Im not sure about other places, but in the US government is not censoring movies, there is only an entity that RATES them based upon their content.

You are wrong.
A man who does it has had the job since late eighties.

Here Are 410 Movies Made Under The Direct Influence And Supervision Of The Pentagon

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-08-04/heres-410-movies-made-under-direct-influence-and-supervision-department-defense

Define "censor some things".

"Child pornography" is already banned, across the board. Laws are in place. Criminals don't abide by the laws.

This is the beginning of the linked story:

When a Hollywood writer or producer approaches the Pentagon and asks for access to military assets to help make their film, they have to submit their script to the entertainment liaison offices for vetting



so yes, IF the government is being ASKED for assets, they have discretion to say yes or no.

LMAO!!!

funny how THAT little tidbit of information was deliberately left out to further the incorrect assumption that she were trying to achieve with this thread.

Which os exactly how I worded it.

Your the one thats hilarious.
Read my first post before link.
Exactly what I said.
If they want something govt has. They agree to allow govt to firmally chg scripts dialogue...etc.
Now you will subject to
Seeing hearing thinking what they want you to.
Simple as that.

thats not censorship


they are not stopping anyone from making a movie, they are only making choices about who will get assets from THEM to do it.

You must not have read the whole article.
They will censor every word and detail.
Either accept the final product or they take their things and go back to Washington.
It is an agreement to allow censorship.
Its still censorship isnt it.

So. Hollywood will agree to allow govt to censor in order to use givt owned.."props"

its discretion over THEIR assets

Hollywood has no choice than to allow ANY sponsor discretion over contribution of THEIR assets ..

double post

You know I find it more interesting that the govts interaction has provided Hollywood with the ability to get very wealthy using tax payer funded items.
So director so n so..actor/actress get quite wealthy using this method.

Made me ponder what movies might be like wo this relationship.

Why does the taxpayer pay 50 bucks at the box office( lol
We already paid for the props!

One could ask why the government does fly-bys over sporting events, or funds the Thunderbirds, Blue Angels, Golden Knights, etc to perform at airshows. I mean, the price of a fly-by (fuel for practice and event, crews, ground security, maintenence, etc) seems like a huge waste, and for people who paid $100s for seats. None of these military personnel are combat troops, they are government-paid acrobats and entertainers. The Thunderbirds planes can't be equipped with ordinance.

The answer, for the fly-bys as well as the Hollywood participation is one word: RECRUITMENT. Playing the National Anthem at sporting events was started during WWI as a tool for encouraging enlistment. The reason you see the Armed Forces participating in movies (think Top Gun) is for their value in recruitment, making the service look COOL.

Watch "The Caine Mutiny" or "The Enemy Below", and you will see a page of the credits saying "the producers gratefully acknowledge the cooperation and assistance of the US Navy..." However, if the Navy feels that the movie script does not paint the service in a favorable light, they can pull cooperation. On IMDB, you will see notes on films where the services pulled support because they did not like the message the film was delivering.

If you are so against Hollywood getting rich using government "props", you are probably also against Dear Leader requiring visitors and those seeking to lobby the government to stay exclusively in Trump hotels? Do you think all those Secret Services agents, press corps, etc eat free while at Trump golf courses? I am sure the local high school would GLADLY supply the NFL team a color guard.

I never said anything about govt getting rich.
I did say, due to the fact they have this type cooperation has made Hollywood rich. Actors/actresses.
I love watching the anti gun crowd fight bad guys in movies with....guns.

I havent had cable since before it was popular. I cut ties with industry 2003.

300 channels of crap to 2000...same movies all month. And who needs to see one more climate alarmist or inequality pc of nonsense anyway.

Best thing I ever did.

I don't think the cooperation of government / armed forces recruiting interests have made Hollywood rich. I think Hollywood has made Hollywood rich, no problem getting rich on its own. But then again, I think that McDonalds has made McDonalds rich, CVS has made CVS rich, etc.

I laughed when you said you gave up (movies?) in 2003, but that you like seeing anti-gun people in movies fight with guns. What does an actor's personal opinion have to do with the fictional character they are hired to play? Actors are actors, like dentists are dentists, we hire actors to play roles because they are talented at making a character on a page appear real. I mean, Shakespeare wrote the character of Shylock as a jew, do you think only jewish actors should be allowed to portray the character?