Shoot ‘Em Up Posters Deemed Too Violent for the U.K.
Earlier this week we reported on the Hitman movie posters that were removed from subways in Philadelphia due to the imagery of “a man pointing a gun, with a nearly naked woman draped over him”. Now there is a similar controversy brewing in the U.K., where the Advertising Standards Authority ruled that two of the posters for the action-comedy Shoot ‘Em Up glamorized guns and should no longer be displayed in public places. Over 55 complaints were received about the posters, a strong reaction which may have resulted from a recent shooting in Liverpool resulting in the death of young schoolboy Rhys Jones.
Is this type of censorship going to become more commonplace, or are these just random incidents, caused by poor timing for the release of these films? I wouldn’t be surprised if, in the near future, guns end up being outlawed from advertising in the same way that drugs and alcohol are. Of course, this would definitely force advertisers to get pretty creative, considering how many big blockbuster films revolve around guns and violence. I mean, if you can’t advertise a movie called Shoot ‘Em Up with guns, what’s the point of advertising at all?
Comments (9)
I’m no fan of censorship, but less images of violence is hard to argue against.
Posted by Henrik on November 22nd, 2007I’m all for that kind of censorship. I mean, it doesn’t affect me at all. I already think a Deagle is cool and can go through walls in cs_assault but I won’t shoot a hooker in the face with it.
But, I learned something interesting recently. In the UK sometimes wanna-be rappers rap about things that aren’t true. For example, in the US (and increasingly in Canada), culture around guns is popular in rap music and most of the time it may be true (T.I.). But when a rapper copies that style and puts out music in the UK, it gives the impression that the streets of London (or wherever) are so dangerous that people have to carry firearms. And this makes young people believe it. And thus begin carrying firearms which ends up making the rap song correct.
It’s probably a bunch of old ladies in party hats complaining about the poster. Disirregardless, there’s nothing good about guns so censor like your life depends on it!
Posted by dario on November 22nd, 2007I can’t say I disagreeable with either Dario or Henrik. I don’t think it’s necessary to see the guns in order to promote the film – the trailers do a fine enough job of that – so censor away.
It also goes to the continued argument that Europe is much harsher on violence than on sex. I can’t say I blame them – one kills and the other one doesn’t (most of the time at least).
Posted by Marina on November 22nd, 2007Sex FTW.
Posted by Henrik on November 22nd, 2007Typical simplistic idiots who think there is a direct correlation between real violence and cinematic violence.
Posted by TheSnowLeopard on November 22nd, 2007Did he just say Disirregardless? oi!
And it would be hilarious if they did mandate that guns were not used on posters or DVD sleeves. Just go through the videostore and look at the number of sleeves with a gun in the poster (in any of the ‘genre’s even Drama and Comedy. The mind boggles how many of them have guns on the cover!
Posted by Kurt on November 22nd, 2007I think it’s a welcome break. Having violent imagery everywhere makes us less sensitive to real suffering.
It’s bad for kids.
Posted by Phil on November 22nd, 2007I find the title of the film just as problematic as the image if we’re worried about the concept of gun violence in movie posters.
Posted by Liz on November 22nd, 2007Leave a Reply