|
Please read the topic before responding to the title. The film has been cut and given a rating, it is no longer banned. - KwarK |
On June 08 2011 06:42 Sindsygafnatur wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2011 06:40 skeldark wrote:On June 08 2011 06:39 Olinim wrote:On June 08 2011 06:37 skeldark wrote:
so there is no question if you should ban such shit because only really dangerous and ill people would watch is anyway. but i think its really scary that there is a bigger market for such films and that there are so many mental ill people around. You're mentally ill if you think watching a movie means you're dangerous. not watching it makes you dangerous! but that you WANT to watch such shit means you ARE dangerous! I heard about this movie...where someone kills another person, just because he's evil and mean. Have you seen it?
Yes, Billy Madison is one of my favorite movies.
|
Tbqh Human Centipede 1 was quite boring because it didn't realy show anything...i can't be bothered by just a concept...they show the centipede but it doesn't really get me
HCII though sounds a bit...visual
|
On June 08 2011 04:31 jdseemoreglass wrote: Banning movies from a country now?
lol, and they call themselves the land of the free and the home....
Oh wait, never mind, this is Europe. Time to put on my rose colored glasses.
User was temp banned for this post.
Uh.. The US has the power to kidnap someone without giving him or anyone neither the reason nor a trial, and then keep him locked away indefinitely.
Start there, and then work your way to governments being able to ban movies from cinema. American television is by the way highly censored with blurred middle fingers, peep sounds in songs etc. I'm not responding to this post because I want to come off as a dick, but rather because there are many posts in the thread describing the same thing but with somewhat rosier language. There are far worse dangers to democracy to be bothered with.
The cinema is in my opinion not an important news medium, and therefor I don't think the censorships are important in a political point of view. I don't understand all the slipperly slope talk. I guess we just don't have the same opinion on that matter. It's imo a long walk from censoring movies to censoring news or election information.
|
I don't care if it really is the sickest thing ever recorded, banning movies, or any other sort of entertainment products, based on the opinion of a stuck-up minority is unacceptable.
|
On June 08 2011 06:49 skeldark wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2011 06:42 Sindsygafnatur wrote:On June 08 2011 06:40 skeldark wrote:On June 08 2011 06:39 Olinim wrote:On June 08 2011 06:37 skeldark wrote:
so there is no question if you should ban such shit because only really dangerous and ill people would watch is anyway. but i think its really scary that there is a bigger market for such films and that there are so many mental ill people around. You're mentally ill if you think watching a movie means you're dangerous. not watching it makes you dangerous! but that you WANT to watch such shit means you ARE dangerous! I heard about this movie...where someone kills another person, just because he's evil and mean. Have you seen it? you dont get the difference about a movie where someone shot someone and a movie where they show how people are tortured in detail?
Okay so movies involving torture should be banned because they make people dangerous. Are there other unpleasant things we should be sheltered from? How about people being mean to each other? People who don't wash their hands after they pee? God they make me wanna blow shit up!
|
Many films are all about creating emotions.
Different genres go for different emotions.
I consider horror-movies as a mental challenge to see if one is able to withstand and process the emotions of fear and disgust they might create.
This is an explanation for those who want to know: "who wants to see this sick shit anyways?"
No one "enjoys" such a film or considers it "entertaining" but there might be people out there who are willing to face them as said mental challenge.
|
On June 08 2011 06:55 Nashtak wrote: I don't care if it really is the sickest thing ever recorded, banning movies, or any other sort of entertainment products, based on the opinion of a stuck-up minority is unacceptable.
Well that's not true is it? Everyone has a limit to how far they'll go.
Banning pedophile movies seems acceptable to me, wouldnt you agree?
|
On June 08 2011 06:58 Deadlyfish wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2011 06:55 Nashtak wrote: I don't care if it really is the sickest thing ever recorded, banning movies, or any other sort of entertainment products, based on the opinion of a stuck-up minority is unacceptable. Well that's not true is it? Everyone has a limit to how far they'll go. Banning pedophile movies seems acceptable to me, wouldnt you agree? Well they didn't ban A Serbian Film(Haven't watched it). At least not everywhere.
|
On June 08 2011 06:54 Euronyme wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2011 04:31 jdseemoreglass wrote: Banning movies from a country now?
lol, and they call themselves the land of the free and the home....
Oh wait, never mind, this is Europe. Time to put on my rose colored glasses.
User was temp banned for this post. Uh.. The US has the power to kidnap someone without giving him or anyone neither the reason nor a trial, and then keep him locked away indefinitely. Start there, and then work your way to governments being able to ban movies from cinema. American television is by the way highly censored with blurred middle fingers, peep sounds in songs etc. I'm not responding to this post because I want to come off as a dick, but rather because there are many posts in the thread describing the same thing but with somewhat rosier language. There are far worse dangers to democracy to be bothered with. The cinema is in my opinion not an important news medium, and therefor I don't think the censorships are important in a political point of view. I don't understand all the slipperly slope talk. I guess we just don't have the same opinion on that matter. It's imo a long walk from censoring movies to censoring news or election information. Don't think that everyone in America is ok with the examples you listed. In fact I would wager that the majority are quite disappointed. There are many, many who are against illegal detention as well as the Federal Communications Commission's arbitrary rule-setting.
You may be right that there are far worse dangers, but this itself is still a danger. Censorship is nothing more than another person who you don't know, telling you what is safe/healthy/right/moral for you to watch or listen to.
|
On June 08 2011 06:58 Deadlyfish wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2011 06:55 Nashtak wrote: I don't care if it really is the sickest thing ever recorded, banning movies, or any other sort of entertainment products, based on the opinion of a stuck-up minority is unacceptable. Well that's not true is it? Everyone has a limit to how far they'll go. Banning pedophile movies seems acceptable to me, wouldnt you agree? That's because the production of child pornography has to involve a child actress, which is fucking wrong and I don't think anyone who doesn't have a screw lose would disagree with that. Same way gore movies would be wrong if they had to torture their actors/actresses.
|
On June 08 2011 07:00 Sindsygafnatur wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2011 06:58 Deadlyfish wrote:On June 08 2011 06:55 Nashtak wrote: I don't care if it really is the sickest thing ever recorded, banning movies, or any other sort of entertainment products, based on the opinion of a stuck-up minority is unacceptable. Well that's not true is it? Everyone has a limit to how far they'll go. Banning pedophile movies seems acceptable to me, wouldnt you agree? Well they didn't ban A Serbian Film(Haven't watched it). At least not everywhere.
Well i dont know what they actually showed in the movie, but if they show children getting raped i think it should be banned. Some things are just too far out.
|
Honestly, I find it semi-amusing. I wouldn't watch it, personally, but censorship is unneeded. If you don't want to see the film, don't watch it. It's that simple.
|
On June 08 2011 06:56 Sindsygafnatur wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2011 06:49 skeldark wrote:On June 08 2011 06:42 Sindsygafnatur wrote:On June 08 2011 06:40 skeldark wrote:On June 08 2011 06:39 Olinim wrote:On June 08 2011 06:37 skeldark wrote:
so there is no question if you should ban such shit because only really dangerous and ill people would watch is anyway. but i think its really scary that there is a bigger market for such films and that there are so many mental ill people around. You're mentally ill if you think watching a movie means you're dangerous. not watching it makes you dangerous! but that you WANT to watch such shit means you ARE dangerous! I heard about this movie...where someone kills another person, just because he's evil and mean. Have you seen it? you dont get the difference about a movie where someone shot someone and a movie where they show how people are tortured in detail? Okay so movies involving torture should be banned because they make people dangerous. Are there other unpleasant things we should be sheltered from? How about people being mean to each other? People who don't wash their hands after they pee? God they make me wanna blow shit up!
I never say it makes you dangerous. a child perhaps... if you want to watch this you are allready dangerous.
The majority have the right to deny rights. that why we make laws. To deny rights of minority to the better good of all. Only because there is a law dont mean it must be good. we should ask ourself every time if our rules are good or if we need new rules. But there is no overall problem on denying something, our society base on this.
So i say the right of many to live secure is more worth than the right of few who likes to watch how people get torture.
The danger that this ill people will harm someone more likely because they see such movies is small but still big enough to deny them this right.
I can understand that people want to give them the right to watch this. even if they are dangerous watching this movie must not mean the start to act like this. But i think the little chance is enough.
|
I thought it was gross on Southpark personally let alone a hole movie!@
however banning in a country seems ridiculous, I think people are smart enough to make there own decision if they want to see it or not... not the government telling them they can or cannot.
|
On June 08 2011 07:02 vyyye wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2011 06:58 Deadlyfish wrote:On June 08 2011 06:55 Nashtak wrote: I don't care if it really is the sickest thing ever recorded, banning movies, or any other sort of entertainment products, based on the opinion of a stuck-up minority is unacceptable. Well that's not true is it? Everyone has a limit to how far they'll go. Banning pedophile movies seems acceptable to me, wouldnt you agree? That's because the production of child pornography has to involve a child actress, which is fucking wrong and I don't think anyone who doesn't have a screw lose would disagree with that. Same way gore movies would be wrong if they had to torture their actors/actresses.
Well, let's just hypothetically say that they showed child porn but nobody was hurt under the filming, nothing was illegal about it.
Would showing it be OK?
I might be playing the devils advocate a little bit here, just curious though
|
Doesn't seem like anything special to me, just another movie trying too hard for "shock value"
|
On June 08 2011 06:58 Deadlyfish wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2011 06:55 Nashtak wrote: I don't care if it really is the sickest thing ever recorded, banning movies, or any other sort of entertainment products, based on the opinion of a stuck-up minority is unacceptable. Well that's not true is it? Everyone has a limit to how far they'll go. Banning pedophile movies seems acceptable to me, wouldnt you agree? Pedophile movies harm another person, in this case a minor. Do you know the difference between licentiousness and freedom to do what you want?
|
A lot of people arguing that this movie shouldn't be banned seem to be Americans who come from a country where the right to freedom of expression is absolute and enshrined in law. There is no equivalent in Europe that I know if other than in France possibly; it is why it is illegal to be a neo-nazi in Germany and why the UK has banned many public figures especially from America which the foreign office have deemed guilty of hate speech. It is why the BNP, the party closest ideologically to the tea party, in England has almost no support and has almost been banned many times as a hate organization. You cannot impose the American value of unqualified freedom of speech onto a country to which it does not apply.
There is no libertarian streak in European politics and governments are generally are expected to legislate or be involved in people's lives to a much greater extent that America. This isn't to say that Europe is against freedom of expression it just has a limit on what can be expressed. We trust our politicians to be liberal where as Americans seem to fear that their politicians will act like fascists.
By the sounds of what the BBFC has said the only difference between this and a snuff film is that it is fictional so I don't have a problem with it being banned. I mean seriously linking the rape of a woman with barbed wire to sexual arousal is too far. If you look at the BBFC past rulings they are actually very fair in regards to how they rate movies and ban very few.
|
On June 08 2011 07:06 Deadlyfish wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2011 07:02 vyyye wrote:On June 08 2011 06:58 Deadlyfish wrote:On June 08 2011 06:55 Nashtak wrote: I don't care if it really is the sickest thing ever recorded, banning movies, or any other sort of entertainment products, based on the opinion of a stuck-up minority is unacceptable. Well that's not true is it? Everyone has a limit to how far they'll go. Banning pedophile movies seems acceptable to me, wouldnt you agree? That's because the production of child pornography has to involve a child actress, which is fucking wrong and I don't think anyone who doesn't have a screw lose would disagree with that. Same way gore movies would be wrong if they had to torture their actors/actresses. Well, let's just hypothetically say that they showed child porn but nobody was hurt under the filming, nothing was illegal about it. Would showing it be OK? I might be playing the devils advocate a little bit here, just curious though  No, you can't fake child porn. There doesn't have to be physical pain for the process to be damaging mentally, there's a reason it's illegal. If the child was a robot (lol) or perfect CGI I wouldn't really give two shits about it though. Like I think anyone enjoying the Japanese cartoon child porn is a fucking creep, it isn't really hurting anyone and it's better for him to watch cartoons than for him to support the fuckheads producing child porn.
But I'll be honest to my hypocrisy. If they banned (or is it already banned?) child porn made with CGI and with no actual children I can't say I'd enter threads about it opposing the censorship.
|
Well apparently this movie is like Cinderella compared to "A Serbian Film".
|
|
|
|