Censorship and Classification: get the product to market or promote other
Soon come the Oscars, and they will again interesting debates about the cinema permeating the media. The topic to which I refer on this occasion is tangential relationship with Oscar: censorship and classification movies. Tangent and say that the motivation for choosing this subject arises for two reasons which I set one by one. On the one hand, I have still a vivid memory of the gala which enjoyed Aberystwyth, when two separate members of Monty Python came to celebrate the screening of the film "Life of Brian" in 2009, just thirty years after been censored in this small Welsh campus.
Nothing more public focus assumed in triumph over oppression that prevents freedom of expression. However, shortly after a student there showed that although the film was in effect censored 30 years ago, was shown two years in not one, but two features of local movie theater, The Commodore.
On the other hand, the famous case recently reminded of the movie "A Serbian Film", whose recent censorship in San Sabastian was profiled by several newspapers (eg El Espectador ). It is clear that not even consider important here to discuss the content of a movie that I have not the slightest interest in seeing. But as I mentioned the article in The Spectator, and how it can be assumed to read the comments of the news of the film "Life of Brian" from Monty Python, one thing is clear: the prohibition through censorship may also be, in terms of markets, products, and promoting those who want to feel and focuses on extreme liberal who likes to tell the truth of these atrocities, to reach his goal.
The question then is: How far is more useful option censorship as opposed to the simple classification film? A lecturer at Aberystwyth University who is currently serving his doctorate in the subject of movie ratings with the British Chamber of Film Classification, BBFC for its acronym in English, I mentioned something similar recently while having coffee: the censorship of a product can become your best advertisement, as has been said already on the case of the "video nasties" of the 70s and 80s in the UK. Although I differ greatly from the famous column Germain Santamaría in opposition to the showing of "The Lady of the Assassins" by Barbet Schroeder, I find myself in agreement that we badly we disagree with those presented in a movie review it. So, unlike you, do not talk content models of these films, allowing each one according your personal opinion about it, but rather I am writing to think well about the work of classifying films for determine the optimal public. not think that this is very simple. The rules affecting the classification of films film also affect access to cinemas and, therefore, threaten the income of a movie. This is where you finally complete the circle looking rhetoric with which I began my trick. As we said Ben Child in his column in The Guardian , the producer of the movie "the King's Speech", by Tom Hooper, widely nominated for an Oscar, would seek to reduce the instances in which the protagonist, Colin Firth to act as his majesty George VI of Britain, using language inappropriate for young boys Americans. This is because the expression of profanity produces a more restrictive classification (R) waiver that if they (PG13). This classification leads to less access to movie theaters. Ergo, if the Oscar winning film can expand and enhance its audience, even fill the coffers of its producers.
That% & $ * production is self-censorship!
0 comments:
Post a Comment