Friday, October 20, 2006
Quite A Cockfight
Having - as I'm sure you'd noticed - had a bit of a dearth in inspiration recently, I went back over my 'to blog about' list, which contains any number of items that seemed like a good idea at one point or another before I either forgot about them or changed my mind. They're mostly rubbish, but one issue that had me pretty angry at one point this summer did spring out as worth mentioning.
At the Edinburgh Film Festival this year, one of the themes was a re-examination of critically lauded but generally forgotten films from the 1970s, one of which was going to be Monte Hellman's 'Cockfighter'. 'Cockfighter' is a brutal drama set in the Deep South, and features actual footage of cockfights. Over recent years, it has been re-appraised, and is now regarded as a very important work - and an excellent character study - by an under-appreciated director. Tony T had words of praise, and I have to go on his judgement since I haven't seen it.
A few days before the scheduled screening, the Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals complained to the festival organisers, who took advice from the BBFC. The BBFC said that any screening would be illegal, since it would contravene the Cinematograph Films (Animals) Act 1937, which expressly forbids public display of any film in which an animal was harmed in the making. It had once been shown in public before, at the NFT, a screening which we now know was illegal.
Although it has never been officially banned, it suffers a de facto ban in the UK. It isn't the only film about cockfighting to suffer a de facto ban. A Claire Denis film, 'No Fear, No Die' also suffers the same fate. According to the Melonfarmers, that film contains a disclaimer in the end credits saying that all the fight scenes were faked, with plastic blades being substituted for metal ones. However, the relevant law also covers 'distress', so the distributors were informally advised that the film would require massive cuts.
I just don't understand who or what is being protected here. In the case of 'Cockfighter', we clearly have animals being killed, yet banning the film is utterly pointless. The relevant roosters have been dead for over thirty years - who are we kidding by pretending it didn't happen? The usual argument about the fruitlessness of censorship in the age of the Internet also stands, only this time, you don't need to go to Ogrish or Rotten to see what the censors won't allow, because there are masses of videos on Youtube. In the case of 'No Fear, No Die', the film apparently takes a moral stance on the issue. 'K. S. Kincaid' on the IMDb:
'Gandhi once said that the true measure of how civilized a society is can be found by looking at how it treats its animals. The message of "No Fear, No Die" seems to be that disregard of and insensitivity towards the lives of animals leads to insensitivity on a greater scale. Jocelyn lets in get to him and leads him to an act of near-homicide. In a modern age in which the peoples of "civilized" nations have become so de-sensitized because of their cultures of excess, we are steadily running headfirst into the brink of our own self-destruction. But no one, it seems, can afford to give a damn.'
What really pisses me off about this is that my dad used to work (and by used to I mean until very recently) near a house in which cocks were bred for fighting, and the suspicion was dogs too. The police know - they raided the house at one point. Nothing came of it. It still goes on. If people want to get angry about cockfighting, then why don't they get angry about it actually happening now, not a film containing a few scenes of it shot three decades ago?
At the Edinburgh Film Festival this year, one of the themes was a re-examination of critically lauded but generally forgotten films from the 1970s, one of which was going to be Monte Hellman's 'Cockfighter'. 'Cockfighter' is a brutal drama set in the Deep South, and features actual footage of cockfights. Over recent years, it has been re-appraised, and is now regarded as a very important work - and an excellent character study - by an under-appreciated director. Tony T had words of praise, and I have to go on his judgement since I haven't seen it.
A few days before the scheduled screening, the Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals complained to the festival organisers, who took advice from the BBFC. The BBFC said that any screening would be illegal, since it would contravene the Cinematograph Films (Animals) Act 1937, which expressly forbids public display of any film in which an animal was harmed in the making. It had once been shown in public before, at the NFT, a screening which we now know was illegal.
Although it has never been officially banned, it suffers a de facto ban in the UK. It isn't the only film about cockfighting to suffer a de facto ban. A Claire Denis film, 'No Fear, No Die' also suffers the same fate. According to the Melonfarmers, that film contains a disclaimer in the end credits saying that all the fight scenes were faked, with plastic blades being substituted for metal ones. However, the relevant law also covers 'distress', so the distributors were informally advised that the film would require massive cuts.
I just don't understand who or what is being protected here. In the case of 'Cockfighter', we clearly have animals being killed, yet banning the film is utterly pointless. The relevant roosters have been dead for over thirty years - who are we kidding by pretending it didn't happen? The usual argument about the fruitlessness of censorship in the age of the Internet also stands, only this time, you don't need to go to Ogrish or Rotten to see what the censors won't allow, because there are masses of videos on Youtube. In the case of 'No Fear, No Die', the film apparently takes a moral stance on the issue. 'K. S. Kincaid' on the IMDb:
'Gandhi once said that the true measure of how civilized a society is can be found by looking at how it treats its animals. The message of "No Fear, No Die" seems to be that disregard of and insensitivity towards the lives of animals leads to insensitivity on a greater scale. Jocelyn lets in get to him and leads him to an act of near-homicide. In a modern age in which the peoples of "civilized" nations have become so de-sensitized because of their cultures of excess, we are steadily running headfirst into the brink of our own self-destruction. But no one, it seems, can afford to give a damn.'
What really pisses me off about this is that my dad used to work (and by used to I mean until very recently) near a house in which cocks were bred for fighting, and the suspicion was dogs too. The police know - they raided the house at one point. Nothing came of it. It still goes on. If people want to get angry about cockfighting, then why don't they get angry about it actually happening now, not a film containing a few scenes of it shot three decades ago?
Comments:
<< Home
Its because people who want censorship usually are only upset about offences they see. They're perfectly fine with hidden atrocity, and they don't SEE the cockfights in that house near your dad's work.
Post a Comment
<< Home
