Saturday, 16 June 2012
Friday, 11 May 2012
A Serbian Film shocked America
Serbian film shocked AmericaHorror that terrified even horror experienced critics - they sorry they saw it, predict it’s censorship, but also write songs of praise!Serbian horror film about the porn actor shocked even experienced American film critics.This is a snuff film theme which really captures the torture and murder, and shocking issue has yet shocking performance. The film was recently premiered at Texas Southby Southwest Film Festival and was horrified audiences and critics veterans.
Among the first to be reported Quint who writes for the famous Is not It Cool Newsreviews and the title of his talk that "people are hanged for crimes against humanity that were less offensive than 'Serbian film! The critic admitted that he watched countless horrible and gruesome films, mostly in Asian production, but this is the first that it was 'really shocked' and 'deeply disturbed', and looked at him open his mouth. Compares director Srdjan Spasojevic and co-writer Aleksandar Radivojevic with other ‘shocking' filmmakers like Gaspar Noe, Lars Von Trier and David Lynch.
Website Twitch has a great tradition of reviewing horror, and their reviewer are still complaining that after the film feels dirty and attacked, "says the film will experience a ‘legitimate protest' and laments the director who made an excellent debut film that will forever remain 'notorious'.
In the blog Cinematical critic Eugene Novikov also admitted that after the movie and he and other critics have acknowledged that this was a ' most shocking film they had ever seen. " In short, Novikov said that he was "a great advocate of freedom of speech ', but filmmakers have a moral obligation to not show certain scenes, and it is here' crossed boundaries'. We do not want you serving SPOILER, but it seems that this is a scene with the baby, so pure that you know - taken out of context, the scene will act sensationalist, and the screen would be really shocking. Scene appears on half of the film and critic announces that it just begins to cannonade the terrible scenes, and even complain about - what he ever saw!
Novikov says that the film is not exploitation but also the sheer political allegory about the terrible state of Serbian society, and this point and other critics. They emphasize that 'Serbian film is not' torture porn ', but intelligently done work that pulls the story you would rather not watch. In addition to the skills of directors, praised the convincing acting, multi-layered script, the music that you enter under the skin, and cinematography of Nemanja Jovanov.
It seems that, despite all the warnings, just the fame 'infamous film' help in distributing the film - if it ever wanted to be running. After the premiere, 'Serbian film goes by a variety of festivals, but cinematic distribution is unsure. The film was shot without government incentives and support to large distributors, so it will be his biggest verbal support that Internet advertising. As in real snuff film, and this film viewers themselves looking for scenes that will shock them. Just like Haneke’s 'Funny Games' - this movie puts the violent scenes in the front of voyeuristic audience, with a warning: "Is this his you were looking for?
INTERVIEW Director Srdjan Spasojevic: My shocking "Serbian film" denounces fascism of political correctness.
Friday, 4 May 2012
The BBFC
The BBFC are a independent, self-financing and not-for-profit media content regulator. they operate transparent, consistent and trusted co-regulatory and self-regulatory classification and labelling systems in the UK.
a list of the BBFC's codes and conventions are
- protect the public, and especially children, from content which might raise harm risks
- empower the public, especially parents, to make informed viewing choices
- recognise and respect adult freedom of choice within the law
- respond to and reflect changing social attitudes towards media content through proactive public consultation and research
- provide a cost-effective, efficient classification service within our statutory remit
- work in partnership with the industry to develop innovative service models to provide content advice which support emerging media delivery systems
- provide an effective service to enforcement agencies
Classification system
All classification decisions are based on the BBFC’s published and regularly updated Guidelines. The Guidelines are the product of extensive public consultation, research and the accumulated experience of the BBFC over many years. They reflect current views on film, DVD and video game regulation.
 | Universal | All ages admitted, there is nothing unsuitable for children. |
 | Parental Guidance | All ages admitted, but certain scenes may be unsuitable for young children. May contain mild language and sex/drugs references. May contain moderate violence if justified by context (e.g. fantasy). |
 | 12A | Cinema only. Introduced in 2002.
Films under this category are considered to be unsuitable for very young people. Those aged under 12 years are only admitted if accompanied by an adult, aged at least 18 years, at all times during the motion picture. However, it is generally not recommended that children under 12 years should watch the film. Films under this category can contain mature themes, discrimination, soft drugs, moderate swear words, infrequent strong language and moderate violence/sex references.
|
 | 12 | Home media only since 2002. 12A-rated films are usually given a 12 certificate for the VHS/DVD version unless extra material has been added that requires a higher rating.
Nobody younger than 12 can rent or buy a 12-rated VHS, DVD, Blu-ray Disc, UMD or game. Films in this category may include infrequent drugs, infrequent use of strong language, brief nudity, discreet sexual activity, and moderate violence.
|
 | 15 | Only those over 15 years are admitted.
Nobody younger than 15 can rent or buy a 15-rated VHS, DVD, Blu-ray Disc, UMD or game, or watch a film in the cinema with this rating. Films under this category can contain adult themes, hard drugs, strong language and one use of very strong language, moderate-strong violence/sex references, and undetailed sex activity.
|
 | 18 | Only adults are admitted.
Nobody younger than 18 can rent or buy an 18-rated VHS, DVD, Blu-ray Disc, UMD or game, or watch a film in the cinema with this rating. Films under this category do not have limitation on the bad language that is used. Hard drugs are generally allowed, and strong violence/sex references along with strong sexual activity is also allowed. Scenes of strong real sex may be permitted if justified by the context.
|
 | Restricted 18 |
Can only be shown at licensed adult cinemas or sold at licensed sex shops, and only to adults, those aged 18 or over. Films under this category are always hard-core pornography, defined as material intended for sexual stimulation and containing clear images of real sexual activity, strong fetish material, explicit animated images, or sight of certain acts such as triple simultaneous penetration and snowballing. There remains a range of material that is often cut from the R18 rating: strong images of injury in BDSM or spanking works, urolagnia, scenes suggesting incest even if staged, references to underage sex or childhood sexual development and aggressive behaviour such as hair-pulling or spitting on a performer are not permitted. More cuts are demanded in this category than any other category.[17]
|
BBFC or British Board of Film Classifications
RESEARCH:
It is perhaps
attribute to the power of the moving image that it should be subject to far
greater censorship than any other artistic medium. Current technology makes it
effectively impossible to censor the written word. Theatre censorship was
abolished in 1968 and there was never been any systematic regulation of other art
forms- anyone seeking to clampdown on such events must mount a private
prosecution, a lengthy and expensive process.
Film and video releases in Britain are amongst
the most tightly- regulated in the western World. With only a few exceptions
every commercially released film both in cinemas and on video will have been
vetted by the British Board of Film Classification originally founded in 1912
as the British Board of Film Censors which applies age restrictive
classifications, and in some cases, recommends cutting or otherwise altering
the film in order to conform to their guidelines. These guidelines are based on
two main factors: legal requirements (for instant unsimulated animal cruelty,
indecent images of children) and the BBFC’s own policies.
The latter have
changed enormously over the last century, ranging from rigidly applied lists of
forbidden topics to the current context-based system where artistic merit is a
key factor in assessing individual films.
Though this approach
has undoubtedly led to a number of important films being passed either uncut or
with a milder age restriction than one would expect, it is also controversial,
duo to the inevitable inconsistency.
Some films are treated
much more leniently than others with very similar content, as a result of
largely subjective judgements by a handful of people.
Contrary to popular
belief, the BBFC is not a government organisation. In fact, central government
has no direct involvement in film censorship beyond passing legislation
affecting the BBFC’s activities. Local authorities have considerably more
power, including the final say in whether or not certain films can be shown,
thought in the vast majority of cases they are happy to accept the BBFC’s
verdict. Indeed,, this is why the BBFC was created by the film industry in the
first place.
The history of British film censorship is
as much social as cultural.
The reasons films were banned in the 1920s
(revolutionary politics) and 1950s (nudity) say as much about the society of
the time as anything in the films. It is also revealing that in an era of far
greater equality the BBFC is noticeably tougher on sexual violence today than
it was 30 years ago, thought correspondingly much more relaxed about most other
issues.
As technology develops, the BBFC’s role may
well become less and less significant. A side effect of its stated commitment
to greater openness is that it is now easy to find out if films have been cut
in their British versions and current technology makes it equally simple to
order uncut and unclassified videos and DVDs from elsewhere. Such material
cannot be legally sold within the U.K. but there are no barriers to
importation. If this practice becomes widespread enough to affect the British
film industry economically, it is likely that pressure will be applied on the
BBFC to reflect this.
FILM CLASSIFICATION
The most significant piece of
legislation to affect BBFC classification standards is the Video Recordings Act 1984. This Act requires all ‘video
works’ (films, TV programmes, video games, etc) which are supplied on a disc,
tape or any other device capable of storing data electronically to be
classified by the BBFC, unless they fall within the definition of an exempted
work.
Under this Act, the
BBFC is obliged to have ‘special regard’ (among other relevant factors) to the
likelihood of video works being viewed in the home, and to any harm that may be
caused to potential viewers or, through their behaviour, to society by the
manner in which the work deals with criminal behaviour, illegal drugs, violent
behaviour or incidents, horrific behaviour or incidents, and human sexual
activity. In considering these issues, the BBFC needs to be mindful of the possible
effect not only on children but also on other vulnerable groups.
Video Recordings Act 2010 (VRA)
In January 2010, the Video Recordings
Act 2010 (VRA 2010) came into force. This simultaneously repealed and
immediately revived without amendment the Video Recordings Act 1984, in order
to correct a procedural error made during the passage of the VRA 1984.
The Human Rights Act 1998 establishes the right to freedom
of expression, and the BBFC has to have regard to the impact of its decisions
on the rights of any relevant person. The Act, however, permits such
restrictions on freedom of expression as are prescribed by law and are
necessary in a democratic society. These include the prevention of disorder or
crime and the protection of health and morals.
The designation under
which the BBFC operates in relation to ‘video works’ obliges the BBFC to seek
to avoid classifying material which is itself in breach of UK law. The relevant
laws include:
The Obscene Publications Acts 1959
and 1964 which
make it illegal to publish a work in the UK which is ‘obscene’. In order for a
work to be found obscene, it must be taken as a whole and have a tendency to
deprave and corrupt (eg make morally bad) a significant proportion of those
likely to see it. If publication can be justified as being for the ‘public
good’ on the grounds that it is in the interests of science, art, literature or
learning or other objects of general concern, then no offence has been
committed.
The Protection of Children Act 1978 makes it illegal to make,
distribute, show or possess ‘indecent’ photographs or pseudo-photographs of a
child (that is, someone under the age of 18 years).
The Criminal Justice and Immigration
Act 2008 makes
the possession of an ‘extreme pornographic’ image a criminal offence. The Act
defines such an image as one which is pornographic and grossly offensive,
disgusting or otherwise of an obscene character and which portrays in an
explicit and realistic way, an act which: threatens a person’s life; results,
or is likely to result, in serious injury to a person’s anus, breasts or
genitals; involves sexual interference with a human corpse; or involves
bestiality. Works classified by the BBFC are excluded from this definition.
The Public Order Act 1986 makes it illegal to distribute or
play to the public a recording of images or sounds which are threatening,
abusive or insulting if the intention is to stir up racial hatred or hatred on
the grounds of sexual orientation. Images and sounds which are threatening if
the intention is to stir up religious hatred are also prohibited.
There are two Acts which cover animal
welfare issues in films which the BBFC must also consider when classifying
works. The Cinematograph Films (Animals) Act 1937 renders
it illegal to show any scene ‘organised or directed’ for the purposes of a film
that involves the cruel infliction of pain or terror on any animal or the cruel
goading to fury to any animal. The Animal Welfare Act 2006makes
it illegal to show or publish a recording of an animal fight which has taken place
in the UK since 6 April 2007. An ‘animal’ is also defined as a vertebrate (but
not in foetal or embryonic form) other than a man.
The Coroners and Justice Act 2009 makes
it an offence to possess non-photographic fantasy images of child sexual abuse
(ie. cartoons, drawings, computer generated images and other depictions). The
Act strengthens the existing laws on child pornography to include
non-photographic images of child abuse by creating an offence of possession of
a ‘prohibited image of a child’.
Sense &
Sensibilities:
Public Opinion
& the BBFC Guidelines
by Pam Hanley
“http://www.bbfc.co.uk/download/guidelines/2000%20Guidelines%20Research%20-%20Sense%20and%20Sensibilities.pdf”
Serbian Film interviews
Serbian film Cinematographer interview
Mark Kermode radio review
Directors reaction to bbfc cuts
written interview with director
Quint at SXSW says people
have been hung for crimes against humanity less offensive than A SERBIAN FILM!
Ahoy, squirts! Quint here with another review
from South By Southwest and this one is a doozy.
Mark Kermode radio review
Directors reaction to bbfc cuts
written interview with director
Comment from director: What “drugs” were
the Serbian people on to have put up with mistreatment from their government
for so long:? SEE FILM DIRECTOR’S INTERVIEW IN ENGLISH!!! It explains a lot about motifs 4 a movie.
http://www.filmski.net/vijesti/dugometrazni-film/7053/srpski_film_sokirao_ameriku
Quint at SXSW says people
have been hung for crimes against humanity less offensive than A SERBIAN FILM!
Ahoy, squirts! Quint here with another review
from South By Southwest and this one is a doozy.
There came a moment a little more than half-way through A SERBIAN FILM where my
jaw was literally hanging open. I had always assumed that was a figure of
speech, an exaggeration of the moment of shock and sometimes I’ve feigned it
when giving my friends a look during a particularly fucked up moment in a movie
(which usually tend to be Japanese), but this time I realized that does happen
in real life.
This moment I cannot reveal. It’s not that I don’t want to reveal a big spoiler
in case you see the movie… there is a little bit of that, but the main reason
is that taken out of context it will sound like shock for the sake of shock,
something so offensive that it will probably make you write the movie off sight
unseen.
I’m a pretty open audience member. I’ve seen some horrible shit… centipedes
crawling out of an Asian lady’s vagina, animal endangerment and mutilation (thanks
again to the crazy Asians and a special nod to the Italians), people taking a
shit, people eating shit, people becoming shit, cocks being split, cocks being
removed, cocks being jerked off until an orgasm of blood erupts from the head…
There’s a lot of weird shit out there and I’ve seen much of it, usually at the
Alamo Drafthouse.
I’m not saying A SERBIAN FILM takes the cake for most offensive, but I can say
without any exaggeration that this film was the first in a long, long time to
make me feel genuinely shocked at what I was seeing. I mean deeply disturbed
kind of shock.
A SERBIAN FILM is an ugly film, not in technical quality (it’s actually quite
professionally done), but in its tone and feel much the same way Paul
Schrader’s films are ugly films. It’s a film that slaps you across the face and
dares you to stick with it and if you do you’re either going to be fuming mad
at the filmmakers for putting you through all that shit or you’re going to be
moved.
Gaspar Noe, Lars Von Trier, Jon Waters and David Lynch have all made films like
that and now Srdjan Spasojevic (director) and Aleksandar Radivojevic
(co-writer) have joined those ranks with this allegorical tale of the state of
politics and living conditions in Serbia.
Basically we follow a famous porn actor (played by Srdjan Todorovic, the
Serbian Kevin Bacon according to writer Radivojevic at the Q&A) who has
quit the business, taking bit roles when his family needs money. But basically
he’s a family man, raising an adorable little boy with his incredibly
understanding and beautiful wife.
Enter Sergej Trifunovic’s Vukmir, a charming artist in a suit and fancy house
that has more money than God, apparently. He’s eccentric, but an artist and big
fan of Todorovic’s Milos. Vukmir believes that pornography is art and wants to
prove it by making a film with Milos and his famous ability to will an erection
with zero stimulation.
Going into the movie the buzz was that this was a movie that Alamo founder Tim
League described as one of the most fucked up movies he’s ever seen, so
naturally I knew Vukmir wasn’t up to any good, but even with that expectation I
wasn’t prepared for what happened when Milos signed on the dotted line.
There’s a little bit of Fincher’s The Game in this movie as the world starts to
unravel around this guy, but unlike The Game there’s no big twist that lets us
sigh with relief. Instead the movie hits us with escalating horrors that reach
a boiling point at a certain point, culminating in what’s essentially a giant
knife being plunged into the audience’s heart… then the movie fades back up and
twists the knife one last time before going to credits.
A SERBIAN FILM isn’t torture porn, it’s not exploitation, but I’m sure it’s
going to receive those labels. I’ve already heard comparisons to a piece of
trash called Murder Set Pieces, which is absolutely unfair. I sat through that
horrendous film and it’s miles apart from Serbian Film, which, at the end of
the day, is a big proclamation about life in Serbia and how victims are
controlled like puppets via their very own victimizations.
Murder Set Pieces is offensive for the sake of being offensive and is sold that
way. It’s hollow, the kind of film anybody who rails against horror as a genre
thinks every horror movie is.
Love it or hate it, A SERBIAN FILM is saying a lot and is extremely
intelligently executed. It’s the kind of movie that grabs you by the collar and
drags you through shit you’d rather not. It doesn’t allow you to be passive.
You’re involved, like it or not, which is going to cause people to bail and I
can’t blame them. It’s tough.
The allegory is there, but not highlighted and because it’s an Eastern European
political allegory not many in the US will understand it even if they sense a
deeper meaning. I know I didn’t fully grasp the concepts behind the movie…
hell, I still don’t even after a very illuminating and passionate Q&A with
the writers and director.
All the performances are top notch, the writing is multi-layered and
suspenseful, the cinematography (on the Red camera) was extremely professional
and the direction was assured, which all helped to give credence to the message
behind the offensive imagery.
This film can and probably will cause protests and righteous indignation. But I
can tell you this: you might be offended by this movie, but you will not be
bored by it. It crosses the line like it wasn’t even there, then goes across
another line that you didn’t know existed before coming to a close. You might
not trust you’re in the sanest of hands and you’d probably be right, but if you
do end up seeing the film it will have an impact on you. It will challenge you,
it might enlighten you, or it’ll just piss you right the fuck off.
Wednesday, 2 May 2012
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)