Archive for the ‘Censorship’ Category

Censor Director Prano Bailey-Bond Is Going to Shock You – Vulture

Photo: Courtesy of Magnet

Britain in the 80s was grasped by the talons of Thatcherism: a brand of right-wing politics that upheld the individual and traditional family values. Some (many!) decried it as fascist, a call that became all the more emphatic when the Thatcher government took on Britains industrious towns and cities, closing down mines, mostly in the north and Wales, and destroying entire families livelihoods.

For Prano Bailey-Bond, the first-time director behind Sundance hit Censor, its difficult to separate Britains turbulent contemporaneous politics from the panic around video nasties: gore-heavy, straight-to-VHS B-movies around which the tabloids rustled up a profound moral hysteria, egged on by the state. In Britain at that time, you have job losses, you have welfare being cut. People were living in poverty, she says. So theres going to be more unrest, and I think horror was an easy scapegoat for all the bad in the world it took pressure off politicians, off what was actually going on.

This political reality serves as a tangible through-line in Censor, which follows a relatively simple conceit. Enid, a film censor played by Niamh Algar, is on the front line in Britains war against the nasties; she decides whether theyre fit for public consumption.All the while, shes tormented by the mysterious loss of her sister: Once inseparable, she vanished without a trace when they were young. But when she sits down to rate a particularly graphic film by the notorious gore-hound Frederick North, things begin to spiral, her perception of reality and fiction blurring at an exponential rate. The crescendo Censor eventually hits offers one of the more unsettling dnouements in recent horror cinema.

With Censor being released this week, Vulture chatted with Bailey-Bond about moral panic, why we love watching films that indulge in the most grotesque of body horror, and whether the video nasties, despite their reputation, can be appreciated as art.

Film censorship happens everywhere, but the moral hysteria around video nasties was specific to England in the 80s. Can you tell us a little about that history?

The birth of VHS led to a boom in low-budget horror becoming available. In every country, these films could go directly to the home, be watched and rewatched potentially getting into the hands of children. For various reasons, the U.K.s reaction was one of the most conservative in western countries. Its a moral panic that emerged in the Thatcher era, this idea that these films were going to possess those who watched them, make them throw their moral compass out of the window, and do terrible things: garrote each other with shoelaces, attack each other with axes.

In the Daily Mail, there was an article called Pony Maniac Strikes Again, which was about a bunch of ponies who were attacked. And the police statement in this article said that the attacker was probably influenced by either video nasties or the full moon. So suddenly the real world becomes this supernatural place where were all howling at the moon, and growing hairs, and going out to attack ponies. Its amazing how the tabloid press was about to whip up this moral panic around these films.

There are moments in Censor where you contrast the political violence of the Thatcher era in the background of one scene, theres archival news footage of police cracking down on a miners strike, for example with the grotesque, but otherwise benign, horrors of the video nasties. Why is that?

Its what I see when I look at that footage. Because obviously in the background of all of this were the miners protesting about the mines being closed down and everybody losing their livelihoods. And you see police brutality in the footage thats not being highlighted or looked at as perhaps not the right way to deal with things, when you look back. But some kind of gory, probably campy special effects are supposed to infect someones brain and make them go out and murder somebody.

We dont watch a horror film and then completely lose all of our morals. The reason people do terrible things is not that simple. It comes from somewhere much deeper; it can come from how weve been treated in life and how we feel in our heads. Its such a simple explanation to just blame horror.

It feels like theres a direct line between this moral panic, happening in a very specific political moment, and, say, the hysteria around video games in America over the past decade or so. The idea that games like Grand Theft Auto lead to shootings

Absolutely, and thats sort of why I wanted to set the film in the past, so that you have an objective viewpoint. When we were developing the film, a few people said, Why dont you make it about a contemporary censor? But the period and what was going on is just too rich not to set it then. But you also have distance from it. You can go back and go, Well, in the 50s, it was comic books that were going to turn little boys into horrible big men. And then it was video nasties. And then it was video games. Its been Marilyn Manson; its been rap music.

Specifically with the VHS thing, I found it interesting to think about just how fragile we think we are, or how fragile our moral compasses are as people, that this new piece of technology is going to completely destroy our understanding of right and wrong. Were so scared of technology; were so scared of the things we create and what theyre going to do back to us.

Sometimes the fear of what theyre going to do causes more of a problem than the technology itself. I think youve got that in the fears around social media and what thats going to do to us and how that is warping our perception of reality, which is perhaps warped already, because then we can go into, What even is reality? And we wont go down that road. Maybe were just a frightened species.

What is it with our attraction to the morbid, the grotesque, and gore what attracts us to, say, people being torn limb by limb by zombies, beheadings, and disembowelment?

I think about this a lot. Some people love it, and some people just cant stand it. I know from my perspective its not so much about the gore. Theres something very physical about watching these kinds of films. I think horror is the most similar, of all film genres, to a roller-coaster ride. You can feel the electricity sometimes when youre watching a horror film, and I dont think you get that from other genres. For me, Im really interested in trying to understand why people do bad things. Im really interested in dark minds and picking them apart.

Its a funny one: My sister isnt really into horror, but she loves crime dramas, and, actually, women are the audience for a lot of serial-killer films. Sometimes I think, Is it because we want to protect ourselves? I dont think anyone wants to genuinely put themselves in these horrific situations in real life, but because we know its fiction, theres something very cathartic about it its an adrenaline rush at times, too. I dont have a hard-and-fast answer.Im still trying to work it out.

Theres an early line of dialogue where a film producer hes supposed to be a bit of an asshole, I think shows some artistic appreciation for an eye-gouging scene that Enid wants to cut: Its King Lears Gloucester, he contests. Its Un Chien Andalou. Looking back, do you think the nasties can be framed, and appreciated, as art?

I think some of them can. The video nasties, as a whole, are quite varied in terms of their art. Some of them are only known or spoken about now because they were banned; had they not been banned, I dont think wed be watching them. Some of them were impressively bad.

But some of them I do think of as art: You look at something like [Dario Argentos] Suspiria or [Matt Cimbers] The Witch Who Came From the Sea they are pieces of art, in my opinion. They have a real kind of vision behind them. And theyre quite sophisticated filmmaking in their own way. Its a real range. Theres the really schlocky ones, and there are some really fun, wild ones like Basket Case. But even then, theres art in Basket Case, you know.

Read this article:
Censor Director Prano Bailey-Bond Is Going to Shock You - Vulture

Letter: Censorship on Potter Hill Dam removal | Letters to Editor | thewesterlysun.com – The Westerly Sun

Two public sessions have been held via Zoom seeking input from the community on the removal of the Potter Hill Dam. The first meeting was on March 18 and the second on June 10. This dam removal effort will affect the residents of both Westerly and Hopkinton. Hopkinton was not made aware of this until March 18. There has been little notice of these public information sessions. These sessions have been online only via Zoom and public comments were limited by the Zoom moderator.

There was a website built after the first meeting to submit questions. These questions and comments are not publicly visible. My questions and others I have spoken with have had no replies after being submitted.

In the most recent public meeting on June 10 there were many people who had their hands raised on the Zoom meeting who were not called upon. For the limited few (including myself) who were called upon, we were not allowed to speak after our question was replied to.

This team has been working on this removal proposal for 10 years and has not fully explained the options reviewed and how decisions were made. There are several unanswered questions that the public should have answered by this team before any work to remove the dam commences in July. There needs to be a public meeting in person that allows the public to comment without censorship.

Jim Duksta

Ashaway

See the rest here:
Letter: Censorship on Potter Hill Dam removal | Letters to Editor | thewesterlysun.com - The Westerly Sun

Big Tech acting as Schiff’s agent in its censorship – The Daily Advance

We all know about the censorship by social media companies, but how this got started has never been explained.

Most people think that the Big Tech companies did this on their own because of their protections under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Well, I have had in my possession some documents for several months that came from the congressional office of U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff, D-California, on his congressional stationery and signed by him.

These documents reveal that on April 29, Schiff sent a letter to the presidents on Google, YouTube and Facebook, suggesting that they could use their position to reduce or eliminate information on the internet that was contrary to the reports of the World Health Organization. It is reasonable to conclude that when Big Tech got the green light to censor people about COVID-19 that they saw the opportunity to use the same means to censor the president and so on.

I have provided the documents to various political and legal figures.

Everyone had assumed that social media was immune from prosecution because of Section 230. It is now clear that the Big Tech firms were acting as an agent for the federal government through its agent, Congressman Adam Schiff. As such, that eliminates the protections and makes them subject to a civil lawsuit.

This is the same legal principle as someone borrowing your car. If you loan your car to a third party for the benefit of the borrower, there is nothing wrong with that. But if you give this person the keys to your car so that he can pick up something for you, then he is acting as an agent for you and any negligence he commits is imputable to you, such as in the case of Congressman Schiff.

So when you get angry about the censorship of social media companies, remember who got all this started and vote the Democrats out of office and teach them a lesson.

Editors note: According to several news accounts, including CNBC, Congressman Schiff sent a letter to the CEOs of Google, YouTube and Twitter asking them to be more like Facebook about removing misinformation about COVID-19. Facebook was already directing its users to COVID myths debunked by the World Health Organization.

See the original post:
Big Tech acting as Schiff's agent in its censorship - The Daily Advance

Is Censor the Future of Giallo Horror? – Gizmodo

Niamh Algar in CensorImage: Magnet Releasing

Censor is a 2021 Giallo film written and directed by Prano-Bailey Bond, and co-written with Anthony Fletcher. The story follows Enid Baines (Niamh Algar), a woman who works at the British film censor board. She is part of a team that decides which movies make it into theaters and which films will never see the light of day. While at work shes well-liked and seen as a hard worker, but outside her job, shes haunted by her younger sisters disappearance.

Her parents want to move on, but Enid refuses to let go. Then, one day while looking at a gory slasher snuff film, Enid thinks she sees her sister in the movie. This sets her on a course of self-destruction as she aims to unravel the truth behind her sisters disappearance. Censorwhich io9 got to review out of Sundance earlier this yearcenters around the inner workings of Enids mind instead of focusing on the terrors of the real world. Bailey-Bond and Fletcher want to evoke unease and tension. However, it often gets overshadowed by its hesitancy to tell the audience the truth. Not sure why as early on its easy to predict where the story is going. Further exploring how obsession as a trauma response can lead to disastrous results would have been a better use of the movies time instead of trying to be scary.

Despite the issues, the Giallo influence is palpable and used to great effect. Censor expertly uses color and style to blend atmospheric tension and suspense. The Cinematography by Annika Summerson and Bailey-Pranos direction is Argentoesque and make it very obvious. The pinks, blues, and purples are not the usual colors used to create tension, but it works here. Theres a strong sense of claustrophobia. No matter where Enid is in the film, the super-tight shots leave no room for her to move, so the audience is forced into a state of discomfort watching this womans death spiral. The kill scenes are gory as hell and also tightly filmed, so you see everything up close and personalin all its bloody glory.

Is Censor the future of Giallo cinema? Well, its hard to say as Giallo is one of those timeless sub-genres that doesnt often see drastic changejust bigger budgets. A better question is whether modern directors and storytellers will utilize the style enough to enhance quality content? And that is what Censor does well. Read Germain Lussiers in-depth Sundance 2021 review of Censor here. The film is currently in theaters and will be available on VOD June 18.

For more, make sure youre following us on our Instagram @io9dotcom.

G/O Media may get a commission

View post:
Is Censor the Future of Giallo Horror? - Gizmodo

Twitter’s CEO Jack heckled at Bitcoin 2021 conference over censorship issue – Mint

Twitter's CEO Jack Dorsey on late Friday (local time) was heckled at the Bitcoin 2021 conference held in Miami.

"Twitter's CEO Jack Dorsey heckled over censorship during an #Bitcoin event," tweeted Disclose.tv.

At the event, one of the attendees interrupted the discussion at one point, seemingly accusing Dorsey of undue censorship of free speech through Twitter.

According to US-based entertainment news company Meaww, the attendee who interrupted Dorsey was an anti-Muslim activist, Laura Loomer.

She attacked Dorsey at the bitcoin reference for being a "giant hypocrite about censorship and freedom of speech".

Laura registered her protest against the new censorship rules and accused Dorsey of "interfering" with people's rights.

"Censorship is human rights violation, " she said. Following her gimmick, Laura was quickly escorted out, reported Meaww.

Twitter banned Laura back in 2018 after she posted a tweet about Minnesota Representative Ilhan Omar. In her tweet, Laura mentioned that Omar, one of the first two Muslim women elected to Congress, was "anti-Jewish" and that her religion pushed homophobia and abuse of women.

Laura had registered her protest against getting banned from the platform by handcuffing herself to the glass doors leading into Twitter's Manhattan headquarters. "It's almost as if Twitter hates Jews and conservatives. When is Jack Dorsey going to stop censoring conservatives? When am I going to get my Twitter back? I'll be here as long as it takes, " she said, reported Meaww.

Twitter raged with reactions over Laura Loomer's heckling of Twitter CEO over censorship issues. While some agreed with Laura's stance, some condemned her act.

One user wrote, "Jack Dorsey, why don't you do the right thing and allow all voices to be heard? Seriously, what are you so afraid of? That people will think for themselves?"

One of the comments slamming Laura Looner read, "Hearing Laura Loomer just lost it on Jack Dorsey at a Bitcoin event in Miami -for censorship Sorry, dopey Laura, wrong platform It's Facebook you're mad at today. But hey, keep it up! Rational America really appreciates the help getting Trump permanently banned from Twitter!"

Another tweet read, "Laura Loomer is a racist islamaphobic loser who feels important because every once and a while she trends on twitter for doing some dumb... like she did today with Jack Dorsey"

At the conference, Dorsey was joined during the discussion by Alex Gladstein the chief strategy officer of Human Rights Foundation and another advocate for the sovereign potential of Bitcoin.

Subscribe to Mint Newsletters

* Enter a valid email

* Thank you for subscribing to our newsletter.

Never miss a story! Stay connected and informed with Mint. Download our App Now!!

See more here:
Twitter's CEO Jack heckled at Bitcoin 2021 conference over censorship issue - Mint