| Reference Type |
web
|
| Title |
The Australian |
| Chapter/Web article title |
Child-abuse film faces ban after rating dispute |
| Author(s) | Lawrie Zion |
| Citation Date |
|
| Site URL |
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,15976133%255E16947,00.html |
| Comments |
Lawrie Zion's article explores two sides of the debate surrounding the potential banning of Mysterious Skin. It contains valuable quotes by prominent Australian political members and individuals involved in the Australian film industry. The article seems to lend itself to a sympathetic view of the way in which Gregg Araki's latest film struggled to gain a general theatrical release in Australia. It is important to note that the film has not been banned in Australia and holds a current rating of R18+. |
| Synopsis |
Zion examines how Australian Attorney-General Phillip Ruddock and Michael Atkinson demanded Mysterious Skin's rating be reviewed as he felt strongly that the film does not correspond with the classification guidelines.
Although the film does not depict any sexually explicit scenes, Australian Family Association spokesman Richard Egan argues that "Filmmakers should be clever enough to convey those values without the need for such explicit description."
Troy Lum, head distributor of Hopscotch Films, labeled the debate surrounding Mysterious Skin an "embarrassment", as it "has more to say about faults in the current system rather than the prudishness of the general Australian."
In concluding, Margaret Pomeranz defends Mysterious Skin, arguing that it is a film "about the damage that pedophilia does, and it might give a great deal of comfort to adults who have previously suffered." |
tags:
add tag Please Wait...
|
|
|
| |
