RACIST LANGUAGE

[boogiebuugie]

Would I be correct in assuming that the single use of racist language within the film was the sole reason rfor its 18 certificate and that as an essential plot element, it could not be removed from the screenplay.

[GR]

Welcome aboard, boogie.

I'm no expert on British film ratings, but I would assume that the language -- which, I agree, was pretty much integral to the characters who used it -- combined with the realistic brutality of the violence (what little there was) and the overall heaviness of the theme probably pushed it into 18 territory.

[josephcroft]

I read that a couple of local councils overturned the rating and made it a 15 in order for the intended audience to be able to see it.

[GR]

Yep -- I just checked out IMDb's trivia page for TIE ("Although this film was rated '18' in the UK when released theatrically, the film was rated '15' in Westminster and Bristol theatrically").

[Dave]

Now I'm not saying I am directly responsible for getting the 15 cert in Bristol... but I think I got the ball rolling. ;D


GR... you may notice that it now says I modified your last post. That was an accident. I haven't done anything!

[GR]

Oh, good. ;D

I think a 15 rating certainly would've been appropriate for this film. The 18 (which, to my way of thinking, sounds like the European equivalent of NC-17 minus the porn stigma) seems a little excessive.

[baz1701]

The BBFC is a bit vague about things like this. Like in a 12 film you can use the f word once, but twice knocks it up to 15, and the same with the c word usage between 15 and 18.

I think you can get away with what's called 'mildly racist dialogue' in a 12 and a 15 rating although how racist language can be mild is beyond me. I think excessive use (like Pulp Fiction) pushes the film to an 18.