300
without any prior knowledge to 300... just listening to the title or reading it if you have no friends to tell you or asked you to go to the cinema to watch this fabulous movie; i can imagine one being at a total lost.
"wanna watch 300?"
"300 what?"
something like that...
right at the start of the movie, it being set in... pre-medieval times, anyone who is not a complete historical bigot would know that its a time of bloodshed, an era of mayhem and an age of war, therefore one would expect a tremendous amount of violence, well actually as much violence as the Australian Broadcast Association Commitee would allow...
which is alot...
...compared to other places in the world.
But "Violence" isnt the new kid around the block in the neighbourhood cinema, compared to its sibling "Sex". As we all know Violence has somewhat been more "accepted" than its less bloody counterpart (argueable), there is this on-going debate on who whould be crowned "the most tabooed-of-them-all"? which of the one in "Sex and Violence" is the lesser evil? which one? is worse than the other?
well in truth they are both as bad and should be banned from the cinemas altogether.
HOWEVER thats not the way Hollywood sells its productions, because over the years, people up in the production line has funded scientists, sociologists, phychologists, doctors, engineers, architects, economists and every other profession you can think of; to figure out what-sells-a-movie-most?
and after years of research this is what theyve come up with...
Controversy(Sex + Violence) = $$$
but theres always a bad side to anything thats good.
many conservatives argued that films with sexual scenes and violence had induced its viewers with a dose of all that is evil, namely commiting adultery and assault-like behaviour towards other fellow humans. (victims are often children or minors)
just like Marilyn Manson and other heavy metal bands taking the head of the mallet whnever theres a school shooting.
So the cencorship board took measures...by blotting out or cutting out frames which contained such material. but to my surprise its usually the reels with Sex that goes under the knife, not so much the Violence anymore.
again we come back to the debate of Sex v Violence.
what ive noticed from my friends in Malaysia is that ALL the Sex scenes from 300 have been removed completely, even nudity (female only of course), wherelse not a single drop of blood spilled by blade or spear was removed...
so im assuming the cencorship board of msia had deemed sex to be more, inappropriate... and as a body with authority and power they should do whatever they see fit to protect its subjects. protecting them from possible adultery?
but the rampaging, slashing dude should continue to exist?
It worries me. not that the malaysian society is too conservative to accept nudity, nor the fact that they are "protecting" its subjects against a phantom menace...
...but what it had preffered to allow its subjects to see...
"wanna watch 300?"
"300 what?"
something like that...
right at the start of the movie, it being set in... pre-medieval times, anyone who is not a complete historical bigot would know that its a time of bloodshed, an era of mayhem and an age of war, therefore one would expect a tremendous amount of violence, well actually as much violence as the Australian Broadcast Association Commitee would allow...
which is alot...
...compared to other places in the world.
But "Violence" isnt the new kid around the block in the neighbourhood cinema, compared to its sibling "Sex". As we all know Violence has somewhat been more "accepted" than its less bloody counterpart (argueable), there is this on-going debate on who whould be crowned "the most tabooed-of-them-all"? which of the one in "Sex and Violence" is the lesser evil? which one? is worse than the other?
well in truth they are both as bad and should be banned from the cinemas altogether.
HOWEVER thats not the way Hollywood sells its productions, because over the years, people up in the production line has funded scientists, sociologists, phychologists, doctors, engineers, architects, economists and every other profession you can think of; to figure out what-sells-a-movie-most?
and after years of research this is what theyve come up with...
Controversy(Sex + Violence) = $$$
but theres always a bad side to anything thats good.
many conservatives argued that films with sexual scenes and violence had induced its viewers with a dose of all that is evil, namely commiting adultery and assault-like behaviour towards other fellow humans. (victims are often children or minors)
just like Marilyn Manson and other heavy metal bands taking the head of the mallet whnever theres a school shooting.
So the cencorship board took measures...by blotting out or cutting out frames which contained such material. but to my surprise its usually the reels with Sex that goes under the knife, not so much the Violence anymore.
again we come back to the debate of Sex v Violence.
what ive noticed from my friends in Malaysia is that ALL the Sex scenes from 300 have been removed completely, even nudity (female only of course), wherelse not a single drop of blood spilled by blade or spear was removed...
so im assuming the cencorship board of msia had deemed sex to be more, inappropriate... and as a body with authority and power they should do whatever they see fit to protect its subjects. protecting them from possible adultery?
but the rampaging, slashing dude should continue to exist?
It worries me. not that the malaysian society is too conservative to accept nudity, nor the fact that they are "protecting" its subjects against a phantom menace...
...but what it had preffered to allow its subjects to see...
posted by Killl_Roy at 9:51 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home