fabio de lunatico
Claymore
For the Paranoia Agent cut, I agree entirely. The Geass edit was slightly different in that the shot removed was "likely to encourage an interest in underage sex", which frankly is even more stupid.ayase said:
MangaUK confirm Strike witches uncut
- Thread starter Ryo Chan
- Start date
fabio de lunatico
Claymore
Only the first episode. Unless there's a bunch of violent, explicit rape scenes later in the show (and if the BBFC didn't see fit to remove anything I'm guessing there isn't), I can't imagine why anyone would worry about edits. A lot has changed since the late 1990s.memorium said:
fabio de lunatico
Claymore
Unless there's something I'm forgetting, Paranoia Agent and Code Geass are the only mainstream anime titles they've cut in what must be close to 15 years. I don't agree with either of those edits but it's not like they have the scissors out on a regular basis.
Only R18 stuff can't be shown to minors. The rest simply can't be purchased by minors, or can't be seen by them in a cinema.ayase said:
Yes the BBFC assume you'll ignore the rating and give 18 certed suff to 12 year olds.
La Blue Girl Returns banfabricatedlunatic said:
and 1 ep of Urotsukidoji (OVA) got banned
fabio de lunatico
Claymore
I don't think either of those qualify as "mainstream".Reaper gI said:
I'd like to see the BBFC only remove material such as real animal cruelty and keep **** like Bumfights off the shelves, but the woefully outdated Obscene Publications Act means their remit is much wider.
Shiroi Hane
Dragon Knight
Those grooming children don't exactly pay attention to age ratings, which is why that sort of stuff isn't allowed in the country under any age rating.fabricatedlunatic said:
fabio de lunatico
Claymore
My point was that it's a ridiculous assertion.
Paradox295
Pokémon Master
Mhm. Ratings for physical media are stupid. If they kept BBFC for cinemas, sure. But any half-decent parent can take away a kid's DVD/Video Game if they think it's unsuitable.ayase said:
Animefreak17
Godhand
so is strike witch going to be uncut or what
That rarely happens though. Parents are unlikely to be watching their kids playing a game to make a judgement. Probably unlikely to see a movie with their kids these days, with so many having their own TV and DVD player now. So the age rating is what they base the judgement on.Paradox295 said:
But it doesn't stop some parents complaining to shop staff when they refuse to sell something 18 rated to a 12 year old earlier in the day.
Animefreak17
Godhand
yes i know im just double checkingmemorium said:
ayase
State Alchemist
Well that's the argument the authorities use anyway. And their answer to that problem is to subject everybody else to compulsory censorship because some people make sh*t parents. Yeah, seems fair. ¬_¬JohnC said:
People need to take responsibility for themselves, and their children if they have them. If people aren't willing to do so that's their problem, no-one else's.
Firstly, I'll just say that I am opposed to censorship, but age ratings, as a guideline, do have their place.
Secondly, what you want is unrealistic, and what you are doing is calling the vast majority of parents sh*t, not just some. I don't know if you have kids, but what you are expecting is for parents to do a days work, come home and do more work relating to family and the home and then find the time to screen everything their kids watch or play before allowing them to and somehow leave some family time? There's not enough hours in the day.
Secondly, what you want is unrealistic, and what you are doing is calling the vast majority of parents sh*t, not just some. I don't know if you have kids, but what you are expecting is for parents to do a days work, come home and do more work relating to family and the home and then find the time to screen everything their kids watch or play before allowing them to and somehow leave some family time? There's not enough hours in the day.