Sunday, 26 April 2015

Critical Investigation



To what extent does the Fast and Furious franchise reflect a growing leniency in Hollywood film certification?
Over the last decade films have increasingly been becoming more and more part of the culture of young people, whereby age certification of films have become ever more lenient allowing young audiences to become exposed to violent and mature themes. As a result, moral panic has been caused amongst the audience and the media. Due to this on-going issue it is believed that the continued exposure of this material and content has the ability to disturb and even persuade young audiences. Also, with the BBFC believing that parents should determine whether their child is ready to watch certain films upon the 12A certificate released in 2002, it is unsure whether the BBFC is becoming an irrelevant body. Films seem to be cutting clips off to lower the age certification in order to suit their commercial target, which leads to the consistency of the certification process to be questioned. In order to provide sufficient evidence of this case the text I have studied closely is The Fast and The Furious franchise which has produced 7 films since 2001.
The BBFC have been held to much controversy with their inconsistent film certification. They have been the UK’s film certificate providers since 1912; prior to this there were no such regulators therefore local councils had to provide their own ratings. The BBFC have in fact no control over cinema releases as they do not require to be presented for classification as local councils have the deciding factor, however the vast majority of the time the councils do use and apply BBFC’s certification to the films. Although, in the past there has been some cases where the BBFC’s certificate had been overruled by the council; this was the case with Mrs Doubtfire in 1993 when the BBFC had given it an age certification of 12 which caused a disagreement between the council and the BBFC as stated by a spokesperson on behalf of BBFC: ‘Some councils disagreed with our decision and gave the film a PG.’[1]  However, there has also been the case whereby the BBFC have changed their mind or have been pressurised by these large media giants into allowing the film to be released to the age bracket they had wanted it to such as the dark knight, which ‘was initially given a 15 certificate by the British Board of Film Classification but this was lowered to a 12A after producers agreed to make several cuts’[2]. Due to this some believe that the pressure from these blockbuster movie producers may be too much for the BBFC as the producer of This is England states: ‘By having one piece of violence and one piece of really acute verbal violence I've managed to get an 18 certificate, whereas someone else can slay thousands of people in a single film and that's OK.’[3] This shows that the BBFC may not be a consistent body as suspected, with different ratings provided for films which may not necessarily reflect the nature of the film. One reason for this could be that the BBFC hadn’t fallen under commercial pressures from This is England as it was a low budget film which was produced by a smaller institution compared to the blockbuster franchise; The Fast and The Furious. Also, another key debate is how over time the leniency of the BBFC has reduced significantly; ‘The Hitchcock film Psycho was given an “X” certificate on release in 1960, (equivalent to the current “18”).  However, on re-release in 1986 it was given a “15”. In the 1960s, the use of swear-words in a TV programme was unacceptable.  Now you will frequently hear swear words, although usually under certain conditions, including after the 9pm watershed or when a pre-programme warning is given about bad language.’[4] However, now it is much acceptable ‘with a spokesperson for the BBFC telling the Telegraph that “the use of the f-word up to four times in a 12A film is considered acceptable”’[5] Over the years from the 1960’s, the age certification and classification of films has changed a vast amount, with the use profanity a given amount of times to be acceptable which in the past would never be considered ethical nor acceptable in films for any ages of audience. This reflects the leniency in Hollywood film certification, and due to commercial pressures and more acceptability towards exposing children to violence and profanity, large media institutions are permitted to show increasing amounts of violence and profanity in films to younger audiences.
In 2001 the introduction of blockbuster franchise The Fast and Furious, had created evidence for the case of how the age certification has changed over the years since the very first film. Due to this it has provided evidence for this issue whilst researching on this topic. Over the years the BBFC have given the film a reduced rating from the first film in the franchise being a 15 to the most recent being a 12A. In one scene from ‘Fast and Furious 6’[6], a military tank drives over several cars during a chase scene as the antagonists try and escape from the proposed protagonists in the film, most likely killing anyone inside. Although the scene was extremely violent and dangerous, there is no blood and no injured occupants seen in these smashed vehicles, however the audience can see that the people/person in the car was killed. The use of slow motion had made the accidents more dramatic and violent and while the villain was shooting civilian cars in the air. Also, a tracking shot was also shown from the side of the tank to follow its devastating destruction and to make it look worse. Point of view shots were used to show how close the car drivers are to having a dangerous accident. During the scene high intensity music is also playing to build up the suspension in the audience, along with the sound of the cars and the crashes, which adds to the realism of the event in the movie. However, in ‘2 Fast 2 Furious’[7], the second film of the successful franchise, there is a very similar scene where a red car tries to squeeze under the truck and in-between its wheels during an illegal street race. The car is bounced back and forth between the wheels as the driver loses control. Then the front of the car gets trapped under the trucks wheels momentarily. Eventually the trucks wheels roll over the car brutally crushing and killing the driver inside. Although the scenes are similar as they both are shocking scenes of people being killed in a vicious way, they were both noted in the certification of the movie, but the film ratings that were given were both different, The Fast and The Furious received an age certification of 15, whereas Fast and Furious 6 received an age certification of 12A. This shows that over time certification has changed as younger audiences are being exposed more and more to violence and profanity. A study by Easterbrook shows that ‘the average American boy or girl will observe 40000 dramatizations of killing by age 18’[8]. Also, over the course of the franchise the crew that are seen to be the protagonists and the hero’s are in fact carrying out illegal activities such as street racing, and they also fight and murder but regardless are seen as the hero’s; therefore in essence this romanticises their behaviour to the audience, who are becoming younger and younger. It was found by the Daily News that ‘135 people died in accidents related to street racing in 2001, the year the current film's predecessor "The Fast and the Furious" was released’[9], this was double the amount of incidents compared to the year prior to the film, which suggests that the exposure of the Fast and Furious Franchise has caused its audience to replicate the acts of the film and lifestyle of the characters in real life. Also, when the film 2 Fast 2 Furious was released in 2003, it was reported that ‘two deaths have been linked to the film, including a 15-year-old boy run down by a 13-year-old driver’[10]. This shows that while the second instalment of The Fast and Furious franchise was given a lowered age certification, it has caused young audiences to perform the illegal activities shown in films. This links with Blumler and Katz uses and gratifications theory as the young audiences may possibly want to feel a sense of personal identity with the characters therefore depicting the illegal activities in the film in real life with negative consequences.   
The ‘Dark Knight’[11] and ‘The Hunger Games’[12] are both examples of blockbuster films which were thought to have been given too much of a lenient certificate for it to be shown to the younger audiences, with complaints from celebrities to the general public. In 2012, the year which both of these films were released a study had found that ‘there was more gun violence in PG-13 films than in the R-rated ones out that year.’[13]  Duncan Smith on the film, Dark Knight, said that ‘he enjoyed the film and thought it was well-made. But he thought the BBFC had "caved in to commercial pressures"’[14]  in terms of the certification of the film as the violence and the profanity in the film were thought to have been overlooked by the BBFC. Also, the Dark Knight had become the ‘most complained about movie of the last decade in Britain, with 364 complaints.’[15] This in turn links to Stanley Cohen’s theory of ‘moral panics’[16] as ‘the repetitive reporting of incidents in the media creates a (possibly inflated) fear.’[17] This in turn may have lead to the Dark Knight becoming the most complained about movie due to the outrage by the media of the violence in the film. Furthermore, the BBFC ‘really is not recommending that under-12s go’[18]; so this again reinstates the inconsistency of the BBFC and that although the 12A rating was issued so that parents could decide whether their child is suitable and mature enough to watch the film, why rate a film lower than what they would recommend themselves. ‘The Media Effects theory has achieved widespread acceptance by society. This theory suggests that those who are exposed to violence in the media are influenced to behave in a violent manner.’[19] A study by the American Academy of Pedriatrics used a sample of 77 PG-13 rated films of which ‘a total of 2251 violent actions were observed with roughly half (47%) of lethal magnitude.’[20] This shows that young people may be too exposed to violence in films which could lead to people follow. In 2012 a young man had performed a massacre during a screening for the film Dark Knight and had then ‘reportedly told police he dyed his hair red to look like Batman's nemesis The Joker’[21]  
One of the original films that sparked a debate into the age certification was Terminator starring Arnold Schwarzenegger; upon the first film of the franchise’s release, Terminator was given an age certification of 15 in 1984. In one of the scenes Arnold Schwarzenegger’s character is shown picking up a scalpel and cutting his forearm, you can then see a large hole in his forearm with his skin peeled to the sides with a lot of blood visible. The lighting used in this scene is low key lighting which makes the scene look much more dramatic and intense; the sound that was used had matched the scene as it was slow paced, and while he moved his hand a robotic whirring sound was playing. This scene was seen as shocking and was thought to be very gruesome and gory. However, the 3rd Terminator which was released in 2003 called the Terminator 3: Rise of the machines, was given a different age certification of 12A; this caused much disagreement with the audience as it ‘sailed close to the shores of a 15 was ‘Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines’[22] - which got the most complaints in 2003 (54).’[23] In a scene in Terminator 3 while Arnold Schwarzenegger’s character is driving, he is shown to have burn marks on his chest, which he then takes a blade to and cuts out large section of his chest and the audience can see blood; he then rips the flesh off his body and throws it out of the window. To show this the use of close-up shots and medium shots made it more gruesome. These two scenes were very similar and were both acknowledged when providing the certification, and surely would be shocking to the audience. ‘The amount of shootings in PG-13 movies has more than tripled since 1985’[24] this shows that since the time of the very first Terminator, there is more violence and shooting scenes portrayed in movies aimed at younger audiences even though the film certification has decreased for an even younger audience to watch the films.
So, what does this all mean for the future of certification? With the evident inconsistency in the BBFC’s film ratings this may mean that the future of certification lies within other bodies; these could be film institutions themselves as they all have their own rating system in order to avoid external regulation.  On the CBBFC website it states that ‘if the filmmakers decide the likely rating is too high, they may decide to change the film, e.g. by removing scenes or changing the special effects, so they are more likely to get the lower rating they want. This is called a ‘cut for category’ and is the most common sort of cut made to films in the UK.’[25] Another governing body could be local councils themselves as they have ‘the power to ignore any decision made by the BBFC and can give them their own age ratings.’[26] ‘We have access to so much information and we are skilled consumers of the media. Most of us are not passive, unthinking consumers of film or other media.’[27] As, in the past where the BBFC may have watched hours and hours of films in order to protect the younger audiences from profanity or violence by creating age certificates, is redundant. This is due to kids being able to ‘watch these films (or far worse) online anyway.’ [28] The digital age that we live in has provided the technology savvy children the knowledge to watch movies online illegally or legally which bypasses any authority and control over what they could watch as there is much choice. ‘Research has shown that many copyright criminals go to illegal sites simply because they are easy to use, allowing films to be downloaded in high-quality formats and watched in widescreen on domestic television sets.’[29] This shows that not only are there many illegal sites for young children to download films from that can be for mature audiences, but they are able to watch the films in high quality. In order to combat this, the government are orchestrating ways of filtering content that is displayed on the internet ‘to “protect consumers from offensive and unlawful content" which will include new proposals for internet filtering to protect children.’[30] The filtering system could either work by filtering routers or ISP’s. One way in which it has been successful to combat the unfiltered illegal downloading sites occurred in 2011, when ’Netflix surpassed BitTorrent in terms of bandwidth use, prompting Wired magazine to write that "for perhaps the first time in the internet's history, the largest percentage of the net's traffic is content that is paid for."’[31] While Netflix allows people to watch a large number of films and TV which the audience pays a substantial fee for deviates the audience from carrying out criminal activities such as downloading off torrent sites. Also, this would enable parents to monitor and filter what their child can watch so that they are less exposed to the violence and profanity in films targeted at them due to the leniency of the film certification.
Age certification in recent years has become more and more lenient; as evidence continues to suggest that the BBFC are in fact falling under commercial pressure and are actively assisting large media film institutions in their bid to create blockbuster films. They have helped by allowing the films the certification that they want in order to aim their film at their target audience. As a result the age certification slowly is becoming irrelevant with the addition to more new/digital media institutions allowing audiences more access and younger audiences the ability to watch content that may not be suitable for them. Also, with continued research into the effects of exposure of violence to young audiences being positively correlated with acts of violence in real life it is a threat to young children as the leniency of the material being shown to them is continuing to grow. Therefore age certification has drastically become more lenient to the extent where it could be pointless in today’s society.




Bibliography

Aluja-Fabregat. (1999). Personality and individual differences. Personality and curiousity about TV and films violence in adolescents, 379-392.
Bagshaw, C. (2009, August 27). Understanding Regulation and Censorship. Retrieved November 1, 2014, from MediaEdu: http://media.edusites.co.uk/article/understanding-regulation-and-censorship/
Barile, L. A. (2003, 06 27). '2 Fast' Blamed in Street-Racing Deaths. Retrieved from People: http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,626285,00.html
Basuroy, S. (2004). (Journal of Business. Managerial Objectives, the R-Rating Puzzle, and the Production of Violent Films*, 156.
BBFC launch 12A cinema advert. (2014, July 29). Retrieved October 2014, 28, from BBFC: http://www.bbfc.co.uk/about-bbfc/media-centre/bbfc-launch-12a-cinema-advert
Bovingdon, E. (2012, March 27). The most controversial 12A films. Retrieved October 30, 2014, from Yahoo! Movies : https://uk.movies.yahoo.com/the-most-controversial-12a-films.html
Brew, S. (2014, December 18). Taken 3 cut to get a 12A rating in the UK. Retrieved January 12, 2015, from Den Of Geek: http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/taken/33421/taken-3-cut-to-get-a-12a-rating-in-the-uk
British Board of Film Classification. (2015, January 15). Retrieved January 15, 2015, from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Board_of_Film_Classification
Bushman, B. J. (2003). Implications for Policymakers and Parents. Media Ratings for Violence and Sex.
Child, B. (2012, March 28). The Hunger Games' 12A classification not to the taste of concerned parents. Retrieved November 04, 2014, from The Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/film/2012/mar/28/hunger-games-12a-classification-concerned-parents
Chrisafis, A. (2002, August 30). Spider-Man seizes the under-12s. Retrieved October 30, 2014, from The Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/media/2002/aug/30/filmnews.filmcensorship
Cultivation Theory. (2014, November 12). Retrieved January 01, 2015, from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultivation_theory
Ewins, M. (2010). The BBFC in Modern Britain . Media Magazine 34: The Change Issue, 14-17.
History of British film certificates. (2014, December 17). Retrieved December 20, 2014, from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_British_film_certificates
Internet censorship and child protection. (2012, June 29). Retrieved from Open Rights Group: https://www.openrightsgroup.org/ourwork/reports/internet-censorship-and-child-protection
KUHN, A. (1999). Crash and film censorship in the UK. The Crash Controversy: Censorship Campaigns and Film Reception.
Lawson, M. (2008, July 31). Is The Dark Knight suitable for children? Retrieved October 31, 2014, from The Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2008/jul/31/isthedarkknightsuitablefo
Leone, R. (2002). Contemplating Ratings: An Examination of What the MPAA Considers "Too Far for R" and Why. Journal of Communication, 938-954.
Lin, J. (Director). (2013). Fast & Furious 6 [Motion Picture].
Mayer, A. (2014, December 13). Pirate Bay: Why illegal downloading will continue with or without it. Retrieved from CBC News: http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/pirate-bay-why-illegal-downloading-will-continue-with-or-without-it-1.2871641
Meadows, S. (2007, April 23). An 18 for This is England? This is an outrage. Retrieved October 29, 2014, from The Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2007/apr/23/an18forthisisenglandthis
Miranda, M. (2014). Wolf of Wall Street: A Case Study in Censorship and Controversy. Media Magazine 49, 46-51.
Mitchell, V. C. (2014, January 19). Film ratings: a little advice for the BBFC. Retrieved November 3, 2014, from The Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/19/bbfc-change-film-certs-here-are-mine
Mostow, J. (Director). (2003). Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines [Motion Picture].
Neish, S. (2011, March 29). Is The 12A Certificate Still Valid? Retrieved October 31, 2014, from HeyUGuys: http://www.heyuguys.com/is-the-12a-certificate-still-valid/
Nikkhah, R. (2009, June 21). To cut or not to cut – a censor's dilemma. Retrieved from The Telegraph: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/film-news/5586314/To-cut-or-not-to-cut-a-censors-dilemma.html
Nolan, C. (Director). (2008). The Dark Knight [Motion Picture].
PG-13 movies are now more violent than R-rated '80s flicks -study. (2013, November 11). Retrieved from WRCBTV: http://www.wrcbtv.com/story/23931738/pg-13-movies-are-now-more-violent-than-r-rated-80s-flicks-study
Rojas, H. (1996). FOR THE GOOD OF OTHERS: CENSORSHIP AND THE THIRD-PERSON EFFECT. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 163-186.
Ross, G. (Director). (2012). The Hunger Games [Motion Picture].
Sacks, E. (2013, November 11). Gun violence in PG-13 movies has more than tripled since 1985. Retrieved from NY Daily News: http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/tv-movies/gun-violence-pg-13-movies-tripled-1985-study-article-1.1513252
Seiden, J. (2001). SCREAM-ING FOR A SOLUTION: REGULATING HOLLYWOOD VIOLENCE; AN ANALYSIS OF LEGAL AND LEGISLATIVE REMEDIES. JOURNAL OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, 1013.
Singleton, J. (Director). (2003). 2 Fast 2 Furious [Motion Picture].
Sparrow, A. (2008, August 5). Dark Knight: MPs criticise 12A certificate. Retrieved November 2, 2014, from The Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/aug/05/politicsandthearts
THOMAS, L., & BOSHOFF, A. (2012, March 27). Shocked youngsters 'are walking out of The Hunger Games' as experts demand film's certificate is raised to 15. Retrieved November 2, 2014, from Daily Mail: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2121303/The-Hunger-Games-rating-Shocked-youngsers-walking-movie.html#ixzz3GrKomYtx
Thorpe, V. (2011, March 13). Illegal movie downloads 'threaten the future of British film market'. Retrieved from The Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/film/2011/mar/13/illegal-downloads-threaten-british-film
Today's PG-13 Movies More Violent Than 1980s "R" Films: Study. (2013, November 12). Retrieved from NBC New York: http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/PG-13-Movies-Ratings-R-Study-Violence-231394731.html
Warren, L. (2012, July 23). Eyes rolling, head swaying and that bright red Joker hair: Colorado killer faces victims' families in bizarre first appearance in court. Retrieved from Mail Online: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2177736/James-Holmes-Dark-Knight-massacre-gunman-appears-court-prosecutors-seek-death-penalty.html
Warren, N. (2008). Teen Film Censorship Considerations and a Diatribe Against Violence. The Teen Film Issue No.82, 43.
Webb, T. (2007). PEDIATRICS. Violent Entertainment Pitched to Adolescents: An Analysis of PG-13 Films, 2.
Why we age rate films. (n.d.). Retrieved November 01, 2014, from cbbfc: http://www.cbbfc.co.uk/film-ratings/why-we-age-rate-films



[1] (Why we age rate films)
[2] (Mitchell, 2014)
[3] (Meadows, 2007)
[4] (Bagshaw, 2009)
[5] (Bagshaw, 2009)
[6] (Lin, 2013)
[7] (Singleton, 2003)
[8] (Warren N. , 2008)
[9] (Barile, 2003)
[10] (Barile, 2003)
[11] (Nolan, 2008)
[12] (Ross, 2012)
[13] (PG-13 movies are now more violent than R-rated '80s flicks -study, 2013)
[14] (Sparrow, 2008)
[15] (Sparrow, 2008)
[16] (Bagshaw, 2009)
[17] (Bagshaw, 2009)
[18] (Lawson, 2008)
[19] (Bagshaw, 2009)
[20] (Webb, 2007)
[21] (Warren L. , 2012)
[22] (Mostow, 2003)
[23] (Bovingdon, 2012)
[24] (Sacks, 2013)
[25] (Why we age rate films)
[26] (Why we age rate films)
[27] (Miranda, 2014)
[28] (Mitchell, 2014)
[29] (Thorpe, 2011)
[30] (Internet censorship and child protection, 2012)
[31] (Mayer, 2014)

Sunday, 12 April 2015

Weekly NDM

Is aluminium the answer to all our battery prayers?



This article is about how research by stanford university has found that alumium batteries may be the next step for next-gen technology.
  • New research by Stanford University into aluminium batteries promises to produce cells that are big enough for a smartphone and charge in just 60 seconds.
  • The new high-performance aluminium-ion battery is the first using the metal – more commonly found in aircraft and car bodies – to demonstrate long life and fast charging.  
  • Stanford’s new battery can be recharged around 7,500 times. Typical lithium-ion batteries used in everything from smartphones and laptops to electric cars last around 1,000 recharge cycles.
  • But the new aluminium-ion batteries are far from being available for commercial use in electronics, producing just half the voltage of lithium-ion batteries.
  • Current lithium-ion battery technology will reach its limit soon – there is only so much that can be achieved through tweaking the battery chemistry of a lithium-ion system – but a change in the way the electrode is made, using nanotechnology, could breath new life into lithium.
  • Lithium-sulphur batteries promise up to five times the amount of energy per gram as current lithium-ion technology.
  • New battery technology is coming and could be in electric vehicles before the end of the decade, but it could be several years before cells fit for use in portable electronics make our smartphones last more than a day.