Warning. Contains references to disability.
urbanhippie
Posts: 3,007
Would you be offended by a film that starred disabled people in lead roles? Would you worry about your kids seeing it?
Anger at disabled film 'warning'
Disabled actors and audiences said the advisory note was offensive
A film that stars disabled actors has caused controversy because it was given a 12A rating warning viewers that disabled people were featured in it.
Special People, which was largely shot in Worcestershire, is one of the first movies to use disabled lead actors, its director has said.
But its stars said it was unfair they were singled out by an advisory note.
The British Board of Film Classification said the advisory notice was withdrawn following complaints.
It said it had issued similar advisory notes on other disability-themed films previously.
'Compelling reason'
Although the note was withdrawn by the board on 3 November, the film makers said it was too late to change their publicity material.
Director Justin Edgar, who is originally from Handsworth, in Birmingham, said: "It premiered last night and we have already had complaints from the actors and some disability groups in the audience who were angry about the advisory note warning people that disabled actors were used.
Mr Edgar said he was one of the first to cast disabled actors as the leads
"You don't get films with black people or women being categorised in this way, so why do it for films with disabled people in them?"
The movie was predominantly shot in the Malvern Hills in Worcestershire and part-financed by the regional film agency Screen West Midlands.
Lee Thomas, the agency's executive producer said: "We provided £80,000 towards the costs of the film.
"They were bold enough to cast disabled actors and that was a compelling reason why we wanted to fund it.
"I don't understand the motivation for the advisory note.
"First and foremost it's a warm and moving comedy, there are characters in it and some of those actors, ground-breakingly, are disabled actors, but it's not something to be cautioning audiences about."
'Strong language'
The film recently won an award at the Moscow Disability Film Festival and was also a top three contender for the People's Choice award at the Edinburgh Film Festival.
A spokesman for the British Board of Film Classification said: "It was not in any way singling Special People out by the use of disability in the consumer advice.
"In the case of Special People, the use of strong sexual language placed the film on the '12A' / '15' borderline, but the board took into account the intentions of the filmmaker and what we considered to be the educational value of the film and awarded it a '12A' rating which would significantly increase the film's potential audience."
It said it had previously used the phrase "disability theme" for its classification of Flesh and Blood, in 2007, and in Australian TV comedy Summer Heights High which carried the following consumer advice - "contains moderate references to sex and disability".
The spokesman said: "In neither case were there any complaints about the use of the term from either the distributor, or the public."
Anger at disabled film 'warning'
Disabled actors and audiences said the advisory note was offensive
A film that stars disabled actors has caused controversy because it was given a 12A rating warning viewers that disabled people were featured in it.
Special People, which was largely shot in Worcestershire, is one of the first movies to use disabled lead actors, its director has said.
But its stars said it was unfair they were singled out by an advisory note.
The British Board of Film Classification said the advisory notice was withdrawn following complaints.
It said it had issued similar advisory notes on other disability-themed films previously.
'Compelling reason'
Although the note was withdrawn by the board on 3 November, the film makers said it was too late to change their publicity material.
Director Justin Edgar, who is originally from Handsworth, in Birmingham, said: "It premiered last night and we have already had complaints from the actors and some disability groups in the audience who were angry about the advisory note warning people that disabled actors were used.
Mr Edgar said he was one of the first to cast disabled actors as the leads
"You don't get films with black people or women being categorised in this way, so why do it for films with disabled people in them?"
The movie was predominantly shot in the Malvern Hills in Worcestershire and part-financed by the regional film agency Screen West Midlands.
Lee Thomas, the agency's executive producer said: "We provided £80,000 towards the costs of the film.
"They were bold enough to cast disabled actors and that was a compelling reason why we wanted to fund it.
"I don't understand the motivation for the advisory note.
"First and foremost it's a warm and moving comedy, there are characters in it and some of those actors, ground-breakingly, are disabled actors, but it's not something to be cautioning audiences about."
'Strong language'
The film recently won an award at the Moscow Disability Film Festival and was also a top three contender for the People's Choice award at the Edinburgh Film Festival.
A spokesman for the British Board of Film Classification said: "It was not in any way singling Special People out by the use of disability in the consumer advice.
"In the case of Special People, the use of strong sexual language placed the film on the '12A' / '15' borderline, but the board took into account the intentions of the filmmaker and what we considered to be the educational value of the film and awarded it a '12A' rating which would significantly increase the film's potential audience."
It said it had previously used the phrase "disability theme" for its classification of Flesh and Blood, in 2007, and in Australian TV comedy Summer Heights High which carried the following consumer advice - "contains moderate references to sex and disability".
The spokesman said: "In neither case were there any complaints about the use of the term from either the distributor, or the public."
A human being that was given to fly.
Wembley 18/06/07
If there was a reason, it was you.
O2 Arena 18/09/09
Wembley 18/06/07
If there was a reason, it was you.
O2 Arena 18/09/09
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Wembley 18/06/07
If there was a reason, it was you.
O2 Arena 18/09/09
it amazes me....for every step forward we seem to take 4 steps back....*sigh* :(
Wembley 18/06/07
If there was a reason, it was you.
O2 Arena 18/09/09
Please Support My Writing Habit By Purchasing A Book:
https://www.createspace.com/3437020
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000663025696
http://earthtremors.blogspot.com/
The idea that they've given this film a 'disclaimer' just because it has disabled actors in it is absurd and quite disgusting. Like the article said, let's put warnings on films with black people or women in them right? What are they worried about, that these actors might look strange and talk funny and people might find it horrific? Get over it people.
I also think that the representative who compared the disclaimer to that given before Summer Heights High is just talking himself deeper into a hole. He's clutching at straws, looking for anything that'll help him escape potential trouble. Summer Heights High (which is brilliant) is a completely different kettle of fish. It has a lot of very-near-the-knuckle humour about disability which is quite likely to offend, if people don't take it in the ironic and satirical spirit in which it is meant. That is NOTHING like a disclaimer which says 'Disabled actors used - be prepared to be disturbed/sickened by their appearance and/or guttural murmurings', or whatever this disclaimer said. Besides, I've also read a Guardian review of the film which says that the humour is gentle and warm and 'British', and possibly not controversial 'enough' to say anything important or new.
So to compare the two is just ridiculous. One is warning people about controversial humour used, the other is warning people about possibly ugly actors. Not on. Especially since no one warned me about Sarah Jessica Parker before I watched Sex in the City.
That said, this article could be stirring shit... it's not unheard of. This disclaimer may have just warned about a 'disability theme' in the same way something like Crash warned of a 'racism' them. That's fair enough in my mind as whenever there is disability, there is discrimination.
But this IS about disabled actors being an issue worthy of a disclaimer so in the end, only one word for it: puke.
- the great Sir Leo Harrison