|
Your Dunkle Sans posted:Hypothetically, what would help change things censor-wise to be more gender neutral, so to speak? I dunno, the most obvious first step is probably to just to make the decision-making group more diverse so you get multiple perspectives. Or make the decisions and the reasons behind them public so that people can make their own judgements and hold the censors are accountable for bad decisions?
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 08:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 00:30 |
|
|
twistedmentat posted:These were stuff like no guns that look like real guns, all have to be futuristic; If you have a gun shoot, you cannot have it shoot and hit a person in the same shot, it has to be divided Wolverine could never use his claws on anyone, but robots and monsters were a-ok; These two things I immediately recognized even as a kid and it took the tension right out when I know Wolverine would only cut robots and stuff.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 08:33
|
|
|
Though Samurai Jack used its robot-death-only restriction to be absolutely brutal
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 08:44
|
|
|
Sentient Data posted:Though Samurai Jack used its robot-death-only restriction to be absolutely brutal It also helped that there were episodes (or at least one that i remember) that showed the robots to be fully sentient. In effect, it was just as brutal as chopping a real person in half would've been. I also seem to remember beasties being chopped up as well, but that might just be memories playing tricks on me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 08:48
|
|
|
Firstborn posted:These two things I immediately recognized even as a kid and it took the tension right out when I know Wolverine would only cut robots and stuff. Yea, also why Foot Clan was all robots in the TMNT series. But yea, Wolverine would slash at a tree, then pick it up and wack someone with it, rather than you know, hacking at them with his claws. Though the comics were always ambiguous about what kind of damage he was doing in the early days. Though we know now that the Hellfire Club guards he hacked up during those comics were made into cyborgs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 08:53
|
|
|
Sentient Data posted:Though Samurai Jack used its robot-death-only restriction to be absolutely brutal Sorry about the crappy uploader added music but this scene: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=neky7mxchcM Is really intense, especially in the last bits with Jack going apeshit and cutting a robot bug in half while it covers him from head to toe in oil-blood and then standing on a pile of bodies dripping in oil. For a show ostensibly for kids, it's incredibly brutal. It's not hard to mentally substitute blood for oil and guts with sudden cybernetic parts from otherwise humanoid creatures. With Samurai Jack returning on Adult Swim, I wonder if they'll keep the robot innards or if they can actually show real blood this time around. Teriyaki Koinku has a new favorite as of 15:50 on Feb 20, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 09:40
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:Yea, also why Foot Clan was all robots in the TMNT series. It'll be weird to see if the rumours are true; if the next Wolverine movie will be R rated. Be fun to see him actually use those claws for what they are meant to.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 09:53
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:A dong is worse than boobs though. Seriously, a bunch of boobs in a movie, and it pretty much gets an R rated, but have a swinging dick, you're getting NC-17. Unless it's CGI and blue. Counterpoint: Wild Things
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 12:29
|
|
|
Is there a reason the MPAA has to be so opaque in the way that it determines ratings? It is strange how much power (and ultimately money) they have control over in the film industry. Are there any NC-17 films that didn't contain any nudity/sexual content? It seems particularly reserved for some of the more sexually explicit films. But often even those were just a product of 'X more minutes of exposed boobs' over an R rating, which feels awfully arbitrary. I heard, for example the orgy scene in Eyes Wide Shut had to get cut down to keep an R rating. I get the impression it was more about the duration of it, not what was actually depicted.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 12:54
|
|
|
Panfilo posted:Is there a reason the MPAA has to be so opaque in the way that it determines ratings? It is strange how much power (and ultimately money) they have control over in the film industry. Because they can, and because it causes the second sentence.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 12:57
|
|
|
Happy Landfill posted:Because, you know, it's not like they have more important things to attend to like the town that's been spewing nothing but lead water for two years. yeah because the government can only focus on one problem at a time here's a story I read about Animal House the writers wanted the girl to say "I'm 16 years old" after they hosed but they thought the MPAA wouldn't approve. So they made her say "I'm 13 years old" so they could then compromise with the MPAA to bring it up to 16. But the MPAA never said anything so she says 13 in the movie.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 13:44
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:A dong is worse than boobs though. Seriously, a bunch of boobs in a movie, and it pretty much gets an R rated, but have a swinging dick, you're getting NC-17. Unless it's CGI and blue. Dicks show up in R movies pretty often, they just can't be erect. Jason Siegel did a full scene in the nude in Forgetting Sarah Marshall, and was writing and directing a Muppet movie a couple years later. This highlights a problem with filmmakers in itself, where male nudity can be played only as a joke with no sex, but there will always be sex attached to a naked woman, at least in any mainstream movie. Man butts have been showing up in network TV as well, and are pretty much good to go on cable, while lady butts are still forbidden on TV. Women's bodies are policed pretty heavily in every way when compared to men's. Ein cooler Typ posted:yeah because the government can only focus on one problem at a time Well, they sure nipped the problem of married couples having oral sex in the bud. Those pervs are going to jail. Poor Miserable Gurgi has a new favorite as of 14:33 on Feb 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 14:30
|
|
|
Practical Demon posted:Dicks show up in R movies pretty often, they just can't be erect. Jason Siegel did a full scene in the nude in Forgetting Sarah Marshall, and was writing and directing a Muppet movie a couple years later. This highlights a problem with filmmakers in itself, where male nudity can be played only as a joke with no sex, but there will always be sex attached to a naked woman, at least in any mainstream movie. What about the scene with Kathy Bates in About Schmidt? Are women's bodies always sexualized, even if they fall under a conventionally 'undesirable' group, such as older or fatter women? If Melissa McCarthy did a nude scene, would audiences really interpret it as a 'sexy' scene, or would it get played for laffs the same way a naked dude would? It's easy to generalize that we overly sexualize women's bodies in movies through censorship, but I notice this happens overwhelmingly with conventional 'Hollywood' proportioned bodies.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 17:01
|
|
|
Issues aren't universal, but they're apparent when you look at the whole. Female nudity is more common than male nudity, even though male nudity isn't censored as harshly. Filmmakers tend to be male, and they make movies with men in mind, for the most part. Non attractive bodies are rare to see nude, and are usually played for a joke, but I'd say a non attractive female body is more rare than a male one for those jokes. I can think of maybe one or two other example off the top of my head other than that Kathy Bates scene, which was a big loving deal at the time. Even when a woman being fat is the joke, producers worry it'll stop people from seeing it. Melissa McCarthy was photoshopped to be thinner on all the posters for The Heat, even though the entire point of her characters tend to center around her size. In general, a woman's body is seen by producers as something to sell a movie to a male audience.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 17:25
|
|
|
Practical Demon posted:Issues aren't universal, but they're apparent when you look at the whole. Female nudity is more common than male nudity, even though male nudity isn't censored as harshly. Filmmakers tend to be male, and they make movies with men in mind, for the most part. I wonder if they're really afraid of alienating their audience, or it is the characteristic cultural 'invisibility' society has on larger or older women; that they think nobody will care enough to bother seeing it in the first place. For example Norbit got a lot of backlash, but it seemed more focused around negative African American stereotypes then 'lol fat chick' attitudes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 17:41
|
|
|
Panfilo posted:For example Norbit got a lot of backlash, but it seemed more focused around negative African American stereotypes then 'lol fat chick' attitudes. The backlash to Norbit I saw was "jesus christ this is awful on every conceivable level," including that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 20:12
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:Counterpoint: Wild Things I only remember two things about this movie. Kevin's Bacon, and it had Smashmouth's cover of Why Can't We Be Friends.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 20:51
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:
Wasn't Rogue and Gambits thing that they literally couldn't touch each other because of their powers? I thought I remembered them specifically mentioning that even in the cartoon when I was a kid cause I remember even then thinking "wow that blows"
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 22:42
|
|
|
Aesop Poprock posted:Wasn't Rogue and Gambits thing that they literally couldn't touch each other because of their powers? I thought I remembered them specifically mentioning that even in the cartoon when I was a kid cause I remember even then thinking "wow that blows" It would be a hell of a feedback loop with Rogue absorbing Gambit's power then charging him back by accident. "I charge you. You charge me! We're exploding painfully~"
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 22:54
|
|
|
Practical Demon posted:Issues aren't universal, but they're apparent when you look at the whole. Female nudity is more common than male nudity, even though male nudity isn't censored as harshly. Filmmakers tend to be male, and they make movies with men in mind, for the most part. See also: "unrated" versions of movies which is code for "there are more tits now." And they don't mean in general, just any ol' boobs, but attractive women. Why does it happen? Because it sells movies. Aesop Poprock posted:Wasn't Rogue and Gambits thing that they literally couldn't touch each other because of their powers? I thought I remembered them specifically mentioning that even in the cartoon when I was a kid cause I remember even then thinking "wow that blows" Rogue and Gambit had the hots for each other but Rogue couldn't touch anybody. That was a common thread among X-Men thing that explained her personality; she kept people at a distance because she hosed up whoever she touched. It registers as "holy poo poo that sucks" because humans generally really like to touch each other. Think about how different life would be if you couldn't even high five, shake hands, or hug.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 23:16
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:Rogue and Gambit had the hots for each other but Rogue couldn't touch anybody. That was a common thread among X-Men thing that explained her personality; she kept people at a distance because she hosed up whoever she touched. It registers as "holy poo poo that sucks" because humans generally really like to touch each other. Think about how different life would be if you couldn't even high five, shake hands, or hug. It was also kind of interesting that, despite this, Rogue was an upbeat, fun Southern gal who liked beating poo poo up. She just had a tragic part of her life that came up sometimes. X-Men Evolution made her a mopey goth, and most comic writers in recent years aren't much better. It just makes her really one note for everything to be about how sad she is about that one thing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 00:33
|
|
|
I remember the last season of JoJo would do this thing where it would cover gore with a shadow, like someone's face being ripped off or a crane hook smashing a head in. Understandable, but then it would do the same thing when someone smokes a cigarette, just shadowed face whafting smoke while looking at the sun or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 02:05
|
|
|
Your Dunkle Sans posted:Sorry about the crappy uploader added music but this scene: Same thing with the Transformers movies where they are absolutely brutal but it's robots so its OK. Hell... the Transformers ride at Universal Studios starts with a scene where Bumblebee rips a (robot) dog's head off with his bare hands. Then later the audience (well actually the transformer they are "riding" but first person) shoots someone point blank in the chest. Plus the general robot on robot violence you expect. All in a family theme park. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4SQtBh_LCNs Zero One has a new favorite as of 03:48 on Feb 20, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 03:43
|
|
|
Anyone remember when Comedy Central would show Cheech and Chong movies back in the nineties and every single reference to weed was replaced with diamonds?
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 10:19
|
|
|
On the Michigan "sodomy law" http://www.snopes.com/michigan-senate-crime-against-nature/ "The Michigan Penal Code still contains language stating that a person who commits "crimes against nature with mankind" is guilty of a felony punishable by up to 15 years in prison. While this language is outdated and in direct opposition of the Supreme Court's Lawrence v. Texas ruling, it still requires the efforts of lawmakers to be removed. When the Michigan Senate passed SB219, the senators opted for reasons of practicality to focus on implementing stronger animal cruelty laws and ignore language referring to a unenforceable, decades-old sodomy law." "Although several states (including Michigan) still have laws on the books criminalizing sodomy, these laws cannot be enforced." The law isn't enforceable because it's already been overruled by the Supreme Court years ago, but no lawmaker feels like being the one to remove the old language, since there's nothing to gain. The new law is really about animal abuse and uses prior laws as its base that were created before sodomy laws were struck down by the Supreme Court. It's just old leftovers from 80+ years ago. There are tons of archaic laws still lying around that aren't worth the headache and cost to remove. Furthermore, some senators like the idea of leaving it in as illegal because, if nothing else, it can be used to protect minors who are sexually abused.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 14:03
|
|
|
Eclipse12 posted:Furthermore, some senators like the idea of leaving it in as illegal because, if nothing else, it can be used to protect minors who are sexually abused. How does that work? Like, what's the legal outcome that's different because there's an unenforceable law on the books?
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 14:09
|
|
|
Presumably it would be another charge to slap on a child molester and anyone trying to strike it down would look really bad on account of "trying to reduce that pedophile's sentence!  ". Jurisprudence! 
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 14:15
|
|
|
Sounds like a gimme as grounds for appeal.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 14:18
|
|
|
Well that's what I mean by "trying to strike it down".  It's all conjecture anyway, I doubt the law's been called on successfully since it was declared unconstitutional, or at least I hope it hasn't.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 14:22
|
|
|
AlphaKretin posted:Presumably it would be another charge to slap on a child molester and anyone trying to strike it down would look really bad on account of "trying to reduce that pedophile's sentence! More or less. I don't know how the Supreme Court's decision is exactly worded, but it likely refers to consensual adults. Children can't consent, so perhaps the law could still be enforceable. More likely, lawmakers don't want to remove anything that might lessen the possible offenses against children.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 14:43
|
|
|
One of the MegaTen games features Hitler as an antagonist. they later censored it in the remake by calling him Fuhrer and giving him sunglasses  Just a instance of censorship actually making things better. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 15:19
|
|
|
What?  There's not way that actually appeased a previously angry ratings board, that character is still transparently, literally Hitler. Wow.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 15:21
|
|
|
AlphaKretin posted:What? And this, ladies and gentlemen, is why talking about whacky censorship standards is so fun! 
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
Detective Buttfuck posted:I remember the last season of JoJo would do this thing where it would cover gore with a shadow, like someone's face being ripped off or a crane hook smashing a head in. Understandable, but then it would do the same thing when someone smokes a cigarette, just shadowed face whafting smoke while looking at the sun or whatever. They only censor smoking when it's a minor doing it. Jotaro is supposed to be 17.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 16:00
|
|
|
 Literally My current avatar is a gift I'm fond of, so I'll let someone else take my insomnia-driven inspiration. I probably won't find this so funny in the morning
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 16:08
|
|
|
AlphaKretin posted:
I think another poster actually has Cool Dude Fuhrer as his avatar already, before this topic in fact. E: Despite my lack of  and Photoshop know-how, it'd be funny if someone edited it into a loop of his glasses raising and him winking before the shades come down again.
Teriyaki Koinku has a new favorite as of 16:13 on Feb 20, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 16:11
|
|
|
That doesn't surprise me in the least. Oh well. Content: You know how ESRB makes games have that "online content not rated" disclaimer because you can't reasonably rate what random dickheads say over voice chat? Yeah that's way too logical for the ACB, "online interactivity" is a rating category they look at and bump games up for.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 16:30
|
|
|
Though it's kind of valid if you can't lock out the online play, especially if it includes voice/text/video communication, and doubly especially if it's the kind that invades into the single player campaign. Consoles should have a parental control mode where the console itself is online so you can play digital games and get updates and save syncing and whatnot but report to the games themselves that there's no internet connection. Obviously the real answer is "watch what your kids are doing", but it'd be nice for them to have toys where you don't have to constantly watch over their shoulders to see if dongs will pop up as avatars
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 17:03
|
|
|
Lord Lambeth posted:One of the MegaTen games features Hitler as an antagonist. The English version of Bionic Commando on NES also had Hitler as an antagonist, although he was called "Master-D" like he was in a breakdance troupe from 1983. His head violently explodes, something completely unheard of in an NES game where the Nintendo Seal of Quality meant no gore or blood (from an otherwise long list of no-no's).  Also scrubbed of references: nazis called "Badds," and stuff like this:  I think even a "drat" slipped through.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 17:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 00:30 |
|
|
AlphaKretin posted:That doesn't surprise me in the least. Oh well. I guess it makes sense in a certain way that if you leave kids to their own devices online, more likely than not it's going to devolve into a whirlwind of screaming, cursing, and racial slurs. Lord knows we get that enough already in Call of Duty and CSGO.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 17:18
|
|