Your Lesson For Today...
Two films, both made/produced/released this year. One, Antichrist, contains "strong real sex, bloody violence and self-mutilation" - specifically, female genital mutilation. The other, Grotesque, contains "unrelenting and escalating scenario of humiliation, brutality and sadism", including amputations and eye-gougings.
The former film has won awards at Cannes and has been passed uncut by the BBFC. The latter has been banned outright and decried as having less plot or character development than the Saw or Hostel movies.
This, ladies and gentlemen, is what you can get away with if you label your work an "art" film. It's like Ai No Corrida, where they got away with the hardcore porn and inapproprate use of boiled eggs (serioisly, look it up, but don't be too shocked...) because the director claimed it was an "art" film.
Before the rant gets away with me too much, I want to make one thing clear: I haven't got a horse in this race, except maybe the one to do with anti-censorship. I've always had the viewpoint that, as long as it's not real and/or (in the case of certain types of pornography) everyone's consenting and no-one's getting hurt, it shouldn't be censored at the adult level, because, you know, we're adults. Personally, I wouldn't see either of these films - Lars von Trier tends to bore and/or confuse me unless I have a guide book handy, and horror films that are grand guignol strictly for the sake of grand guignol (but without the plot, because most people forget that grand guignol actually had storylines behind them) have about as much interest to me as watching paint dry. But just because I personally wouldn't watch either film doesn't mean that I don't see the absurdity in these two decisions. I just don't see too much difference in the two films that one gets a free pass and the other doesn't - especially if you consider the fact that Antichrist is meant to be more realistic, and thereforetheoretically far more shocking than a film which apparently concludes with a scene straight out of the ending of the Lamberto Bava film Macabre (trying not to spoil the film there).
(Oh, and as a further reference, Grotesque sounds remarkably similar to a British film called Boy Meets Girl, which was banned by the BBFC for eight years but finally released uncut in 2001).
The former film has won awards at Cannes and has been passed uncut by the BBFC. The latter has been banned outright and decried as having less plot or character development than the Saw or Hostel movies.
This, ladies and gentlemen, is what you can get away with if you label your work an "art" film. It's like Ai No Corrida, where they got away with the hardcore porn and inapproprate use of boiled eggs (serioisly, look it up, but don't be too shocked...) because the director claimed it was an "art" film.
Before the rant gets away with me too much, I want to make one thing clear: I haven't got a horse in this race, except maybe the one to do with anti-censorship. I've always had the viewpoint that, as long as it's not real and/or (in the case of certain types of pornography) everyone's consenting and no-one's getting hurt, it shouldn't be censored at the adult level, because, you know, we're adults. Personally, I wouldn't see either of these films - Lars von Trier tends to bore and/or confuse me unless I have a guide book handy, and horror films that are grand guignol strictly for the sake of grand guignol (but without the plot, because most people forget that grand guignol actually had storylines behind them) have about as much interest to me as watching paint dry. But just because I personally wouldn't watch either film doesn't mean that I don't see the absurdity in these two decisions. I just don't see too much difference in the two films that one gets a free pass and the other doesn't - especially if you consider the fact that Antichrist is meant to be more realistic, and thereforetheoretically far more shocking than a film which apparently concludes with a scene straight out of the ending of the Lamberto Bava film Macabre (trying not to spoil the film there).
(Oh, and as a further reference, Grotesque sounds remarkably similar to a British film called Boy Meets Girl, which was banned by the BBFC for eight years but finally released uncut in 2001).