[HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Product Warnings Just Kill Me!

[GulPlum]

Louisa Cudahy wrote:

>My personal favourites are the little warnings that go with film ratings 
>these days. The CoS one had "contains mild peril and fantasy spiders" as 
>far as I remember. Very very funny. And I feel so sorry for all those 
>"gross-out teen rom-coms" that have the very embarrassing caveat that the 
>film contains "one use of strong language and mild sex." Oh, I could laugh 
>about those for hours....

I've never seen that one for CoS. I don't mean to question your integrity, 
but I would love to see any item of publicity which included it (other than 
a review).

There is an absolutely valid reason why some films include those warnings 
(technically, they're called "Advisories"). They are part and parcel of the 
relatively new "12A" rating by the British Board of Film Classification. 
This certification was introduced for Spider-Man and has become 
increasingly popular for films which are marketed at children but for one 
reason or another, the certification board considers borderline cases 
between PG ("Parental Guidance recommended, children of any age may be 
admitted") and 12 ("Children under the age of 12 may not be admitted"). 12A 
means that children over the age of 12 may be admitted, but children under 
the age of 12 must be accompanied by a responsible adult.

Those "responsible adults" need information in order to be responsible, and 
so 12A films are released with an advisory statement (hence the "A" after 
the 12) informing them what it is about the film which children may not be 
able to take, or rather their parents may not be prepared to accept on 
their behalf.  The text of the advisory is an integral part of the 
certificate, and all publicity relating to the movie MUST contain the 
advisory's full wording, as established by the BBFC.

To take a few of films on current release which are rated 12A: X-Men 2 
("contains moderate violence"), How To Lose A Guy In 10 Days ("contains 
moderate sex references"), Bulletproof Monk ("contains one use of strong 
language and moderate violence").

CoS was rated PG and therefore had no advisory connected to its 
certificate. I would love to argue the case with anyone who thought it was 
required.

Incidentally, on the original subject, a few web sites with several other 
product warnings:

http://rinkworks.com/said/warnings.shtml
http://home.pacifier.com/~kbarratt/stupid.htm
http://www.sebourn.com/stupid/stprod.html

And someone who thinks that the laws of physics should take product 
warnings to a new level: http://www.laughnet.net/archive/misc/warnings.htm