y u stoopid? haha. lol.
It’s a just world after all, nothing to see here! You can all ignore the censorship and the impact on creativity and the invasive practices hobbling art. Some people have managed to work to their own benefit within the system, it’s all ok now, you can all go home.
Production costs other than the per minute charge, cameras, a wall, lighting, paint etc.
8 hour working days.
No. You didn’t read the original article or the Kickstarter. He produced 14 hours of film before he started the fundraiser; the fundraiser was supposed to purely pay the British Censor Board charges:
All the money raised by this campaign (minus Kickstarter’s fees) will be put towards the cost of the certificate, so the final length of the film will be determined by how much money is raised here.
(I did forget to deduct for Kickstarter fees, though.)
I still think what I did the last time this article came up.
The BBFC really seems like a misplaced target for this sort of trolling.
Hehe, and neither did you.
But I have the advantage of having said ‘etc’, which is where the money went:
I must apologise. An invoice arrived earlier today from the BBFC, requesting a sum of money 20% larger than expected, and I realised that the fees quoted on the BBFC’s website are, of course, excluding VAT.
(A note for international backers: in the UK, a 20% value-added tax is levied on most goods and services provided by registered businesses in the UK.)
Individuals wishing to have their films rated by the BBFC should therefore remember that — once VAT is added on — the effective cost of a certificate is £121.80 plus £8.51 per minute of runtime, not £101.50 plus £7.09 per minute as previously stated.
In the case of ‘Paint Drying’, that means the film’s runtime has now been shortened to 10 hours and 7 minutes.
[quote=“Shuck, post:20, topic:72712, full:true”]
Except: isn’t the classification mandatory?[/quote]
Literally, no, but in practice, yes. As I understand it, classification isn’t legally compulsory, but local authorities are unlikely to allow an unrated film to be shown in their districts.
I’m sure someone will prove me wrong, but my understanding is that it’s extremely unlikely nowadays - the BBFC of the 1960s isn’t the BBFC of 2015. The primary objective is to classify films as ‘suitable’ for different age groups, with an outright ban being the nuclear option for something truly startling.
As I sort-of said earlier, I don’t have a problem with the possibility of banning - I do not support the principle that absolutely anything - anything - goes. If that’s censorship, I support censorship.
ETA: Again just my understanding, but I think it’s common for the BBFC to say “we’ll give it an ‘18’ as it is, but if you change this, this, and this, we’ll give it a ‘15’.” There’s obviously a commercial pressure to agree, as it’ll affect the size of the potential audience, but I still don’t see it as a problem.
That’s broadly what we have in the UK:
- U (Universal) - all ages.
- PG (Parental Guidance) - 8 and over; parents are warned that younger children might be disturbed.
- 12A (12 if accompanied by an adult)
- And apparently there a ‘Restricted 18’ for… specialist films.
My movie will be several hundred hours long, and intended to be an artistic statement examining the interaction between image and audience. The important part of a movie isn’t what happens on the screen but what happens in the mind of the viewer. Given the opportunity to be completely unencumbered by plot, character or action for a prolonged time, (miss the start or end, watch as long as you like, it doesn’t matter) what “movie” will play itself out in their brain?
I hope the BBFC will never see my movie - instant ban by nuking from orbit
Depends. What stuff are we supposed to be smoking?
Meh. I’ve seen a lot of this artist’s work, before he went mainstream with his latest, I don’t think it’ll ever meet the sublime brilliance of Seventeen Hours of Bathroom Wall. You should find it on VHS if you can. Analog is the only way.
The US has a zip code lottery for anti-science in schools and we have a postcode lottery for film censorship. Though ours is easier to circumvent, being in a small country.
The twist is the camera zooms out at the very end to show the paint had been drying on naked people the entire time! 10+ hours of unrecognizable nudity! The conversations this will start in film criticism circles!
10/10 would watch again!
They need to flash a single image on an engorged penis at about the 7-hour mark.
At least in Australia there’s a category called “Refused Classification”, which could be considered A Bad Thing.
“Refused Classification (RC) is a classification category. Material that is Refused Classification is commonly referred to as being ‘banned’. Films, computer games and publications that are classified RC cannot be sold, hired, advertised or legally imported in Australia. Material that is classified RC contains content that is very high in impact and falls outside generally accepted community standards.”
If you’re saying that this classification shouldn’t exist, and that there should be absolutely no limit on what can be publicly distributed, I’m afraid we’ll simply have to disagree.
Why should be?
Also, in the Age of the Internet, does the RC classification still have any meaning, any actual impact?
One does not equal the other.
There are already categories that restrict who can buy films or games so kids don’t see things that their parents feel uncomfortable talking about, and there already are laws against stuff like child pornography etc. Refusing classification is just a way for Moral Guardians to feel self-important.
So I don’t think RC should exist, and that even without it there are limits to what can be publicly distributed.
This is hilarious in it’s conception. Aside from that, hire an editor, the grammar in this story is atrocious.