Singapore says satire on censorship not funny
-
Hmmm...now that bar-top dancing has not torn Singapore apart, as predicted by one of our million dollar, world class ministers, maybe 13-minute satires on the system might cause Singapore to implode.
I seriously think that if some of our Ministers kept their yaps shut, they might be able to maintain the illusion that they are actually worth the king's ransom we pay them....
-----------------------------------------------
Friday March 26, 9:39 AM
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/040326/3/3j1w2.html
Singapore says satire on censorship not funny
By Jacqueline Wong
SINGAPORE, March 26 (Reuters) - A cinematic spoof on Singapore's strait-laced film censors could be censored itself, underscoring the limits to loosening stuffy social controls in a country known for decades as Asia's "nanny state".
Royston Tan, a young film-maker whose first full-length feature about drugs and delinquency won international plaudits last year, is courting controversy even before his latest film "Cut" hits the screens.
The 13-minute satire, due to open the Singapore International Film Festival in April, is about a film buff who has a chance encounter in a supermarket with a censorship board official and explodes into a rant on films the board has cut.
The government, which has poured millions of dollars into developing a film industry and nurturing local talent, is not laughing. One minister said in parliament the film could sap Singapore's institutions.
"The producer may think it is funny, but I'm afraid that I don't appreciate such unbecoming attempts to undermine the standing of a public institution," said Lee Boon Yang, minister for information, communications and the arts.
The film comes at a delicate time for Singapore as it takes tentative steps at relaxing censorship laws that now ban Playboy magazine, routinely clip racy scenes from movies and scissor drug references from pop cultural magazines.
Despite recent steps to loosen some of Singapore's stuffier laws, such as adopting a new film ratings system to give young adults more access to mature content and allowing bars to stay open for 24 hours in some parts of the city of four million, state film censorship remains pervasive.
Kate Winslet's disrobing scene in the film "Titanic" was deemed too daring. Scenes of women kissing each other in the award-winning film "The Hours" were also cut, as was a brief glimpse of nudity in recent Oscar honoree "Lost in Translation".
The cuts are easily noticeable, giving movie scenes a disjointed feel. On occasion films are banned outright.
"Zoolander", starring Ben Stiller as a model dragged into a plot to kill Malaysia's prime minister, was barred in 2002.
A ban on "Sex and the City", the hit U.S. television sitcom about a quartet of single women in New York, was lifted last September, but the show has yet to air in Singapore. Officials say they need more time to ensure citizens are not offended.
Residents say they expect this to mean parts of "Sex and the City" will still be censored.
DEVELOPING NEW EXPORTS
Ministers are banking on entrepreneurship, technological innovation and the arts to power the next stage of the country's economic development. But, as the furore over "Cut" illustrates, building up film-making is not friction-free for the government.
Lee, the arts minister, told parliament that "making fun" of the censorship board would not prompt the government to change its rules "to suit the agenda of those with vested interests".
Industry sources say some state-funded art institutions have started to distance themselves from Tan, a 27-year-old film-maker who was hailed last year as one of the brightest new lights in Singapore's nascent movie industry.
Tan, whose film "15" about drugs and delinquency won a standing ovation at the Venice Film Festival last year, said he had hoped "Cut" would spark a constructive dialogue about censorship. He said it was not meant to be malicious.
"It's not that I wanted to tear down the system or something like that. I believe in the system, but we can improve on it," Tan told Reuters.
"I really think it's constructive," Tan said of his film. He said he was merely voicing an opinion through the medium he knows best.
Film buffs are concerned that an exhibition of Tan's work at the Singapore History Museum will not be shown in April.
A spokeswoman for the museum said the timing of his planned retrospective clashed with the city state's film festival.
The fate of "Cut" also hangs in the balance as the film festival organisers wait to learn how the satire will be rated.
"It's a matter of waiting to see what it is," said Vinita Ramani, the festival's publicist. "The policy has always been that if the film is going to be proposed passed with cuts, we don't show it."
Lee's ministry played down talk of a backlash against the film-maker. Another of his films, commissioned by the museum, would be shown there until 2006.
"We will continue to tap all creative talents to help us make Singapore an interesting and vibrant place," the spokeswoman said. -
I support the easing up of censorship in singapore. Sometimes too many cuts in the show really leave one bewildered on wat is going on or miss out an important detail.
However sad to say there r always complain kings and queens who will jump up and write an equally convincing essay on being strict on censoring... They even complain about scenes where guys should not dressed up as girls in show (after a silly show where MC king dress up as girl) or allowing shows tat r too violent to be in. Guess censorship board is torn up between the 2 parties.
Frankly they should ignore most silly complaints to step up censorship... -
In the past some silly people complaint that popular song is harmful and must be bared
-
it's not meant to be funny anyway.....
it's a wake-up call for respect to film producers and leave arts as it is
and a move to close down the censorsh!t board
hohoho~
nehmind, i ask royston to send me mpeg of the movie then............ -
Originally posted by Viper52:
Hmmm...now that bar-top dancing has not torn Singapore apart, as predicted by one of our million dollar, world class ministers, maybe 13-minute satires on the system might cause Singapore to implode.
I seriously think that if some of our Ministers kept their yaps shut, they might be able to maintain the illusion that they are actually worth the king's ransom we pay them....
-----------------------------------------------
Friday March 26, 9:39 AM
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/040326/3/3j1w2.html
[b]Singapore says satire on censorship not funny
By Jacqueline Wong
SINGAPORE, March 26 (Reuters) - A cinematic spoof on Singapore's strait-laced film censors could be censored itself, underscoring the limits to loosening stuffy social controls in a country known for decades as Asia's "nanny state".
Royston Tan, a young film-maker whose first full-length feature about drugs and delinquency won international plaudits last year, is courting controversy even before his latest film "Cut" hits the screens.
The 13-minute satire, due to open the Singapore International Film Festival in April, is about a film buff who has a chance encounter in a supermarket with a censorship board official and explodes into a rant on films the board has cut.
The government, which has poured millions of dollars into developing a film industry and nurturing local talent, is not laughing. One minister said in parliament the film could sap Singapore's institutions.
"The producer may think it is funny, but I'm afraid that I don't appreciate such unbecoming attempts to undermine the standing of a public institution," said Lee Boon Yang, minister for information, communications and the arts.
The film comes at a delicate time for Singapore as it takes tentative steps at relaxing censorship laws that now ban Playboy magazine, routinely clip racy scenes from movies and scissor drug references from pop cultural magazines.
Despite recent steps to loosen some of Singapore's stuffier laws, such as adopting a new film ratings system to give young adults more access to mature content and allowing bars to stay open for 24 hours in some parts of the city of four million, state film censorship remains pervasive.
Kate Winslet's disrobing scene in the film "Titanic" was deemed too daring. Scenes of women kissing each other in the award-winning film "The Hours" were also cut, as was a brief glimpse of nudity in recent Oscar honoree "Lost in Translation".
The cuts are easily noticeable, giving movie scenes a disjointed feel. On occasion films are banned outright.
"Zoolander", starring Ben Stiller as a model dragged into a plot to kill Malaysia's prime minister, was barred in 2002.
A ban on "Sex and the City", the hit U.S. television sitcom about a quartet of single women in New York, was lifted last September, but the show has yet to air in Singapore. Officials say they need more time to ensure citizens are not offended.
Residents say they expect this to mean parts of "Sex and the City" will still be censored.
DEVELOPING NEW EXPORTS
Ministers are banking on entrepreneurship, technological innovation and the arts to power the next stage of the country's economic development. But, as the furore over "Cut" illustrates, building up film-making is not friction-free for the government.
Lee, the arts minister, told parliament that "making fun" of the censorship board would not prompt the government to change its rules "to suit the agenda of those with vested interests".
Industry sources say some state-funded art institutions have started to distance themselves from Tan, a 27-year-old film-maker who was hailed last year as one of the brightest new lights in Singapore's nascent movie industry.
Tan, whose film "15" about drugs and delinquency won a standing ovation at the Venice Film Festival last year, said he had hoped "Cut" would spark a constructive dialogue about censorship. He said it was not meant to be malicious.
"It's not that I wanted to tear down the system or something like that. I believe in the system, but we can improve on it," Tan told Reuters.
"I really think it's constructive," Tan said of his film. He said he was merely voicing an opinion through the medium he knows best.
Film buffs are concerned that an exhibition of Tan's work at the Singapore History Museum will not be shown in April.
A spokeswoman for the museum said the timing of his planned retrospective clashed with the city state's film festival.
The fate of "Cut" also hangs in the balance as the film festival organisers wait to learn how the satire will be rated.
"It's a matter of waiting to see what it is," said Vinita Ramani, the festival's publicist. "The policy has always been that if the film is going to be proposed passed with cuts, we don't show it."
Lee's ministry played down talk of a backlash against the film-maker. Another of his films, commissioned by the museum, would be shown there until 2006.
"We will continue to tap all creative talents to help us make Singapore an interesting and vibrant place," the spokeswoman said. [/b]
another proof of the stiffness and inability to luff at oneself. -
What's lost is not just a piece of the plot, when a scene deemed undesired is snipped. The right to information is abolished and our will to exercise choice fenced, the practise synonymous in other aspects of residing here.
The package arrives trimmed because someone feels this is better, for I must be too dense to comprehend or decide what could ruin or prosper me. If it's not conventional or textbook, it ain't good eh? Hence the lengths they go to, restrictions by shutting doors, threat or not. Don't they know the desperate break down doors, even walls. -
to me it shows a great sense of insecurity on their part - insecurity tt their "authority" positions will be compromised, tt their credibility will be lost, tt by giving in in any small part opens the floodgates for more - whether or not there is any water behind the gates, who cares.Originally posted by M:What's lost is not just a piece of the plot, when a scene deemed undesired is snipped. The right to information is abolished and our will to exercise choice fenced, the practise synonymous in other aspects of residing here.
The package arrives trimmed because someone feels this is better, for I must be too dense to comprehend or decide what could ruin or prosper me. If it's not conventional or textbook, it ain't good eh? Hence the lengths they go to, restrictions by shutting doors, threat or not. Don't they know the desperate break down doors, even walls.
and its reflective of the "half baked" attitudes towards the advancement they have espoused to be driving. -
talk about irony
-
Wuming78 posting criticism about the government? Who are you and what have you done with the real wuming?Originally posted by wuming78:to me it shows a great sense of insecurity on their part - insecurity tt their "authority" positions will be compromised, tt their credibility will be lost, tt by giving in in any small part opens the floodgates for more - whether or not there is any water behind the gates, who cares.
and its reflective of the "half baked" attitudes towards the advancement they have espoused to be driving.
Seriously, you are right. The government talks a lot about lossening up and not exercising controls. But its actions like these, and the words that accompany them, that speak a lot louder than the empty words to the contrary. -
hey! i think u haven read alot of the other threads where i criticised what they have done or are thinking of doing.Originally posted by Viper52:Wuming78 posting criticism about the government? Who are you and what have you done with the real wuming?
theres nothing wrong with criticising. just dun turn it into a defaming and defacing session. and best if its constructive. -
what the **** is this director doing? Why the **** does he want back into Singapore? If he is making it big in other countries with awards, he should be happy. Because Singapore's movie making industry is disconnected from the Western world via conservatism. Singapore is a backwar.. i mean.. conservative society, films and film making is thus DULL compared to that in the West. If you want to succeed in film, dont do it in Singapore coz of the laws and the limited market.
-
Do you have 11 minutes to Cut?
note: max 4 streams at a time, keep trying.
That's a piece of work, kudos Royston! -
too laggy, can't see muchOriginally posted by M:Do you have 11 minutes to Cut?
note: max 4 streams at a time, keep trying.
That's a piece of work, kudos Royston! -
well a coursemate (bikini ger) and lecturer (hang from pipe guy) happened to be part of the crew of cut, so i managed to saw it yesterday. it is good. extremely funny and witty.
nice edit of "there was a time in singapore" too
-
Originally posted by wuming78:to me it shows a great sense of insecurity on their part - insecurity tt their "authority" positions will be compromised, tt their credibility will be lost, tt by giving in in any small part opens the floodgates for more - whether or not there is any water behind the gates, who cares.
and its reflective of the "half baked" attitudes towards the advancement they have espoused to be driving.
Well this kinda late for my view...but if you're talking about their credibility and them giving in small parts opening floodgates, does anybody realise that the more the publicity and crititism, the SLOWER the 'reforms' will be? I feel the govt is already wanting to incrementally allow lesser censorship and nannying to preserve their image or credibility, over a long period of time..so this stuff will not to so hyped up.