Jacco
[Link]
| Author | Post |
|---|---|
| sir wankalot Member UK 904 Posts 5/03 |  Posted - May 10 2008 : 8:03PMI just bought an R18 Rob Stone film and was surprised to see that some sex acts had got past the censor. I noted: 1. A girl being fucked with a glass beer bottle 2. A girl receiving mild slaps to the face whilst being fucked 3. A funnel put up a girls arse and beer poured into it. Harder than i imagined for an R18 film. [Link] |
Jacco  All-Star Member "liable to deprave and corrupt" 2673 Posts 5/04 | Posted - May 10 2008 : 11:09PM Jacco [Link] |
| sir wankalot Member UK 904 Posts 5/03 | Posted - May 11 2008 : 8:34AM [Link] |
| Jacco All-Star Member "liable to deprave and corrupt" 2673 Posts 5/04 | Posted - May 11 2008 : 12:38PM 1 and 3 are borderline for the BBFC, depends on which reviewer you get. But with the new "violent" pornography law I expect the BBFC to get less lenient. Jacco [Link] |
| Gabriel Nine Senior Member Firecracker 1273 Posts 8/01 | Posted - May 11 2008 : 5:14PM So we could see the situation where their decision to refuse a certificate on grounds covered by this legislation could effectively criminalise film makers and/or viewers who take an interest in this material. Let's say the BBFC decide: "No certificate for you: that's extreme porn under the Dangerous Pictures act". So what happens then to the producers of such images? Do the BBFC grass them up to the cops? Do film makers dare take any potentially hazardous imagery to the BBFC in the first place? Either it's play it safe or take it underground, and run the risks. UK viewers and producers are now on uncertain ground till we actually see how the legislation will be interpreted - my hope is that this will only be applied to the most genuinely extreme cases, rather than people who like moderate BDSM movies, but is that a vain hope? [Link] |
 | |
| sir wankalot Member UK 904 Posts 5/03 | Posted - May 11 2008 : 5:20PM Cuts required to sight of urolagnia - woman places hand on thigh during urination with next shot showing her licking fingers, giving audience good grounds to believe that urolagnia is taking place; and urination during penile penetration of anus - in accordance with current interpretation of Obscene Publications Act 1959 and BBFC policy and guidelines based on that. Cuts were also required for sight of fisting - all five fingers, including knuckles, penetrate vagina - in accordance with same legislation and policy already stated. Additional cuts were required to remove sight of woman choking / looking distressed during deep-throat fellatio, and to gagging references on the grounds of potential harm in accordance with the Video Recordings Act 1984 and BBFC guidelines and policy There was some pissing in this film and five finger fisting 'up to the knuckles'. Also spitting into a girls mouth during sex. All quite hardcore really. I do find UK made porn hard to watch though. I think it's the accents. Makes it more comical than sexy. [Link] |
| Jacco All-Star Member "liable to deprave and corrupt" 2673 Posts 5/04 | Posted - May 11 2008 : 7:18PM One of the Lords said that one of the consequences of the new law was that possessing a picture of an act which is legal to do and to film is now being made illegal. He has a point. The uncertain ground will remain for a while, until the first prosecutions, but I don't see many volunteers. Vague laws like this one have be abused in the past and I am sure they will be abused again. Jacco [Link] |
| Use the code below to link to this topic or a specific post. |
| URL of this thread |
| Link to this post with HTML |
| Link to this post with Forum Code |