Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 29, 2024, 02:18:11 PM

Login with username, password and session length

The Human Centipede II rejected by BBFC

Started by Subtle Mocking, June 06, 2011, 06:56:56 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Subtle Mocking

http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=31162
Quote"The first film dealt with a mad doctor who sews together three kidnapped people in order to produce the 'human centipede'of the title. Although the concept of the film was undoubtedly tasteless and disgusting it was a relatively traditional and conventional horror film and the Board concluded that it was not in breach of our Guidelines at '18'. This new work, The Human Centipede II (Full Sequence), tells the story of a man who becomes sexually obsessed with a DVD recording of the first film and who imagines putting the 'centipede' idea into practice. Unlike the first film, the sequel presents graphic images of sexual violence, forced defecation, and mutilation, and the viewer is invited to witness events from the perspective of the protagonist. Whereas in the first film the 'centipede' idea is presented as a revolting medical experiment, with the focus on whether the victims will be able to escape, this sequel presents the 'centipede' idea as the object of the protagonist's depraved sexual fantasy.

The principal focus of The Human Centipede II (Full Sequence) is the sexual arousal of the central character at both the idea and the spectacle of the total degradation, humiliation, mutilation, torture, and murder of his naked victims. Examples of this include a scene early in the film in which he masturbates whilst he watches a DVD of the original Human Centipede film, with sandpaper wrapped around his penis, and a sequence later in the film in which he becomes aroused at the sight of the members of the 'centipede' being forced to defecate into one another's mouths, culminating in sight of the man wrapping barbed wire around his penis and raping the woman at the rear of the 'centipede'. There is little attempt to portray any of the victims in the film as anything other than objects to be brutalised, degraded and mutilated for the amusement and arousal of the central character, as well as for the pleasure of the audience. There is a strong focus throughout on the link between sexual arousal and sexual violence and a clear association between pain, perversity and sexual pleasure. It is the Board's conclusion that the explicit presentation of the central character's obsessive sexually violent fantasies is in breach of its Classification Guidelines and poses a real, as opposed to a fanciful, risk that harm is likely to be caused to potential viewers."

If we were in Australia or Germany this might be something of a non-event. It's quite rare to see a film banned in the UK these days, and the original Human Centipede garnered something of a cult following. According to the article above they have about 8 weeks to appeal against it, but there'd probably have to be a fair bit cut to make it acceptable for cinemas.

The film sounds fucking disgusting but you have to wonder if banning it will make any difference, especially with the wide availability of films on the internet. Any opinions on film censorship here?

madhair60

I'm very fond of the BBFC and find them extremely approachable and helpful.  I think they've made a sound judgment here - besides, anyone who wants to see it uncut easily can.

I'm fairly mixed on film censorship.  When a film falls afoul of UK obscenity law as this one seems to (going by the blurb above), then I can understand the need.  I'm pro-classification but also believe in freedom of viewing choice for adults, obviously.  It's a difficult balance but I think the BBFC do an excellent job.  As you said, we haven't seen an outright ban for a while now.

Goldentony

Sexual violence seems to be the only thing they're remotely touchy about these days since they started finding ninja stars less and less objectionable. I can't say i'm surprised they've lost the plot if the above description of the film is anything to go by, especially after all that Grotesque controversey, but don't think I can ever find an outright ban of fiction to be anything other than stupid. Especially in 2011 when you can walk into HMV and pick up a fully uncut DVD copy of Island Of Death off the shelf, which is as ridiculous as this movie sounds.

SOTS

Won't people just... download it illegally? I can't imagine anyone buying the actual DVD in the first place.

Santa's Boyfriend

A film has to be pretty beyond the pale in intent in order to get banned these days.  I well remember the days of going through pirate videos on sale at comics conventions and seeing things like Straw Dogs and The Exorcist, both of which were banned outright by James Ferman and were released almost as soon as he left.  Films were regularly cut back then, but it's rare that such a thing happens these days unless the company wants to get a lower rating - and even then it's usually removing a head-butt or something.[nb]The BBFC really doesn't like head-butts in children's and teenagers' films.  Even The Matrix had a 2 second cut for head-butt removal.[/nb]  Films are rarely cut now for blood or gore etc, they're simply classified - and I'm really glad I live in a country where a film being classified 18 doesn't prevent it from being seen (unlike the NC-17 rating in the US).  I agree with madhair60 about the BBFC doing an excellent job walking a fine line. 

This film isn't being rejected because of anything you see, it's being rejected because of its intent regarding sexual violence and inviting the audience to enjoy torture and mutilation.  And I can see their point.

SOTS - yes people will download it illegally.  But not that many people will - and they'd have to know about the film in the first place, too.  I don't think it's a reasonable argument to say "oh well we might as well release it then" because some people know how to get hold of it illegally.  (I know that's not necessarily what you were saying!)

Depressed Beyond Tables

It's like they've taken the first film and stitched its anus to the mouth of the sequel.

biggytitbo

I've seen worse on a Saturday night in Leeds town centre.

You can't really blame the bbfc, it sounds a bit nasty. It's not really a censorship concern though, if someone wants to watch it they can.

biggytitbo

Quote from: SOTS on June 06, 2011, 07:40:45 PM
Won't people just... download it illegally? I can't imagine anyone buying the actual DVD in the first place.

The only people I can imagine would want to pay to see it would be people who are already seeking out this kind of stuff on the Internet now.

Big Jack McBastard

#8
If there's one thing we know about those of an oriental persuasion is they like doing stuff which involves mass co-ordination, Olympics openings, a tribute Thriller video in a prison yard, a parade march of high-kicking high-shorted heavily armed ladies to fill Kim Jong-il with... national pride, a hundred couples all shagging at the same time in a warehouse with a mirrored floor, you get my drift, yeah.

Human Millipede anyone?

It'd be no trouble to cast, hell the Japanese thought the first one was a comedy, they'd do a cracking job I'm sure.

El Unicornio, mang

Quote from: Santa's Boyfriend on June 06, 2011, 07:46:08 PM
Films are rarely cut now for blood or gore etc, they're simply classified - and I'm really glad I live in a country where a film being classified 18 doesn't prevent it from being seen (unlike the NC-17 rating in the US). 

The NC-17 rating doesn't stop films being seen, it's just that some cinemas refuse to show films with such a rating. In fact, films in the US don't require ratings at all, but studios want to get a rating to ensure their film won't be rejected by any cinema chains. The NC-17 rating is very rare though, the vast majority of films which are 18 in the UK are R-rated in the US, and most NC-17 films are edited to make them into R's anyway. Plus, if you go to a video store you can pick up any title, NC-17, R or unrated, without a problem. Many studios will even ensure they get an NC-17 as they tend to sell very well when released on home format.

Quotesince they started finding ninja stars less and less objectionable

Seems quite laughable now that 20 years ago Nunchakus were banned in films released in the UK!

Subtle Mocking

Quote from: Big Jack McBastard on June 06, 2011, 08:17:01 PM
Human Millipede anyone?

It'd be no trouble to cast, hell the Japanese thought the first one was a comedy, they'd do a cracking job I'm sure.

It'll probably go to Saw lengths of milking. The Human Train? The Human Nile? The Great Human Wall of China?

Ginyard

#11
Human Centipede Pterodactyl, and I'll be first in line with the popcorn. Why can't the writers use their imaginations and strap a pair of wings on them? At least get the chain gang to glide through a valley or two before the back-half is barb buggered.

Cerys

Dammit, I was hoping that the series would follow a logical progression, finally culminating in the whole of the UK parliament and/or US Congress being stitched together.

Santa's Boyfriend

Quote from: El Unicornio, mang on June 06, 2011, 08:20:29 PM
The NC-17 rating doesn't stop films being seen, it's just that some cinemas refuse to show films with such a rating.

I understood it to be that most cinema chains wouldn't accept an NC-17 film and most high street chain stores wouldn't stock them so as to not upset the morality police?  Has that changed?

Depressed Beyond Tables

Quote from: Cerys on June 06, 2011, 08:56:16 PM
Dammit, I was hoping that the series would follow a logical progression, finally culminating in the whole of the UK parliament and/or US Congress being stitched together.

An hour and a half of a man trying to teach a centipede in a tuxedo to talk.

Ginyard

Quote from: Cerys on June 06, 2011, 08:56:16 PM
Dammit, I was hoping that the series would follow a logical progression, finally culminating in the whole of the UK parliament and/or US Congress being stitched together.

The Human Senatepede.


El Unicornio, mang

Quote from: Santa's Boyfriend on June 06, 2011, 08:57:05 PM
I understood it to be that most cinema chains wouldn't accept an NC-17 film and most high street chain stores wouldn't stock them so as to not upset the morality police?  Has that changed?

The big cinema chains often won't accept them, but places like Blockbuster make (or made, since they're going out of business) their living off Unrated and NC-17 versions of DVDs. Pretty much every gross-out teen comedy and gorefest horror that is released has an Unrated version that is released to appeal to those who demand gratuitous nudity and suchlike (although the "unrated" subtitle has meant less and less in recent years as it's just tacked on to boost sales). Plus, as I mentioned, most NC-17s are cut to make them into Rs anyway. Most 18s used to be cut before release, not sure if that's the case now though.

Here's a list of NC-17s:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NC-17_rated_films

As you can see, only a few retained their NC-17 rating (or X as it used to be)

Subtle Mocking

From Louis Theroux on Twitter:
'Do you think the Human Centipede II being banned in the UK is unlawful censorship?'

In short, no.

Santa's Boyfriend

The BBFC is the lawful body through which all films must pass if they are to be screened for cash.  It's paid for by and run with the consent of the movie studios themselves, as a way of protecting themselves against morality witch-hunts.  Considering how well-reasoned the BBFC's case against the movie is, how it could be regarded as unlawful censorship is beyond me.

Funcrusher

It's lawful, I would just prefer to have the chance to decide for myself what I think of a film, not have some bunch of bureaucrats decide it's not suitable for me.

madhair60

So download it like everyone was going to anyway.

Subtle Mocking

Exactly. It was never going to be a box office smash, was it?

SOTS

Quote from: Santa's Boyfriend on June 06, 2011, 07:46:08 PM
SOTS - yes people will download it illegally.  But not that many people will - and they'd have to know about the film in the first place, too.  I don't think it's a reasonable argument to say "oh well we might as well release it then" because some people know how to get hold of it illegally.  (I know that's not necessarily what you were saying!)

No-one I know that has heard of the film found out about it via regular advertising, nor did anyone watch it by actually obtaining a DVD copy. It's all completely online and word-of-mouth. Most of the people that are going to watch this one are people that watched the first one and already know about the sequel.

So many people are horrified by the fact that i've seen the first one but I honestly didn't find it that bad. The hallmark of it is not it's grossness but the fact that it's a ridiculous concept and that the film itself is quite rubbish and badly acted.

AsparagusTrevor

Quote from: Ginyard on June 06, 2011, 08:25:30 PM
Human Centipede Pterodactyl, and I'll be first in line with the popcorn.
I'm sure that'll pop up on Syfy any day now.

Danger Man

Other countries have Government censors. Thank God we live in a world of 100% freedom where films are just 'classified'.

El Unicornio, mang

Interesting list of countries with banned films. Certainly doesn't give much credence to the theory that banning films makes a society better, looking at some of the places with high levels of bannage

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_banned_films

Subtle Mocking

I mentioned Australia in the first post but looking at that list of their banned films, I was referring more to their history of game censorship.

El Unicornio, mang

I would like to think that Burma banned Meet the Spartans due to it being really, really shit

Subtle Mocking

We really dropped the ball by not banning that one. Malaysia have a massive ban list too.