<http://schema.org/articleBody>
"The British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) is a very different body to the one which seemed to ban things left, right and centre in the &amp;quot;video nasties&amp;quot; era of the mid-1980s. These days, its approach to movies is generally reasonable, and - with the odd minor quibble - there&amp;#039;s little controversy. When it refuses to classify something though - and effectively bans it in the UK - the BBFC will always make the headlines. In 2009, the board banned Japanese-language horror film Grotesque, not just because of the &amp;quot;amputation, eye-gouging, castration and evisceration&amp;quot;, but mainly because of &amp;quot;the spectacle of sadism (including sexual sadism) for its own sake&amp;quot;. Similarly, while the icky The Human Centipede (First Sequence) was passed uncut by the censors, the BBFC has banned follow-up The Human Centipede 2 (Full Sequence). What forced the BBFC&amp;#039;s hand is clearly the &amp;quot;strong focus throughout on the link between sexual arousal and sexual violence&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;the explicit presentation of the central character&amp;#039;s obsessive sexually violent fantasies&amp;quot;.The board concluded that there is a &amp;quot;real, as opposed to a fanciful, risk that harm is likely to be caused to potential viewers&amp;quot;. You can read the full ruling here. But will the ban be counterproductive? Has a small, low-budget torture-porn flick been given a massive free publicity boost by the censors? Director Tom Six claims that he is &amp;quot;furious&amp;quot; about the ban, but has the BBFC played into his hands? And should anyone have the right to tell us what we can and cannot see? Let us know your thoughts in our poll below.     "^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string>
<http://www.digitalspy.com/movies/news/a323616/poll-was-the-bbfc-right-to-ban-the-human-centipede-2/>