Wednesday, October 01, 2014
Not so proud in the USA
One reviewer complained about the film Pride that it was not gritty enough and should have had more sex scenes. Personally, I thought the story of gay activists raising money to help families during the 1984 miners' strike struck just the right balance. It was entertaining, but told the story in a realistic and balanced way.
This has had little impact in the USA though where, as the South Wales Evening Post reports, it has fallen foul of American film censors:
This has had little impact in the USA though where, as the South Wales Evening Post reports, it has fallen foul of American film censors:
The Motion Picture Association of America has ruled the film was unfit for 16-year-olds unless they were in the company of a parent or adult guardian.
The film is rated 15 in the UK, and the US verdict has prompted anger among filmmakers and gay activists.
"It is outrageous, knee-jerk homophobia," says veteran campaigner Peter Tatchell.
"There's no significant sex or violence in Pride to justify strong ratings. The American classification board seems to automatically view any film with even the mildest gay content as unfit for people under 17."
The MPAA has not given reasons why Pride is considered inappropriate for unaccompanied 16-year-olds.
An interesting difference in cultural outlook.
The film is rated 15 in the UK, and the US verdict has prompted anger among filmmakers and gay activists.
"It is outrageous, knee-jerk homophobia," says veteran campaigner Peter Tatchell.
"There's no significant sex or violence in Pride to justify strong ratings. The American classification board seems to automatically view any film with even the mildest gay content as unfit for people under 17."
The MPAA has not given reasons why Pride is considered inappropriate for unaccompanied 16-year-olds.
An interesting difference in cultural outlook.
