Blue Valentine film 'opened censorship debate'

Tell us what's happening in your part of the world.
Forum rules
The emphasis here is on original comment and opinion by the poster.
Article length Cut-and-Past posts are discouraged.
The general Code of Conduct rules apply to this forum.

Blue Valentine film 'opened censorship debate'

Postby AJRC » 16 Jan 2011, 10:53

The director of Blue Valentine has said the recent battle over its certificate in the US has helped open a debate over cinema sex and violence.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-12192734

This has always puzzled me about the US. It's censors go apoplectic when they see sex, but gratuitous violence doesn't get a second thought.

"It's started a big discussion in America about why is sex taboo and why is violence okay. I think the MPAA has to re-evaluate its stance on things.

"I feel like my kids will see far worse things during commercials on football games - violence and guns.


The movie is now showing here in the UK with a rating of 15, but in the US it caused a storm when it got a NC-17 but on appeal it got downgraded to an R. Some say there is explicit sexual content and shouldn't be shown to anyone under 17, but on the other hand you have ultra violent movies with the R rating all the time. Is it a double standard to say violence is ok but sex isn't?

I mean is it a religious thing? It got through the UK censors without any problem at all. Is it a conservative thing? I still remember the controversy when Janet Jackson's boob popped out for half a second during the Superbowl. Some in the US were up in arms about indecency while over here in the UK we were like "what's all the fuss about?"

Should sex be such a taboo while violence isn't?
User avatar
AJRC
Oracle Class Poster
Oracle Class Poster
 
Posts: 5108
Joined: 22 Aug 2007, 03:34
Location: Newcastle Upon Tyne, England

Return to In Other News

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests

cron