should mumsnet help ban this film

[richrichrich]

Hi all mumsnets

Just listened to Radio 4 debate re Eastender sstory line. It praised mumsnet for bringing attention to a storyline.

I saw a film last year called "Eden Lake". In it a bunch of teanagers tortured to death a young married couple, slashed their mouthes with a stanly knife tied them up with barbed wire, burned a small asian boy to death and laughed about it and recorded all on their mobile phones. I was so disturbed that I contacted my local MP. I complained that the film content should never be considered entertainment in a civilised society. He asked the film classification board to re check the film. The matter went no further. The board is however, I believe, funded by film makers!
The matter went no further. After writing to the papers, and TV journalist all to no avail, I have had to give up as nobody appears to agree with my point of view. My point is that If this film is considered good entertainment by our main stream cinemas,then I am not surprised that some youngsters do the things that they do. Not long after this film was released there was a story in the news where two small boys tried to torture two other small boys to death, one was left for dead in a ditch. Very similar to the film!! Please would you mumsnetters review, and if you feel motivated do what you do best

Many thanks to you all. You probably do need to watch the film to fully understand my point, but I warn you it is very unpleasant.

but no responsible parent would show inappropriate films/games to young children.

Irresponsible and neglectful parenting would of course be harmful which is not the same argument, and please do stop repeating yourself about the torture for entertainment thing

do you think that showing tv series were grown men torture grown men because they 'simply must do it for the sake of freedom' or some such is harmful to grown ups? does it make them vote for eejits?

Rich, you are funny. I have a very dubious record when it comes to films and books that I have digested. Yet I have never in my life started a fight. I have never maimed anyone. Despite reading 120 Days of Sodom, I have never as much as punched a girl in the face, nevermind subjected her to months of torture followed by death.

So, in conclusion, while there may be a change in "the violent behaviour of children" (which I very much doubt, I have read Dickens and articles about Mary Bell), I do not think it is down to Cert18 movies.

Society is after all just a bunch of people bobing along together held together by a set of ideas about what they feel is acceptable and what is not.

I am just asking the question, are the opinions of the film board reflecting what joe blogs average finds acceptabele with regards to this film.

It would seem that I am out of step with the rest of society, and that the film board was correct and I was wrong.

I find it very sad that a poll of uk mums feels like that. I can not think of anything more abhorant than a child torturing another child. I do hope that the people that replied are not representative of UK mums.

I understand that there is an issue of freedom of speach and here. However, the only reason why life in areas of the uk is violent is either because we make it so or we decide to tollerate the violence. I would suggest that tollerance of this film is included in that.

In accepting this film do you play your part in making the UK a more violent and less safe place?

So rich, seeing as you are so vocal about how awful we are, maybe you'd like to be vocal in answering some questions?

a) What did you expect the film to be like considering it is an 18, the front cover contains the line "one of the most provocative and terrifying thrillers of the year" and the back cover contains the line "genuinely shocking"?

b) What do you think the 18 stands for?

c) Do you believe under 18's should be watching it?

d) If not, then do you think it should be censored just in case under 18's watch it?

e) Do you feel the same about PG films, after all, really young children may watch them? Should we in fact cease making any entertainment aimed at adults just in case?

f) Do you believe all graphic violence needs to be censored, or just this film? If all, then would you like the news censored to?

Did I miss the post where someone found it entertaining?

I don't mind horror or thriller films, especially ones that play on making you think about what's happening (I have a vivid imagination and scare myself silly!) I'm not a fan of slasher films. I accidentally watched Hostel (I got engrossed in the computer and didn't notice it come on, I kept looking up at it but was too busy to change it) and it was horrible, not something I'd deliberate watch again. I'm not going to call for it to be banned because some people like those types of films, they know it's only a film, only fantasy. It's far from the same as a programme claiming to be educational and then putting a storyline they claimed to have researched and sought approval from relevant bodies yet the only thing it does is make the lives of grieving parents just that little harder when people think that they're at risk of having their child snatched or harmed.

I too diasgree - I love horror films however, they haven't as yet, turned me into a crazy cowboy wielding a chain saw or such like!

An interesting film by Haneke that looks into the debate raised here was "FUNNY GAMES". It went to Cannes in 1997.
Times have changed now...

unfortunately...

I think everybody is missing the point of the OP.

It is not the film per se, but the general slackness and pure irresponsibility of the film-making industry that is making it more acceptable to a minority of young people to act like total sickos.

Has everybody forgotten about what happened to Jamie Bulger? And how his murderers were influenced by a seemingly innocent "comedy-horror" film. Yes, it was a rare case, but it still happened.

I work as a young journalist in the entertainment industry and am subjected to an enormous amount of films, videogames and music of all genres. The producers and distributors of these titles generally don't care about the welfare of children, they just want to shift units. As a result, what is getting put out there is becoming increasingly more violent to keep up with what is becoming more acceptable.

RichRichRich is absolutely right - it is totally unacceptable to portray one child setting fire to another child.

I have seen Eden Lake as I had to review it for a publication. Yes, it was graphic and shocking. But the the device the director used to make it morally shocking is the very one the majority of replies to RRR's post seem to be humouring.

In Eden Lake the director is saying: "look at the state of our kids today - and don't you think we should examine why they are like that..." For those who haven't seen the film, they should before lambasting RRR's post.

The other shocking thing about Eden Lake is that it is very real. There is no fantasy in it - it is, essentially, a drama. Any kid with the wrong parenting or who gets in with the wrong crowd could very feasibly be influenced by the film.

As for the freedom of speech/censorship issue? I think it is perfectly reasonable to deem minors torturing others offensive and therefore suitable for censorship.

They are banning parents filming school nativity plays FFS, but it's okay to put stuff such as Eden Lake on general release?!

I, for one, think RichRichRich did a responsible thing by bringing up the issue with his MP and being brave enough to throw it onto to MN too.

We all moan about the current state of society and what we are bringing our kids into, but at least he is doing something about it.

"I can not think of anything more abhorant than a child torturing another child." Then don't go watching movies like Eden Lake Rich. Simple.

LittleBooks The film is not available for young children to watch. It is an 18. It is not the film makers fault that some people are lax enough to let children watch it?

Do you really want film makers to censor their films on the chance children will watch it?

"I think it is perfectly reasonable to deem minors torturing others offensive and therefore suitable for censorship."

Have you ever read Lord of the Flies? Would you like that censored?

Yes you did miss the post sconfuddledDOTcom. you missed all of them. As part of society, when you agree that a film is acceptable to be on release, you are endorsing it as acceptable entertainment, for the society that you live within, including the children that watch it under age. My point exactly.

Children will always find ways of watching films above their age limit. Many children are not blessed with even your high level of inteligence BeerTricks. they are more easily influenced by film.

Given that under-age viewers will watch such films. Adults, mums, dads, grandmas, grandads, all need to be protective of them. Thanks Ladygaga, I will watch that film to find out why my views are in the minority.

Ff you really don't want people to watch it then don't go posting the gory details on an internet forum. It just makes it more appealing iyswim. I'd never heard of it til now same as the other one mentioned. Now I want to watch it...........

I watched Dumbo and I was offended on soooo many levels. Should we ban that too Rich, oh and Bambi, that one really messed with my head?

You saw a film that offended you. That's pants. Next time I suggest you research better, that way you may have a more enjoyable movie experience and further research may indicate to you that violence in childhood is not down to movies.

rish Couldn't manage to answer my questions then?

It is not the film makes responsibility to make films with the thought of children watching films already labelled as unsuitable for them. Do you honestly think it is?

If you think it is, do you think we should just stop producing any adult oriented content just in case?

Kalokimallow Under age children are always going to get hold of films. I have to agree with littlebooks. In this particular instance, yes this film should be censored because of that.

As far as the comparative issue goes between this film and the "lord of the Flies", regretably you will probably have to watch the film to understand.

That isn't an answer to my question. Should all adult films be censored? I mean, Schindler's List is pretty grim, should the less appetising bits be cut out just in case?

Lord of the Flies had children tortured and killed by gangs of other children, so how is it not comparative?

See what's happened because of HQ getting involved with all the Eastenders crap? Now we've got fuckwits thinking we make the Daily Mail look reactionary.

Do you think idiots who let children watch films like this are going to make sure they restrict their internet access? Perhaps we should just go off line as a nation to pre-emptively prevent their little neglected brains being warped by hardcore porn?

Also,
"Under age children are always going to get hold of films."

By that logic

• under age children will always get hold of alcohol; ban all alcohol
• under age children will always get hold of knives; ban all knives
• under age children will always get hold of dangerous household cleaners; ban all dangerous household cleaners

I'm actually really reassure by the fact that (according to your figures ) 90% of mums take a more active approach to parenting rather than relying on someone else to do it for them.

When did the mums of the uk decide that they found this entertaining? not in the 70s and 80s when I grew up.

As an avid horror film buff in the 70 and 80s when you grew up didn't we have;

1.Texas chainsaw massacre.

1. I spit on your grave.
2. The shining.
3. The Exorcist.
4. Clockwork Orange.
5. Halloween.
6. Friday The 13th (part 1 to ????)

etc..etc..

I find personally the Saw films can make me a little unsettled in my stomach especially when watched all at once (joke).

BUT that's my choice as an adult to watch these films including Eden Lake twice!..
My DS 26yrs wasn't allowed to watch horrors when underage and my DD doesn't like horror films 21yrs and never watched a horror until she went to college (personal choice).

And richrichrich vanished in a puff of logic?

If enough people complain about what is getting put through, then when they make the films in the first place directors would be mindful of not offending people. The standards have been lowered so much that anything is now deemed acceptable.

I think 'Eden Lake' had an intent to shock, as did 'A Serbian Film', which blatantly should be banned (if it hasn't been so already).