so I wouldn't worry so much przgzr.
If they've said (or given the impression) that it's not open for discussion that just shows you how mature they are.
I really don't see the use in being concerned about whether the girl was old enough to have consented to filming or not. First of all it's in the past. All the outrage in the world can't go back and change what's happened.
As for concern for the future, you can't control what's going on behind closed doors and what any director or actors may engage in.
If any law were broken it should (and I assume was?) brought up and dealt with at the time.
But if Internet is multinational, multicultural, open to all people from all countries, one would expect that people who use it - especially on a site like this that is supposed to gather people with certain level of education and culture - would have some basic decency.
It's open to anyone, not only that but is anonymous which means all kinds of people will gather (trolls, timewasters, troublemakers, preachers) and most intelligent cultured people wouldn't waste their time on message boards trying to get through to the general population or general
internet population anyway.
I don't see the point of banning films. I think it's ludicrous actually. That's why I'm suprised at what you said Troy-Boy1971. You appeared to be against it too? But why SHOULD I (or the person you were directing your comment at) have to go online and seach for hours, sometimes even weeks and months to find a DVD. Pay extra to get it imported, pay money as it comes through customs, make sure my DVD is the right region etc.
Suppose they wanted to ban tomatoes or something because "someone" in charge didn't particularily like them or think it was good for the country's citizens. Is that fair to the general population who might want tomatoes?
If they sit on a shelf in a supermarket they're not doing anyone any harm. Especially those who don't want to eat tomatoes. They are there for those who want them, or at least want a choice. I think EVERYONE would like to have choice, no?
Isn't that everyone's right?
There is NO PROOF that a tomato or a film will have a bad effect on someone. In fact, some people may have a bad reaction to tomatoes, but you wouldn't ban them just because a few people had a bad reaction to it or didn't know HOW to react to it. This is the kind of thing that's happening in the world today though. Political correctness, fear of lawsuits etc. Putting excessive warning labels on stuff. Eg: packet of nuts : this product contains nuts.
Microwave: don't use for drying your cat
Hot Coffee: warning, hot! don't spill on yourself as it may cause a burn
REALLY? Back to banning films though- It's complete BS. I believe that's what the watershed is for, and I have no problem with the watershed. No, Fat Girl should not be shown at 4pm in the afternoon. That makes sense.
But why should it not be shown AT ALL or in FULL because SOMEONE decided ..... well.. what did they decide actually? Because I see no good reason for banning or censoring ANY film.
You don't like it? Don't watch it. You saw something you didn't like? Switch it off and think about WHY you didn't like it, then deal with your own emotions.
You have access to the Internet, like everybody else here does. If this movie was banned in the U.S., and you wanted to watch it badly, you'd find a way to get it. You simply use your imagination, and use a search engine, and order the movie from another country if you had to.
It's common sense. ;)
That's not common sense. Not only is it hard to impossible to find some films, I don't see why anyone should have to go out of their way to watch this film. Also, a person doesn't usually purposely seek out films they might like to watch. They usually take their pick of what is available.
Since they made Fat Girl unavailable we're not free to choose it if we wanted. A lot of things in life happen by chance. How do you usually find your films? Look through message boards or a database of films and then go out of your way to find a copy of something specific? Probably not.
That's what I don't like. It's something like a mother trying to "protect" their children from things. Who are they (the state, or people who ban/censor films) to decide what is okay for me to see? It's just one example of how a country trys to control it's citizens and make them think less, or think what
they want them to think. No, it's not as simple as just ordering it online. Even then, that's hardly simple.
And that's all i have to say about that. For now.
reply
share
przgzr
18 years ago
"First of all it's in the past."
Yes, but it has an influence today, too. And, just for avoid their movies being banned, directors don't make brave movies any more. Americans gave up long ago, European authors have changed in last 10 years. Their movies look more and more like American: the more Americans become more strict, the more Europeans become more careful. Simple reason: it seems that literally every European director dreams that his movie will be released in USA (and maybe get Oscar nomination), and he mustn't put a single scene or content that would be questionable to Americans. Modern European directors seem to be frustrated they're not Americans and they make Europe look less worth. Besides, all European movies now look similar to American, and that makes things even worse, because American movie quality is worse then ever in their (up to few decades ago) great movie history.
Otherwise I agree with your post, as you've guessed.
reply
share
pracad
18 years ago
Yeah I was just meaning that complaining in this way, (on a completely unrelated message board...) no directors are going to read or take notice of it.. it doesn't influence films that are in the process of being made, and not the future.
Although I think that they are getting stricter too, (so there's not that much to worry about in the child nudity department) I think part of the reason is to reach a wider audience and avoid lawsuits and public scandal.
But these laypeople can worry and be concerned all they want but they have ZERO say in any of it, and all their venting and "warnings" and concerns put forth on a message board isn't going to turn back time or change what the film rating bosses choose to do.
Luckily.
Like I always say, i'm not aroused by the film so I see nothing that concerns me. If the people see the film or little girl's body as sexual then it's THEM who have the problem. That's precisely why some of them are so bothered by it. They need to get off here and work out their issues elsewhere.
And that's all i have to say about that. For now.
reply
share
przgzr
18 years ago
We obviously didn't think the same by "influence"; I ment that attitudes people express (not only on IMDb), and they do it very loud, make censors stricter and authors more careful and avoiding some "disturbing" content or scenes.
Or do you think that a person whose major argument is "period" - "I say that so everyone is free and obliged to think the way I do" - would only sent posts to IMDb? I'm sure they do the same on PTA, Party and chuch meetings, write to congressmen, TV stations, Oprah etc. And that is the influence I was talking about. Yes, and due to that "to reach a wider audience and avoid lawsuits and public scandal" became a priority, so new movies are mostly pale, boring, whatever thema do they deal with.
Someone would say "period". Not me. I am not going to change anybody's mind. I just want them to know there are still people who weren't sucessfuly brain-washed.
reply
share