Only two films banned in the United States?

Claim: Only two films are currently banned in the United States - Superstar: The Karen Carpenter story because of copyright infringement, and The Profit - a satire of a $cientology-like cult for supposed libel.

Although it is not difficult to confirm that there are court orders against screening those two films, I find it difficult to believe that those are the only two banned. Wouldn't things like kiddie porn and the such also be banned?

An unsourced wiki article claims those are the only two, but it is unsourced.

Well, as far as I know "snuff" films are banned, as are child pornography.. these may be the only two "banned" by title, but I'm sure there are a number of genres not permitted in this or many other countries...

Warlok

I think the article is talking about movies that were specifically banned by title from a government process.

Originally Posted by songs78

I think the article is talking about movies that were specifically banned by title from a government process.

The Tin Drum is banned in most states, at least here out west, because it is considered too close to child porno, even though it is not really.

[barbrainey]

"Snuff" films are a myth. No one has ever deliberately murdered anyone for the purpose of making a movie of the crime for entertainment and profit at any theater.

Barbara R.

[Morgaine]

According to IMDB, 'The Profit' is banned in the US because the church of Scientology considers it slanderous and apparently was able to find a judge who agreed. 'Superstar' is not exactly banned but it can't be distributed because of copyrights. I'm assuming that Carpenters family never gave permission for the music to be used to it can't be distributed with the soundtrack intact.

In Australia there is a large and growing list of films (and other publications) that are banned by title. In my work with Customs I need to access this list from time to time. Due to Australia's very specific laws regardng violence in pornography you may find that four out of a series of seven porn releases are refused classification*. I should point out that there are no actual "made for the cinema" movies on this list**. The vast majority of the titles are porn releases that depict minors or violence, or material deemed to incite racial hatred or instruct on matters such as terrorism.

* Technically, "refusing classification" is not the same thing as an outright ban, but it amounts to the same thing.

**Incidentally, until very recently the actual list itself was a banned publication!

ETA - this is why I always laugh at people who claim that conspiracy films such as Loose Change were "banned by the government" as some sort of badge of credit. It ain't on the list...!

[Singing in the Drizzle]

Does Gedo Senki (Tales of Earthsea) count since it can not be shown or sold in the US for a couple of years do to Sci-Fi chanel have exclisive right to the story in the US. I'm sure there are more films to add to the list are banned for simmlar reasons.

Personal I do not think banned for copyright our usage rights should count on the list. Since this is not the govement make laws that band or rule that type of content can not be seen in the US. This stuff that is stopped from be sold or profit made from in the US do to intellectual property rights.

[BrianB]

Originally Posted by forceflow15

The Tin Drum is banned in most states, at least here out west, because it is considered too close to child porno, even though it is not really.

It was never banned here in California because I remember when it was shown in theaters. I looked up "Tin Drum" and "banned" and I did find this reference on IMDB:

In June 1997, at the urging of a Christian fundamentalist group and after viewing only a few isolated scenes, an Oklahoma County District Court judge declared that this film contained child pornography (as defined by Oklahoma's obscenity laws) and as such was illegal.
{ snip }
By October of 1998, over the course of rulings in several related lawsuits, the U.S. federal courts found that the confiscation of the tapes had been unconstitutional, and ruled that the movie did not violate Oklahoma's state laws. The U.S. Court of Appeals closed the final case in May 2001, and the movie is once again available for rental in Oklahoma County.

That IMDB page also says that it was banned in parts of Canada. However, I can't find any evidence of the Tin Drum being banned anywhere else in North America.
Brian

[mouse goddess]

BarbRainey:
I sent you a pm, but I wanted to hear back sooner.....
Have you always used that name?? If not, what did you used to be?? I'm just shocked to see it in print, as it is the name of my deceased mother, and it kind of freaked me out....I definitely should've noticed sooner.

I know Rainey isn't all that uncommon, it just surprised me.

And you have proof of this? Given this recent story, http://www.courttv.com/news/2007/011..._raped_ap.html, its not to hard to see how this could have gone another way.

I dont doubt for a second that these films exist, just given the subject matter I highly doubt they circulate outside of a very closed and close knit circle. I have seen enough films on a sexual level that deal with subject matter that could curl your toes ... several close friends of mine find scenes like the skull cutting in Saw III or the "dinner" scene in Hannibal to be very arousing.

Aaron

Originally Posted by barbrainey

"Snuff" films are a myth. No one has ever deliberately murdered anyone for the purpose of making a movie of the crime for entertainment and profit at any theater.

Barbara R.

[pinqy]

Originally Posted by lopxtc

I dont doubt for a second that these films exist,

Even though none have ever been found by law enforcement? Most people have heard of them, but none have ever surfaced. So where does the information about them come from and how reliable could it be? That being said, it is possible that in the future we could see pseudo-ostension in someone believing that such films exist and making one due to this belief, but it doesn't change the fact that there is no reason to think they actually do. IIRC, Charlie Sheen, who had one of the largest porn collections in North America, thought he had a snuff film and turned it over to the FBI. It was a fake.

pinqy

[Richard W]

Originally Posted by lopxtc

And you have proof of this?

It's very difficult to prove that something doesn't exist, but you can prove that it does exist by finding one. And the longer the time elapsed without one, despite the fact that law enforcement authorities worldwide would be all over it if they did find one, the less likely that they exist.

There's quite a detailed discussion about snuff films on the main snopes site, including pinqy's Martin Sheen story.

[Lainie]

Originally Posted by Richard W

There's quite a detailed discussion about snuff films on the main snopes site, including pinqy's Martin Sheen story.

Charlie Sheen. I suppose the elder Sheen might have a porn collection, but it seems out of character.

[Richard W]

Whoops! Sorry. I don't really know the difference...

[Lainie]

Originally Posted by Richard W

Whoops! Sorry. I don't really know the difference...

Charlie is Martin's son. Charlie is 40-something and has a history of substance abuse and hiring prostitutes. Martin is 60-something, a devout Catholic and apparently devoted family man who is active in liberal and anti-war political causes.

Originally Posted by BrianB

It was never banned here in California because I remember when it was shown in theaters. I looked up "Tin Drum" and "banned" and I did find this reference on IMDB:
That IMDB page also says that it was banned in parts of Canada. However, I can't find any evidence of the Tin Drum being banned anywhere else in North America.
Brian

Aye, Brian, color me guilty. The movie was theaterically released but then banned in OK after its release to tape. I also heard something about it being banned in some other states I used to live in, but I bow to your research.

Thanks for the work

Ala "The absence of proof is not proof of absence." At the same time, its very hard to prove something that doesnt want to be found and here you we are talking about something that someone really wouldnt want to be found.

Saying something doesnt exist because law enforcement hasnt found it is really a stretch. Most law enforcement doesnt have enough time on their hands to get done a lot of what they need to get done on a daily basis let alone track down things that the general population doesnt think exists. Not to mention that in today's high-tech world it would be easy to hide things like this. No one involved in this community would risk keeping these items readily available given their unique nature ... if I were to be involved I would keep items like this on the lowest tech level possible. God I hate to invoke this title like this ... but honestly I would produce and keep these films on Super-8. A tech that isnt as easy to copy, isnt as easy to spread around, and isnt as easy to just pop in bring up a menu and select a scene. How long would it take you to gather the equipment needed to watch a 8mm film if I gave it to you today? Even better how easy is it to destroy 8mm if you needed to? Hard drives are quite easy to recover data from, even if destroyed. The average user doesnt know how to "zero-out" a hard disk, let alone dispose of cd-roms or DVD's. Even small fractions of a disks platter are usually enough to pull small amount of data from. 8mm file is simple enough to destroy with basic every day things found around a house.

Aaron

Originally Posted by Richard W

It's very difficult to prove that something doesn't exist, but you can prove that it does exist by finding one.

[Richard W]

Originally Posted by lopxtc

... here you we are talking about something that someone really wouldnt want to be found.

Except by other potential members of their community, of course.

Not to mention that in today's high-tech world it would be easy to hide things like this.

Like child porn, you mean...?

[PallasAthena]

Aaron, You’re arguing the existence of the Loch Ness monster, Yeti, Aliens, and Ghosts. Sure you can’t prove that it doesn’t exist, but you can’t prove that it does either. One may choose to believe that it does, and that's fine, but not all of us are willing to make that leap of faith.