Hacker News Reader

Comment by zimpenfish | Hacker News Reader

> I've never heard of the MPAA slapping a new certification on an already approved movie

At least in the UK, from what I understand, if you make a "not actually new" release (by adding something like a director's commentary), it has to be re-rated by the BBFC. There's also the case of, IIRC, "The Specialist" which was a 15 in cinemas but an 18 when later released on video.[1]

(None of which is relevant to the YouTube argument, mind.)

[1] https://www.bbfc.co.uk/release/the-specialist-q29sbgvjdglvbj...

View on HN

The BBFC are (or were) mindful that films in the cinema are a one-off sequential viewing, but in the home might be watched in an unhealthy way ie repeatedly looking at a particular very violent scene.

I think their view was young people (especially) could be corrupted by material that fed into criminal ideation - so home media was either cut more or got an adult classification.

Found the guidelines:

Release format: Classification decisions may be stricter on video works than on film. This is because of the increased possibility of under-age viewing as recognised in the Video Recordings Act (see Annexe), as well as the increased possibility of works being replayed or sections viewed out of context. Accordingly, a video work (either packaged or online) may occasionally receive a higher classification than on film, or require new or different cuts. (Video works may also receive a higher classification because they contain additional content.)

[pdf] https://darkroom.bbfc.co.uk/original/a2109fba273d7dffc461f7c...

> but in the home might be watched in an unhealthy way ie repeatedly looking at a particular very [meme]iolent scene

I should never have watched that Dark Knight Rises aircraft shenanigans sequence, so many times. Who else can be blamed?

Bane?!

> I should never have watched that Dark Knight Rises aircraft shenanigans sequence

How many planes have you hijacked since?!?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com