Topic: BBFC British Barbarian Film Censors (Rant)

[goodguy]

As some of you know I grew up behind the Iron Curtain where censorship was a common occurence. So it especially angers me when a movie made in the '60s in the CSSR passed the communist censors, but cannot be released uncut today in the UK. Case in point: Frantisek Vlacil's Marketa Lazarova, which the BBFC required to be cut by 3sec for so-called animal cruelty according to British law in effect since the '30s.

In the '90s, Vlacil had been rediscovered as one of the important Czech filmmakers, and Marketa Lazarova is considered not only his masterpiece but one of the truly great movies of the '60s, with frequent comparisons to Tarkovsky.

All that course doesn't mean anything to the babarians with the scissors.

Sorry for the rant.

[Najemikon]

Well, it is a bit of rant! I am a staunch supporter of the BBFC who do incredible work. There was a time they were far too strict, however, they have never been as bad as the US censors. For quite a few years now they have respected the viewers intelligence far more than they used to.

Also, they don't cut, they advise and their criteria these days is very wide. In fact, most arguments are based on the rating they award, because they don't cut. The 12A rating was brought in because of Spider-Man which they would have rated as a 15, thereby cutting off most of the audience.

But I repeat, they had no intention of actually censoring someones work. They just advised that it would have to be a more restricted audience. In fact, I have seen interviews with them where they express frustration at being accused of censoring classic films when in fact, the work in question could be resubmitted and would more than likely pass uncut. I think The Matrix is a recent-ish example of that situation.

Animal cruelty is one of the very few points they dig their heels in. And, I'm sorry, but I agree. There is no need for it and no excuse for it ever. This is from the report:

This work was cut. The cut(s) were Compulsory. To obtain this category cuts of 0m 3s were required. Details of cuts below may contain spoilers of plot details. Show details »

A cut was required to remove sight of a snake being stabbed and rearing up in pain. The cut was made on the basis of BBFC policy on genuine animal cruelty.

One cut of 3 seconds is hardly massacring a masterpiece. As an example of a far more serious impact, consider that before Straw Dogs was reclassified, they cut a rape scene and that changed the fabric of the film entirely. Of course it has since been re-released.

[Achim]

That is the one nice thing about the BBFC: They detail their reasoning and decision on their website for everyone to see. As they point out themselves,reading it will usually spoil the film, but it will explain exactly why something was rated the way it is.

[goodguy]

Yeah, it was a rant - complete with dropped letters and words due to angry typing.
 
I'm aware that there are other decisions with greater impact on films, made by the BBFC or rating boards in other countries. And there are enough horror stories about the treatment of films in (West) German history, although with different circumstances - "Casablanca" and "Notorious" being the most well known examples.

What can be said in favor of the BBFC is that their work at least is transparent and properly documented. But unlike, for example, an MPAA rating, a BBFC rating is a legal requirement to distribute or show a film in the UK. So in a rant like mine, the BBFC usually gets the blame, even if the situation actually might be a little more complex.

Talking about the impact of a cut on a film is misleading. The fact that this case requires only 3sec to be cut from a 2.5h film makes matters worse, because it completely ignores the context, both within the film and outside of it. Let's not forget that this is a film made 1967 in a foreign country and put before the BBFC in 2008 for the first time. And the "advisory capacity" of the BBFC is just newspeak here, the cut was not required to obtain a 15 rating, it was required to obtain a rating at all.

What has happened here has nothing to do with Matrix-like business decisions to accept a cut to get a lower rating. It also has nothing to do with ignorance, stupidity or neglect. It is an act of deliberate vandalism against a work of art and a film-historic document, an act of vandalism enforced by law.

That the film was made in Eastern Europe before the fall of the Iron Curtain makes this particular case more personal for me. I can tell you that I'm still furious, even if that may seem a little irrational to you.