Banning of Exploitative Films

There’s no question that the first amendment protects our right to freedom of speech in the United States.  Hollywood cinema has evolved over the last century making more mature material considered acceptable to society.  Dozens of films have been classified as being exploitative in nature, but is there a point where the movie’s content goes beyond what general audiences may view as entertaining?  According to Film Certification Boards in several different countries, banning these exploitative films is what’s best for their society and culture.

 The controversial movie, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, was released for viewing in North America on December 20, 2011.  India was scheduled to release the movie on February 10^th of this year.  However, India's Central Board of Film Certification insisted that several scenes be edited before release.  In this film, there are two explicit love-making scenes between Lisbeth Salander (Rooney Mara) and Mikael Blomkvist (Daniel Craig), an anal rape scene between Lisbeth and her state appointed guardian, several torture scenes containing disturbing images, and a lesbian scene between Lisbeth and another woman at a bar.  After Director David Fincher refused to edit the film, Sony Pictures stated, "…while we are committed to maintaining and protecting the vision of the director, we will, as always, respect the guidelines set by the Board." Fincher felt it would leave out too much of the storyline if those scenes were taken out.  I saw this movie two weeks ago and, in my opinion, some of the violence and R-rated adaptations by the director could’ve been left out to still capture Stieg Larsson's best-selling book that the film is based on.  Implications could’ve been used to keep the intensity alive in the film and protect the viewer.  Personally, I wouldn’t have gone to the movie if I had known what I was walking into.  The definition of “Rated R” in America seems to be stretching farther and farther in modern times.  There needs to be a common ground on what Rated R means to the director and audiences.

 The horror film sequel entitled, The Human Centipede II (Full Sequence), has been banned in Australia and the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) refused to legally supply it in any form in the UK.  This film encompasses a short, British man named Martin Lomax who obtains the Human Centipede (First Sequence) film and becomes obsessed with recreating a twelve person human centipede.  This “human centipede” is formed by twelve victims who are surgically stitched together, mouth to anus, by a staple gun and are thus forced to eat the feces of others before them in line.  The antagonist, Lomax, becomes increasingly sexually aroused by the pain he inflicts on his victims.  After becoming aroused by the sight of his victims defecating into each other’s' mouths, one scene involves him wrapping barbed wire around his penis and raping the woman at the end of the centipede. The BBFC said "[T]here is little attempt to portray any of the victims in the film as anything other than objects to be brutalized, degraded and mutilated for the amusement and arousal of the central character, as well as for the pleasure of the audience."  According to the New York Times, Australia's Classification Review Board banned this movie on November 28, 2011 because it contains "gratuitous, exploitative, or offensive depictions of violence with a very high degree of impact and cruelty…”.  I viewed the Human Centipede (First Sequence) a little over a year ago and it has scarred me.  Granted, I saw it after I had upper and lower jaw surgery so it wasn’t the best idea, but again, I wasn’t aware of what I was about to witness on the screen.  I don’t think cinemagoers need to see this kind of foul, vile content.  I feel this kind of a revolting subject is destructive to audiences and I don’t blame these other countries for banning this kind of film.

In the United States, the “R” rating is increasingly being pushed to the limit.  We do have freedom of speech in America which makes it acceptable to produce disturbing films.  However, how far is too far?  If other countries are banning these films to protect their audiences, then why aren’t we doing so in the United States?  There are many unanswered questions about what is acceptable to be seen in the rated “R” category.  It’s inevitable that exploitative films will be shown, but at this point in 2012, I think movie goers deserve to know what they’re walking into.   We need to have consistent answers as to what rated R really means.

Pubilication Data:


Child, Ben. "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo Cancelled in India | Film | Guardian.co.uk." Latest News, Sport and Comment from the Guardian | The Guardian. 30 Jan. 2012. Web. 06 Feb. 2012. http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2012/jan/30/girl-dragon-tattoo-cancelled-india.


Cunningham, Todd. "India Bans 'Girl With the Dragon Tattoo'| Reuters." Business & Financial News, Breaking US & International News | Reuters.com. 29 Jan. 2012. Web. 07 Feb. 2012. <http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/29/idUS122486517520120129>.


Itzkoff, Dave. "'Human Centipede' Sequel Is Banned in Australia." New York Times [New York, New York] 1 Dec. 2011: 2+. Academic Search Premier. Web. 6 Feb. 2012. http://www.shoreline.edu:2219/ehost/detail?vid=3&hid=104&sid=9238ba97-1c92-4a3c-98a4-8cb98ee2d1fe%40sessionmgr13&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=aph&AN=67522586

Shoard, Catherine. "The Human Centipede Sequel Just Too Horrible to Show, Says BBFC | Film | Guardian.co.uk." Latest News, Sport and Comment from the Guardian | The Guardian. Web. 06 Feb. 2012. http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2011/jun/06/human-centipede-sequel-bbfc

"THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2 [FULL SEQUENCE] Review | Rama's Screen." A Movie Blog - News, Reviews and Trailers | Rama's Screen. Web. 06 Feb. 2012. http://www.ramascreen.com/the-human-centipede-2-full-sequence-review.

"Google Images." Google. Web. 06 Feb. 2012. <http://www.google.com/imgres?um=1>.