in a game is acceptable. It is not my place to say what people should and should not watch and again, is mearly a personal opinion.
4) Pulp Fiction caused a fair bit of controversy, to say you "cannot recall any complaints" is shockingA simple google throws up tons of results
Yup, I was way off. Sorry!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
