Post-Lupin
Prolific Poster 
Immanentizing the Eschaton
Posts: 5,673 
|
Post by Post-Lupin on Jan 25, 2016 14:02:22 GMT -5
Here's his AMA. As a Brit, I think this is one of the most subversive pieces of cinema ever made that I will never, ever watch.
|
|
LazBro
Prolific Poster
Posts: 10,042
|
Post by LazBro on Jan 25, 2016 14:10:44 GMT -5
A 607 minute film of paint drying is in itself an act of gratuitous violence, so if I was the board I'd slap on the 18 and move on. AMA sounds fun, though, so I'll check it out if I find time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Return of the Thin Olive Duke on Jan 25, 2016 15:08:59 GMT -5
Here's his AMA. As a Brit, I think this is one of the most subversive pieces of cinema ever made that I will never, ever watch. What is the UK's antiquated film censorship regime? Is it the one that imposes tariffs on American movies to prevent us from polluting your country with our vulgar accents? Is it the one that only allows you to make shitty tie-in films for lowbrow sitcoms we've never seen? Either way, it sounds like a Beautiful Tradition™. |
|
Post-Lupin
Prolific Poster
Immanentizing the Eschaton
Posts: 5,673
|
Post by Post-Lupin on Jan 25, 2016 15:20:42 GMT -5
The UK law is; all films have to be watched by the BBFC Board for classification and/or cuts. You have to pay for this privilege, by the minute. Unclassified films could only be shown in private clubs until recently, but that was abolished... so de facto you have to get a BBFC classification.
(Except, interestingly, in art galleries. Tonks & I just had a fun half hour trying to find out why... and the answer seems to be basically "it's Ok, because it's Art".)
|
|
|
|
Post by Baramos on Jan 26, 2016 0:03:33 GMT -5
Is there any guarantee they don't just split the film into chunks for several members to watch and then report whether he stuck some porno in there?
|
|
Paleu
AV Clubber 
Confirmed for neo-liberal shill.
Posts: 1,258
|
Post by Paleu on Jan 26, 2016 0:09:56 GMT -5
(Except, interestingly, in art galleries. Tonks & I just had a fun half hour trying to find out why... and the answer seems to be basically "it's Ok, because it's Art".) There's a similar exception in US obscenity law for artistic expression. Or, more specifically, works that possess "serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value." |
|
Post-Lupin
Prolific Poster
Immanentizing the Eschaton
Posts: 5,673
|
Post by Post-Lupin on Jan 26, 2016 3:36:37 GMT -5
(Except, interestingly, in art galleries. Tonks & I just had a fun half hour trying to find out why... and the answer seems to be basically "it's Ok, because it's Art".) There's a similar exception in US obscenity law for artistic expression. Or, more specifically, works that possess "serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value." It's not a legal exception as such: Tonks & I have seen material in shows which not only breaches BBFC completely, but also uses extracts from BBFC-passed materials, and there's no actual exemption in law for art as per the US. The roots of this are almost certainly class-based - cinema as the entertainment of the hoi-polloi needs more restrictions, while Art is, well, Art: Culture for the cultured. |
|
