Bricks in Motion
We are a friendly filmmaking community devoted to the art of stop-motion animation using LEGO® and similar construction toys. Here, you can share your work, join our community of other brickfilmers, and participate in periodic animation contests!
A place to discuss, share, and create stop motion films.
Ad
You are not logged in. Please login or register.
About 3 months ago I submitted this film to the directory. I recently got an email saying it wasn't approved because it didn't fit the idea of this site being family friendly.
I can understand that as it has two guys making out on the street, but what I don't understand is how this got in the directory.
Seriously, wtf is up with that?
I'd be very interested to know who rejected your film, this is the first I've heard of this.
I don't know, but this is what I got:
I laughed out loud, but unfortunately I don't think this film fits with the site's goal of being "family-friendly." I hate to do this, but I can't allow it into the directory.
Oh yeah that's right, I forgot, homosexuality is still "evil."
It's not about whether or not homosexuality is evil, but whether it's appropriate for younger members. I may not like this video's humor, I may totally disagree with it, but there isn't anything totally explicit shown like in Trubador, so I don't see why it should be rejected when Trubador was allowed in that sense. But then Trubador had a story other than the objectionable content, and in this one there is not much value in it whatsoever to let it slide past the usual guidelines against letting such things into the directory.
Last edited by Bricklord (March 13, 2010 (04:51pm))
I have no problem confessing to being the reviewer in question here. My reasoning was not what Droid surmised, and frankly, I resent the accusation; my reasoning was that the entire film was centered on a naked guy making out with a stranger on the street. No story, no humorous dialogue, just nudity for humor. The objectionable content in Bulldog's film was a mere sliver of the whole experience, whereas in Filip's, it was pretty much all there was. It's also worth noting that different people reviewed the two films in question; I don't know that I would have accepted "Trubador," and I doubt Tripod would have rejected yours.
But I'm willing to admit that perhaps I had a lapse in judgment, and if I'm overruled, you won't hear any argument from me.
Ah, that was the other part I meant to point out. I blanked out at the last second and just posted what I had. I agree, Noodle. You can skip past the objectionable content in Trubador, whereas in Filip's film you skip past it and the film's over. And in Captain Bulldog's film there was redemptive value in it, and none at all in Filip's.
Well let's start deleting all Keshen's video's out of the directory then. 
Sarcasm. I hate.
Its a film about two guys, presumably both naked, making out. I think a better question would be, how is that family friendly? I sure wouldn't be showing that to younger kids.
Having said that, and strongly disagreeing with the film, I think if you throw a warning up front about the content, just like the Trubador film had there would be no harm done.
It's a nude LEGO-man. It's not like he's got his dongle handing out. I'd have let it in if I were on the panel. Then again, that could be because of my filthy filthy mind.
Why is there even an option to list the video as "Explict Sexual Content"
bump btw
So basically like a "back room to the video store" kind thing.
So basically like a "back room to the video store" kind thing.
Only less sexy and potentially more perverted. I don't think straight out !@#$ brickflicks would make it on this website anyways; it would be films with mature or controversial themes like Weed Cops or Mike Is a Rapist.
Right, we're not planning to have "adult brickfilms" on this site, but some stuff that is already here and popular is basically R-rated.
The thing is Filip, your film is not explicit. Its just a joke and you don't see anything, its up to the viewers imagination, for a 'mature' person to understand. Its not like they're having doggy style on screen or something, then children will be really confused and they'll begin to ask their parents questions...Besides, if only 13 year olds and over should be on the site, then it should be ok. They probably know all about it, and they aren't exactly children.
Whoever said it wasn't 'family friendly' is new to the judging panel and wants to do a 'good job' so he/she is being very picky, or is very narrow minded and hasn't seen the rest of the films on the site.
Thats just my opinion anyway.
Whoever said it wasn't 'family friendly' is new to the judging panel and wants to do a 'good job' so he/she is being very picky, or is very narrow minded and hasn't seen the rest of the films on the site.
Read the entire thread next time.
Last edited by Noodle (June 4, 2010 (10:01am))
Ratboy Productions wrote:Whoever said it wasn't 'family friendly' is new to the judging panel and wants to do a 'good job' so he/she is being very picky, or is very narrow minded and hasn't seen the rest of the films on the site.
I missed that bit, but it was still a silly decision
Posts [ 1 to 20 of 38 ]
