Cheers, I'll have a look.
Cineworld cancels film about the daughter of the Prophet Muhammad
- Thread starter Devil_forever
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran are here to talk about a frustrating 2 points dropped at Crystal Palace. They then discuss the regeneration of Old Trafford. Finally, Nik is joined by special guest Michael Statham from the Football Oranje podcast - who gives us a more in depth look at our EL opposition FC Twente, and then runs through the (many) Dutch connections currently at United.
Cheers, I'll have a look.
https://www.bbfc.co.uk/about-us/news/statement-on-the-lady-of-heaven
We classify content in line with our published Classification Guidelines,which are the result of wide-scale consultations with thousands of people from across the UK, extensive research, and more than 100 years of experience. They are updated every four to five years to ensure that our standards continue to reflect the expectations and values of people across the country.
We classified The Lady Of Heaven 15 for strong bloody violence, gory images, and threat. We provide content advice – which we call ‘ratings info’ – on our website and app for every film we classify, so that audiences can decide for themselves whether a film will be suitable for them or their families. You can review the ratings info for The Lady Of Heaven here.
On occasion, we will consider some content unsuitable for classification, in line with the objective of preventing non-trivial harm risks to potential viewers and, through their behaviour, to society. As an accountable and transparent organisation, this decision and the reasons for it will be communicated to the distributor and publicly. However, there is nothing in The Lady Of Heaven that exceeds our Classification Guidelines at 15 or deems it unsuitable for classification.
Filmmakers are free to explore historical or controversial themes and events within their films. The BBFC’s role is to ensure the content is classified appropriately based on our guidelines, in order to protect children and other vulnerable groups from potential harm and to empower consumers to make informed viewing decisions.
1) I am not talking about a "right". Since the start I've talked about actions and consequences. Certain actions will have certain consequences and you can't hide behind free speech (again, I mean the non violent consequence of hatred in society). You can't just say "this shouldn't happen".
If you want my personal opinion, if it should matter, I do not care for such movies being played but them being banned is in no way a step backwards when it comes to free speech. It's keeping a society healthy and respectful. So I don't understand this strong defense of a movie being banned if it is out of respect for muslims.
If it is out of fear of the staffs safety, then that is wrong. That's if this is what the protestors where doing and I wasn't there so I can't comment on the violent part but they sound pretty dumb and narrow minded either way.
so 2) I am not talking about the screechers, because I've had this back and forth with you before on some other incident and its about the overall impact of offensive material being promoted as free speech. It has negative consequences for everyone and zero value.
3) That is the whole debate. What is "our beliefs" and "western" culture. I was talking about it from the perspective of a working class immigrant. Examples that came to my head was wearing a hijab and "westerners" looking at it as some form of oppression. If you had immigrants that looked at "western" women in skirts as nothing but hoes and tried to pass laws that they should be covered then I would agree with you?
And I definitely don't hope you're making the argument of "if you don't take off the hijab, well you don't respect MY values of how a woman should be".
Cheers!
I absolutely can. It’s the 21st century in a country with legal protections for freedom of speech, religion, and expression.
I oppose it for the same reason I’d oppose a Christian saying a movie about a gay couple or that satirizes Christians should be banned out of respect to Christians… because having a religion doesn’t mean you get to dictate what to do & believe to everyone else.
I think we’ve seen enough videos posted to have an idea of why they were concerned.
From your point of view.
I think banning people from wearing a hijab is equally wrong and wouldn’t support it here and would speak out against such a ban if it were to happen here… for the very same reason that I would speak out against a movie being banned because a religion got offended by it.
Alright, I can't reason with this anymore. I tried to add context but you're drawing parallels that just don't hold the same context. I'm glad you've found good use for your "freedom of speech" and all Im sure you will add a lot of value to society that way.
Okay.
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2015
- Messages
- 17,474
- Supports
️
I don’t get why it was banned. Genuinely would like to know why?
Can anyone TLDR the reasons?
Can anyone TLDR the reasons?
Your so far off its unbelievable. The simple fact is that this is religious people being offended by a movie. It wouldn't matter what religion it was, if you feel a movie should be banned because it offends your faith then tough.
South Park and the Simpsons have been making fun of Christianity for years. You can't go around banning things just because it offends different faith's.
People can believe in whatever God they want to just don't push you believes on to everybody else. Religion has been dividing people for hundreds of years. It's the 21st century and it's time to move on. The fact that we are still talking about stuff like this in 2022 is a joke.
Some people don't like it so they think no one else should be allowed to watch it either.
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2015
- Messages
- 17,474
- Supports
- ️
Could they just not watch it?
It wasn't banned. One cinema chain, Cineworld, pulled the film from their screens citing staff safety. It is still been shown by other cinemas, like Vue, around the country.
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2015
- Messages
- 17,474
- Supports
- ️
Ah ok so you could watch the film elsewhere but it’s not safe to watch it at Cineworld?
Why is it not safe for the staff to show the film?
They cited staff safety. I don't know exactly what they experienced to make that decision. The most obvious reason appears to be that it was in reaction to large groups of protesters showing up outside some of their cinemas.
In one of the clips @2cents posted, one of the managers of the cinema said they wouldn’t be showing it in solidarity with the community the cinema is based in.
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2015
- Messages
- 17,474
- Supports
- ️
So the staff didn’t feel safe with protesters so a film has been pulled from all Cineworlds?
On the surface to me that seems like a big overreaction? Surely the protestors can protest and the film still be shown?
Haven't seen this much sociopolitical fuss around a movie since The Interview, which I enjoyed for openly poking fun at North Korea.
Seriously, fellas, it's an attempt at a bibliographical movie. I just don't get groups getting riled up for something this innocent.
Seriously, fellas, it's an attempt at a bibliographical movie. I just don't get groups getting riled up for something this innocent.
Surely it’s obvious why they were concerned about staff safety? It’s not as though the protestors were school kids waving pictures they’d drawn for earth day.
I can imagine what it was, which is why I explained what the obvious answer might be but I don't know the precise events that led to the decision, as in did something specific happen at one of the locations, was it triggered the general nuisance of the crowds etc.
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2015
- Messages
- 17,474
- Supports
- ️
If they’ve threatened violence then surely police should protect Cineworld’s employees and the protest should be disbanded then?
Certainly shouldn’t be removing films from places due to angry mobs?
I think tbh the staff rightly feel it's not worth it. I would in the same place. Charlie hebdo were producing the content. The staff of the cinema are simply working in a place showing the film. I don't think any of them want a target on their back possibly for a very long time just for doing their jobs in the cinema.
Last edited:
Not really surprised the reaction this movie has got. It was designed to be such.
The funds gathered for this movie are huge, and certainly don't appear to be, for example, about an "art movie" or such. One of the makers himself has said 18m for certain aspects of the movie.
Not surprised that Shia and Sunni have condemned this movie collectively as the person making it and those behind it are Rafidhi. Or Shia Rafidah. Rafidah meaning rejectors. These Shia are not Muslim in the same way a guy eating a maccys big Mac isn't vegetarian despite claiming to be one.
I think there is a narrative developing here. Sort of focus on the one loud mouth rather than the majority and ignore what the cinema manager said and speak of health and safety of staff.
The funds gathered for this movie are huge, and certainly don't appear to be, for example, about an "art movie" or such. One of the makers himself has said 18m for certain aspects of the movie.
Not surprised that Shia and Sunni have condemned this movie collectively as the person making it and those behind it are Rafidhi. Or Shia Rafidah. Rafidah meaning rejectors. These Shia are not Muslim in the same way a guy eating a maccys big Mac isn't vegetarian despite claiming to be one.
I think there is a narrative developing here. Sort of focus on the one loud mouth rather than the majority and ignore what the cinema manager said and speak of health and safety of staff.
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2015
- Messages
- 17,474
- Supports
- ️
I understand why theyve done it but surely this does fall under the whole freedom of speech argument and that should be protected.
The film has been certified for audiences and people disagreeing to the point of making a cinema pull the film isnt ok.
What has happened is a large group has disagreed with a film, made people feel threatened and subsequently got their own way. It sets a terrible precedent.
By all means disagree with the film and dont watch it out of personal choice. And equally protest and explain to others why its offensive to you and why you wont be supporting the film if you wish. There is nothing wrong with people publicly showing disapproval. It may even help others make an informed decision as to whether or not they too wish to boycott it.
But this clearly cant have been calm and peaceful for staff to feel unsafe and that is the issue. Any suggestion of threats to safety make this feel really uncomfortably like mob censorship. I should be able to walk into any cinema at any point to watch any certified film I want to regardless of anyones opinion of the film without fear for my safety.