Censorship in 2006

[curiousa2z]

Well,

I would have loved to do a review of Broke Back Mountain for OUCH!, except that it is not showing in our town's Cineplex in any of the 11 goddamn theatres.

Hostel is, with some effects that someone I know says made her "want to vomit", but heavens, let's not dare show a film about gay cowboys.

So I guess I'll be waiting for it to come out on DVD.

*follwed by the usual slew of Saxon swear words*

Have you seen it?

 

[Big Dick McGee]

No, but it's playing all around my area. The benefits of being a very prosperous and liberal suburb of Philadelphia, I guess.

One quibble I have with your title: This is not "censorship". It's a business decision. Those theatre owners in your area decided that the backlash of playing a "gay cowboy" film would be greater than the business it did.

It's a pet peeve of mine, when people use the word censorship when it doesn't apply. It diminishes the value of the word.

 

[Blindgroping]

I have one objection:
Painting the word Censorship with the propoganda spin of "business decision"
Not alowing a population to see something is still censorship.

 

[curiousa2z]

I stand by the title.
It's censorship.

 

[PreatorX]

If they felt they'd get backlash for playing a gay cowboy movie, thus they decieded not to play it, then that is still censorship. All those damn Fundies feel they have to shove their strict morality down everyone's throats, so they make a huge fuss over anything to do with gey or lesbian themes. Thus, by trying to bankrupt every company that violates their view of morality, the foist censorship on the rest of the population.

I'm glad I live in Canada where people complain whenever we get censored material from the States. There was a backlash when they released the American version of "Eyes Wide Shut" here, which was censored, rather than the European version, which was not.

Damn Puritans...

 

[Big Dick McGee]

I have one objection:
Painting the word Censorship with the propoganda spin of "business decision"
Not alowing a population to see something is still censorship.

Don't be an emotional liberal. Censorship is when a government bans somethign so that no one is able to view it possess it, etc. It becomes illegal to do so. For example, child pornography is censored.

Can you see Brokeback Mountain in virtually the entire United States? Of course you can. Did the Federal, Local, or State Government outlaw the exhibition of Brokeback Mountain in Curiousa2z's areas? Nope.

When a specific group of exhibitors decide not to show a film, for whatever reason, that's not censorship. It's a business decision, even if your motivation for not showing the film is because you're a backwards hick.

 

[Big Dick McGee]

If they felt they'd get backlash for playing a gay cowboy movie, thus they decieded not to play it, then that is still censorship. All those damn Fundies feel they have to shove their strict morality down everyone's throats, so they make a huge fuss over anything to do with gey or lesbian themes. Thus, by trying to bankrupt every company that violates their view of morality, the foist censorship on the rest of the population.

I'm glad I live in Canada where people complain whenever we get censored material from the States. There was a backlash when they released the American version of "Eyes Wide Shut" here, which was censored, rather than the European version, which was not.

Damn Puritans...

So, theater owners have a moral obligation to show a film, even when-no, especially when-the film is likely to garner protests and loss of business? Bullshit. Get off your fucking high horse and stop thinking of things from a purely emotional standpoint. The free enterprise system assures business owners the right to make decisions that are best for making a profit.

 

[PreatorX]

So, theater owners have a moral obligation to show a film, even when-no, especially when-the film is likely to garner protests and loss of business? Bullshit. Get off your fucking high horse and stop thinking of things from a purely emotional standpoint. The free enterprise system assures business owners the right to make decisions that are best for making a profit.

No, I'm saying that theatre owners shouldn't fear a loss of business for any film they choose to show. I blamed the Fundies in my post for the censorship, not the theatre owners at all.

All of society shouldn't have to pander to the extremest morality expressed by a few Fundies.

No matter how you look at it, or who's responsible, it's still censorship.

 

[curiousa2z]

even if your motivation for not showing the film is because you're a backwards hick.

LOL! True, that.

...p.s. they never show Jet Li films up here either - apparently since we have only a small population base of people of Chinese descent that means no one else would be interested in seeing his films.
Sweet Zombie Jesus on a stick!

 

[Sarek]

Don't be an emotional liberal. Censorship is when a government bans somethign so that no one is able to view it possess it, etc.

Huh. Then why all the screaming over censorship at TrekBBS? TrekBBS isn't a government, therefore, it's not censorship.

 

[Sarek]

He's wrong about that. Governments aren't the ONLY institutions capable of censorship--the idea is actually quite laughable...

I know that. I was making a point.

Anyone who withholds information from another is practicing censorship in some way, shape or form.

 

[Number_6]

It's censorship. Plain and simple. The theater owers have decided (for whatever reason: moral values, financial, prejudice, religion, any or all of the above) to censor the content displayed in their theaters.

There are degrees of censorship. Is this as bad as if the government or the FCC decided to ban the film nationwide? No. Is it worse than the parents who censor controversial material in their own homes? Certainly.

But let's make no mistake about it. It's censorship.

You know I hate censorship almost as much as you do, but you're dead wrong here. The theater owner is under no obligation to show any particular film. If something like American Pie 4 had actually made it onto celluloid instead of DVD, would we be having this argument if theater owners opted not to show it in their theaters? Probably not.

In some areas, Brokeback Mountain isn't going to make a lot of money, because a lot of people don't want to see it. Just like a lot of people aren't going to pay good money to see American Pie 4. As BDM states, it is a business decision. Just because you happen to want the ideas propagated by the film to be spread as far and as wide as possible doesn't make not showing the film an act of censorship.

Neither you nor any other group has the right to require a business owner to make a decision that will hurt his or her business.

 

[PreatorX]

Oh, and I'm not an "emotional liberal." At least not ALL the time.

 

[PreatorX]

Neither you nor any other group has the right to require a business owner to make a decision that will hurt his or her business.

That's not the point here. Simply saying that something is censorship isn't condemning those who choose to censor it. I guess the very word "censorship" has such bad connotations that it's automatically seen as condemnation to label something as such.

My impression of this whole situation is that a theatre refuses to show a moivie because it has "gay" themes because they are worried about what action the Fundies will take to destroy their business. Thus, material is being censored because a small special interest group with lots of power feel it is immoral and "sinful."

 

[Big Dick McGee]

^^^What if they simply realize there's no market for Brokeback Mountain in their area? What if they know they won't make back their operating costs? Should they still play the film because "it's the right thing to do?"

That's like asking a supermarket in an area with no Latino population to stock the shelves with Goya products to be "inclusive".

 

[curiousa2z]

Just because you happen to want the ideas propagated by the film to be spread as far and as wide as possible doesn't make not showing the film an act of censorship.

but, 6, that's not why I want to see it.

I want to see it because:
1. I like Ang Lee's films;
2. It's based on a short story by E. Annie Proulx, whose writing I've enjoyed thus far (have not read the short story the film is based on);
3. The critics are falling all over themselves regarding it, which piques my curiosity; and last, base, [but true]:
4. I just like Heath Ledger, and think it'd be hot seeing him in this role.

The thing that puzzles me is that if there is controversy about a film, that's like free advertising, and as a rule results in big ticket sales, no?

But we live in a traditionally conservative (small c) area up here - hence my suspicions it is not being shown because TPTB are proscribing the subject matter.

And isn't that censorship?

 

[Number_6]

So then the choice not to play American Pie 4 would also be censorship?

I'm not sure why we have now decided that certain groups have the right to a public forum, and anyone who doesn't actively help them spread their message is a censor.

And I wasn't trying to make an inference about your motivations for wanting to see the film, curious, just the definition of "censorship" that's being used in this thread.

As for your taste in authors, all I can say is that The Shipping News is one of the worst books I've ever read. I hated it, and I hated the characters. I read it on the recommendation of a colleague whose judgment I had trusted. Bleh.

So I wouldn't be likely to see it just because I don't care for E. Annie Proulx.

 

[curiousa2z]

^ lol - fair enough...when I finally read the damn story I'll let you know how it compares to Shipping.
Who knows when I'll get to see the film.

 

[Big Dick McGee]

My point is that the words censor, censorship, censored...they're very powerful words, with very specific meanings. Again, when something is truly censored, it is completely unavailable to the citizens of the United States. It's illegal to own the censored item. One of the only true examples of censorship that I can think of is child pornography. The Government of the United States of America has decided that this expression of sexuality is not something that should be legal in the United States. Hence, the censor it.

If all of the theater owners in the United States colluded and decided they would not, under any circumstances, show Brokeback Mountain, that could reasonably called censorship. What we have in curiousa2z's case is a group of businessmen exercising their free speech by not playing the film. Why can you all not see that??

When you start throwing a word like "censorship" around willy-nilly, it's not long before the word loses its importance and value. It's not long before some hideous American Idol contestant claims that he was censored because he'd didn't make the telecast.

 

[Number_6]

It's not long before some hideous American Idol contestant claims that he was censored because he'd didn't make the telecast.

I'm surprised we haven't already seen this.