KingJimmeh
Magical Girl
So it goes to show that anime as a block on a pre-existing channel rather than its own channel could be a viable option.
Anime Central to be taken off the air!
- Thread starter Voddas
- Start date
ConanThe3rd
Railgun
I dunno, the way it's going, we might as well not bother, cuz someone's going to go and Eff up our christmas in this regard. Be it the company itself, it's brodcaster (Sky killed Rapture) or Ofcom (Killin' ninja since 2006)
That would be closer to 1986 when Ofcom decided that the word Ninja was too violent to be used in a children's cartoon title, the result of which was that the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles became Teenage Mutant Hero Turtles. Nothing really new there then... At least they have relaxed that a little now and allow the characters in Naruto to be ninjasConan-san said:
MrChom
School Idol
Gawyn said:That would be closer to 1986 when Ofcom decided that the word Ninja was too violent to be used in a children's cartoon title, the result of which was that the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles became Teenage Mutant Hero Turtles. Nothing really new there then... At least they have relaxed that a little now and allow the characters in Naruto to be ninjasConan-san said:
Perfectly correct aside from Ofcom not existing till 2002.
As far as I know the "Ninja" was dropped because the BBFC disliked the term, and would be liable to jack up the rating for home video versions. Thus to keep the whole line of merchandise accessible by kids everything was changed. These changes also included cuts in the intro, and the show itself to remove some weapon use (followed by further BBC enforced dialogue cuts).
This was largely off the back of some incidents with commonly available martial arts weapons at the time, and is pretty much the birth of the BBFC policy on imitatable violence (e.g. killing someone with a knife is less acceptable to them than a gunshot).
MrChom
School Idol
Sy said:
The problem with 12a is that parents aren't being responsible with it. The BBFC advise a minimum of 8 for a 12a film, but the problem is that most parents just see it as being able to see a film they want to go and see without having to hire a babysitter.
I'd be a lot happier if they reintroduced a "hard" 12 alongside 12a, so that stuff that's only just over a PG can be a 12a, but stuff that's just under a 15 can be a 12.
The assumption was always that there would be parental control over what kids would see, a certain responsibility to ensure your kid doesn't 1. end up scarred for life, or 2. annoying other cinema goers. Sadly this never happened. Frankly I'd love a cinema where I could go, maybe for an extra fiver, and they'd stop behaviour like screaming little kids in movies....you know, remove all the people with their feet up, stop people from coming in late, kick anyone out for using a mobile phone (even on silent, the lights are damned distracting)....but then I'm a grumpy old fart....whatcha gonna do.
Is out of here
Great Teacher
Sy said:
Like the latest batman film................not that it bothered me but apparently some people did complain.
I complained. The movie is clearly not suitable for young children with the atmosphere and themes alone should have got it a solid 15 rating. The cinema was packed with kids and I can assure you that most were uneasy and uncomfortable throughout the movie. The BBFC defend it on the grounds that the violence isn't explictly show and only implied. If that's the case then perhaps Seven shouldnt be rated 18? The threat and implications of violence can have just as much if not more of an effect. If I want to go down their road then the Jokers infamous pencil trick is imitatable by kids.EpicLulz said:
ayase
State Alchemist
Just get rid of the damn BBFC, another group who like to enforce their view of what is and isn't acceptable on others. Nothing in a 12A is going to do mental damage to a kid unless they're damaged already. The only things I don't thing kids should see is sexual violence and horrific gore, because that really might disturb them. Someone being beaten up or threatened... kids see that in the playground at school. A lot of people seem to have the view that children are innocent and must be protected from corrupting influence. Unless your kid never goes out of the house (which may be possible in the scaremongering times we live in) or watches TV or uses a computer - because often there's worse stuff on the news than in films - then they are going to learn about the world. And it is going to harden their hearts and take away their innocence. Because that's life. That's growing up. It seems to have turned into a battle between parents and the world as to how long they can keep their kids from learning the truth.
To my mind the most important thing parents and schools can do about it is teach kids to distinguish between fantasy and reality - most of them can.
To my mind the most important thing parents and schools can do about it is teach kids to distinguish between fantasy and reality - most of them can.
ayase
State Alchemist
Because we still have the Obscene Publications Act (1959 & 1964), the purpose of which is:chaos said:
"An Act to strengthen the law for preventing the publication for gain of obscene matter and the publication of things intended for the production of obscene matter."
So in other words, the UK has a law stopping things from being published which are, according the the powers that be, "obscene". And people think the "Nanny State" is something new...
To be frank ayase the main problem I think with the BBFC is that their guidelines are generally not that bad and work quite well but they very rarely seem to stick to them themseleves. By how they rate movies and tv shows they undermine and show little faith in their own rating system. It seems like all they do is look for loopholes.
MrChom
School Idol
chaos said:
The BBFC do have some fairly concrete guidelines on what is and is not appropriate ate certain ratings....unfortunately due to the fact that for 40 years we had the strictest film board in Europe (Barring Ireland) they've decided to go a bit soft in recent years.
Fellowship of the Ring has limb removal and decapitation....that got a PG....that's the one I always pull out when I need to. The BBFC guidelines stricly say it should be a 12am but is it? No. Why? Dunno. No actual proper reason at all, it just happened.
As for getting rid of the BBFC, Ayase, I quite disagree (It's such a surprise, I know, even I'm shocked our opinions differ
). I think the BBFC should, as I said, reintroduce the "hard" 12, and become a little stricter again in its ratings system. The reason I say this is that some kids DO need protecting, and some adults need a damn guideline too. Now I'm not part of the "violent films breed violent people" mob, far from it, I love a good kung fu movie with a couple of beers and the closest I get to violence these days is doing punches as part of a workout. What I am saying is that a lot of 18 rated films can scar kids, mentally. I know one kid who at 10 suffered some quite bad psychological trauma from watching a horror movie with some friends, but it doesn't have to be as deep as that....some kids are just plain upset by what they see, and for me that's enough for an age rating systems to be necessary.Some kids are going to be scarred by depictions of violence, sex, sustained horror, gore, etc. It's for those kids that we need that rating system in place, and have it well enforced. I realise that some kids are more mature than others of their age and might be ready for a movie earlier than others, great, when it's on DVD their parents can watch it first and then make that decision.
The BBFC is not part of a nanny state, it's just common sense to my mind.
ayase
State Alchemist
But they only look for loopholes when it suits them to do so.
An anime related incident I can think of is that they cut Paranoia Agent on the grounds that a child attempting to hang herself was "imitable by children" That was a mandatory cut to something which already had an 18 certificate! So in that case they decided "We can't show this at all, because children *might* see it, even if it has an 18 certifacate on the box!"
What the hell's the difference with a gory horror film with an 18 certificate? Or pornography? Should they ban these because children "might" see them? It's a slippery slope...
edit: Hey Chom. Let's just cut to the chase and agree to disagree again, eh? :wink: You'll win anyway 'cause there's no way I can see the BBFC ever being brought down, much as I do dream of doing it myself...
An anime related incident I can think of is that they cut Paranoia Agent on the grounds that a child attempting to hang herself was "imitable by children" That was a mandatory cut to something which already had an 18 certificate! So in that case they decided "We can't show this at all, because children *might* see it, even if it has an 18 certifacate on the box!"
What the hell's the difference with a gory horror film with an 18 certificate? Or pornography? Should they ban these because children "might" see them? It's a slippery slope...
edit: Hey Chom. Let's just cut to the chase and agree to disagree again, eh? :wink: You'll win anyway 'cause there's no way I can see the BBFC ever being brought down, much as I do dream of doing it myself...
I wouldnt be surprised if these big production companies like Warner Bros offer them something look for loopholes in the rating system to get them lowered.ayase said:
About the Paranoia Agent thing, thats exactly the sort of thing I mean by showing little faith in their own ratings system.
MrChom
School Idol
Ahhh, now the cutting of stuff at 18 is a bit of an issue for me, I saw the original uncut version, and the cut version and am still confused as to why the BBFC demanded it in an 18 cert.
I'm not saying 18 material should be unregulated by any means (There are some things that go against public moral decency and should be banned.....like any video containing Maggie Thatcher)....but I do think that cut was bizarre considering that stuff like Hostel is allowed a UK release. At all. EVER.
Oh, and Ayase, I always agree to disagree....loudly....and often, whilst stating my opinions in bullet point format complete with trying to get actual evidence to back some up. I can't help it....I just love to argue
I'm not saying 18 material should be unregulated by any means (There are some things that go against public moral decency and should be banned.....like any video containing Maggie Thatcher)....but I do think that cut was bizarre considering that stuff like Hostel is allowed a UK release. At all. EVER.
Oh, and Ayase, I always agree to disagree....loudly....and often, whilst stating my opinions in bullet point format complete with trying to get actual evidence to back some up. I can't help it....I just love to argue
chaos
The Boss
it's simply, ridiculous. Anyway, I agree with Mr. Chom. I've had nightmares because of the "Poltergeist" movie for ages... I've got over this by my own, but it did took a long time.
Censorship though, as in the case of paranoia agent, is something I can't agree to though, had my fair share of censorship back home (dictatorship comes to mind, here....)
Censorship though, as in the case of paranoia agent, is something I can't agree to though, had my fair share of censorship back home (dictatorship comes to mind, here....)