LUDIC LOG

A trip to my local video store* found me in possession of a VHS copy of Larry Clark's underrated "Bully"**, which I had seen before. I enjoyed it a great deal and thought I might invite a few friends over to watch it with me; however, after popping it into the VCR and sitting through the obligatory three and a half hours of previews, a tiny, lightning-quick disclaimer informed me that I was in for a major disappointment. 'This film,' it read at Evelyn-Wood-thwarting speed, 'is not the version originally released in theatres. It has been edited so as to receive an R rating from the MPAA.'

Well! That's certainly nice to know, once I've already ponied up my three bucks for the video. Nowhere on the box was I informed that i was getting a bowdlerized version of the movie, or I wouldn't have rented it; this sort of thing is deceptive at best and fraudulent at worst. The edited version of "Requiem for a Dream" (which seems to be the only one available) at least has the decency to put 'EDITED VERSION' in small letters on the cover, where you can spot it if you're looking for that sort of thing. "Bully" and "Romance" did no such favor, alerting the viewer only after he's paid for it that he's seeing a movie that bears little to no resemblance to what was released in the theatre. It's ironic that uncensored material -- such as rap albums -- are forced to bear huge, easily visibles right on the cover reading "EXPLICIT LYRICS - PARENTAL ADVISORY", while successfully butchered*** films need not announce in any way the fact that they've been thoroughtly hatcheted.

I won't waste your time with another condemnation of Jack Valenti & company, nor will I point out the moral hypocricy of the edits (sex scenes were turned to hash or removed entirely, while scenes of violence were untouched), nor yet mention the fact that our culture daily becomes more and more hostile for thinking adults who fancy themselves capable of making their own decisions. But it's interesting that in our society, where the market is deemed capable of making every decision, we're still subject to the whim of proto-Catholic moralists when it comes to our home viewing choices. And for all the wind the MPAA expends patiently explaining that what they do is rating, not  censorship, they can't get away from the de facto/de jure border crossing. Every filmmaker is free not to submit their movie to the MPAA, but unrated movies will not be carried by video stores, and censorship becomes a practical, if not a legal, reality. It would be nice, though, if they'd at least let us know ahead of time, in the land of the free.

*: Why do all video stores smell like a used diaper pail?

**: The nearly uniform evaluation of the film, that it was just an excuse for dirty old man Larry Clark to film naked nubile teens, must surely rank as one of the most fatuous and lazy exercises in recent critical history.

***: The edited version of "Bully" is one of the most egregious hack-jobs I've ever seen; so much material was excised that entire plot points were lost and a number of scenes were simply incomprehensible.