Masters Of Crimegraffiti Movies & Documentaries

13-04-2021 admin

A cloudy sky rules, formidable Victorian buildings stand still, and a smell of beer overwhelms the atmosphere. And then, quirky gunmen roam the city in a rush and all at once disappear into its underground paths and covered walkways. Arguably, Britain has got the character, the style, and a quite entertaining crime cinematic underworld.

How much money do people make with a Master’s in Film degree? Because there are many ways to utilize your Master’s in Film degree, there are many ways to get paid. But rest well, a job in the film industry is lucrative. For example, film and video editors make over $58,210 a year. And producers and directors make, on average, $71,620 a year. Students who hold a Master in Criminology can have access to a wider variety of interesting jobs than someone who only has a bachelor’s degree. Those with this kind of background may elect to work in law enforcement as either a police officer or a detective, or they could choose to work behind the scenes as a forensics researcher or consultant.

From the American film-noir movement of the ‘40s to the French “policier” cinema of the ‘60s and then back to the classic Hollywood crime films of the latest decades, the on-screen universe of gangsters, thieves, and hired killers has always been dark, mysterious and terrifyingly multidimensional.

British crime cinema, however, has carried out a different course, utilizing its ethnic culture and creating a definable place of illegality, cynical yet charming characters, and bittersweet decline. Through Guy Ritchie’s lens and upon familiar scratched pale faces, let’s enjoy the unlawfully provoking Albion that we love.

10. Mona Lisa (1986)

What differentiates a street prostitute from an expensive call girl? Nothing. Dressed in high-cost racy underwear, Simone visits luxurious hotels and effete politicians. She hides behind her impressive appearance a weak girl that used to stroll in the infamous districts of Soho every single night. George, an ex-convict with sad eyes, has taken over the ambiguous duty of Simone’s driver.

He performs his duty in his charmless stiff body, observing the disguised abjection of this young beautiful woman. She immediately realizes George’s lack of adequacy. In this fashion, these two outlaws share a volatile yet caring relationship that is found in the streets of London, split in between casual transactions of vulgar, paid, and meaningless sex.

On a first level, this is the story of Simone and George: two people that waste their days and deliver their body, but keep a dusty box of old, faded images in their heart. Initially, they both can’t stand one another. George projects a part of his fate on Simone’s life and so does she. But, eventually, they become an insoluble unit, recovering a vast treasury of feelings and weaknesses in one another’s eyes.

On a second level, “Mona Lisa” is a sad story of dispersed cruelty, sentimental coldness, and lost chances for a given life.

9. In Bruges (2008)

This is an exceptional black comedy, shot in one of the most stunning small cities in the whole world. From another point of view, it’s an unconventional study of silly bad guys. At the end, “In Bruges” is a hilarious, intelligent and irresistible flick of characters and space-time. You may try to predict its plot kinesiology, or understand what it’s really about. What you have to do, still, is to sit comfortably and enjoy its obscurity.

Ray is a professional killer that failed to fulfill a mission without collateral losses. After murdering a priest in Dublin, he accidentally shot a child. Without being aware of it, he stung his boss’s Achilles’ heel, who decided to exile him in Bruges for two weeks with his naïve and moonstruck mate in crime. Ray and Ken represent two alternating poles of numbness and excitement, volitional blindness and observation. In their bizarre sphere of childish immorality, you both love and hate them for different reasons.

There’s a quite unique trait in Martin McDonagh’s first feature film: it’s thrilling —entailing a suspenseful and unpredictable plot— and character-driven at the same time. The story is meant to enchant the viewer and reveal the core of its protagonists as well. The film’s ending cuts through the very heart of its environment’s ethics and intentional quintessence.

8. The Hit (1984)

This is a film you’ve probably missed. In an unconventional quality of a novel, “The Hit” by British Stephen Frears is a breathtaking road trip that could travel your mind and soul. Drawn upon a nature’s acreage of beauty and narrated through the humane vicious sweetness, this is a picture to enjoy and linger on.

Of course, it’s the story of a criminal. Or isn’t it? Actually, it’s the tale of a man that encountered with a bestial façade of crime, dared to look at it, and then run so as to never behold its ugliness again. Willie Parker, a hitman immersed into the shady waters of a British gangland condemns his co-criminals and searches for a shelter somewhere in the warm, serene, and hostile grounds of provincial Spain.

The years have gone by. Willie’s life has been peaceful and smooth, hidden under his land’s comforting shadow of sun. But that beast he had once looked is alive, chasing him and seeking revenge, even ten years later. As if traveling through space-time, a car has crossed the thick transparent wall that divides Willie’s past and present, sweeping everything in his way and catalyzing roles, sides, and shades of innocence or guiltiness. This is crime, after all.

7. Snatch (2000)

It has Jason Statham and Vinnie Jones. You almost smell the beer and feel the moisture in the air. It also includes Brad Pitt in the role of a gypsy. This is Guy Ritchie two years later. Is his 1998 “Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels” better than his second strike at the same field‒ known as “Snatch”? Of course it is. But, more than a crime film, this is an absolutely amazing piece of comedy.

The film’s pitch-black yet comic underworld moves through illegal boxing games, gambling, stolen diamonds, and other infamous paths of a quit complicated microcosm in London’s crime scene, that seems to marginally survive on a long chain of countless friable hoops. As this chain is intensely stretched by internal and external forces, we see its pieces interacting on the verge of a disastrous crash.

The energy, the character, and the grace of the noisy black charade that it is “Snatch” lie in its characters’ surreal and at once ordinary profile. Each one of them defines a unique landscape of a tangled identity and comic ingredients. Arguably, the film’s blemishes are obvious. But as you watch its characters being what they are and interacting in their quaint little sphere, you can’t help but falling in love with it.

6. Get Carter (1971)

He’s stony, unhesitating and eerie. His steely eyes overflow with revenge all the same. This is Michael Caine in one of his best roles. Embodying Jack Carter, a man who lives for crime but could die for his brother, Caine’s face creates a stinging grief in the heart, instead of easing any feeling of aversion. Mike Hodges’s 1971 “Get Carter” is a lament dedicated to a twisted gangland.

Every man could die. Every man has to be removed from his way, when he needs to proceed. But this time, it has to do with his brother, a man that he used to love. Jack knows that his brother didn’t die accidentally, and he seeks revenge. In the casual way that he has always been acting, Jack gets involved into serious, complicated and violent circumstances in order to reach his goal.

Growing fond of the story’s cold-handed criminal is impossible. Still, in opposition to his cold actions, his heart is something more than warm, and thus, you can’t hate him either. Hodges leaves no margin for a lot of feelings here. His picture’s landscape is constantly covered by a dull fog of misery. Always evolving around Jack, an endless tapestry of tragedy culminates in an inevitable deadlock for its hero and his doomed environment.

013.Fourquan.Salil.Sawarem.Four.Oq

Directed by Unknown / 201?

In August 2017, a 62-minute DVD-Rom titled 013.FOURQUAN.SALIL.SAWAREM.FOUR.OQ was banned by the Classification Board.

The Australian Federal Police - Joint Counter Terrorism Team - Sydney was the applicant.

The reason given for the Refused Classification ratings was:

Reason: 9A
9A Refused Classification for publications, films or computer games that advocate terrorist acts
(1) A publication, film or computer game that advocates the doing of a terrorist act must be classified RC.
(2) Subject to subsection
(3), for the purposes of this section, a publication, film or computer game advocates the doing of a terrorist act if:
(a) it directly or indirectly counsels, promotes, encourages or urges the doing of a terrorist act; or
(b) it directly or indirectly provides instruction on the doing of a terrorist act; or
(c) it directly praises the doing of a terrorist act in circumstances where there is a substantial risk that such praise might have the effect of leading a person (regardless of his or her age or any mental impairment (within the meaning of section 7.3 of the Criminal Code) that the person might suffer) to engage in a terrorist act.
(3) A publication, film or computer game does not advocate the doing of a terrorist act if it depicts or describes a terrorist act, but the depiction or description could reasonably be considered to be done merely as part of public discussion or debate or as entertainment or satire.
(4) In this section: terrorist act has the meaning given by section 100.1 of the Criminal Code (no matter where the action occurs, the threat of action is made or the action, if carried out, would occur).

Australian Counter Terrorism Police Are Asking The Classification Board To Ban ISIS Propaganda
buzzfeed.com, February 1, 2018

The applications made by the Australian Federal Police (AFP) appear to be the first time the agency has sought for materials originating with ISIS or Al-Qaeda to be banned in Australia.

They are unusual, because possession of some of the materials would potentially already engage Australia's broad terrorism laws.

University of New South Wales dean of law George Williams said that 'quite apart from the censorship regime, there are very broad powers and stringent offences for possessing things connected with terrorism.

'That has in the past included instruction manuals and material of that kind.'

But the new applications appear to be targeted at prosecuting individuals who may be seeking to move banned material in or out of Australia.

A spokeswoman for the AFP told BuzzFeed News: 'In order to prosecute a person for moving material in or out of Australia the AFP is required to apply to the Classification Board for the material to be Refused Classification.'

The spokeswoman directed BuzzFeed News to a section of the Customs Act that prohibits the import of material that has been refused classification, carrying a maximum penalty of up to five years in prison.

If an individual was charged for importing some form of ISIS propaganda under this offence, it would likely be the first time this has occurred in Australia.

The development signals that the AFP may be adopting broader enforcement strategies to combat threats, relying on a range of offences not traditionally linked to terrorism.

A number of terrorism matters are currently before various Australian courts stemming from several prosecutions initiated in the past five years.

1 Berlin-Harlem

Directed by Lothar Lambert - Wolfram Zobus / 1974 / West Germany / IMDb

1 BERLIN-HARLEM was rated R in March 1985 after footage was deleted. The reasons for the cuts were infrequent, gratuitous, high level sex.

The Australian Film Institute appealed the decision and managed to get the film passed uncut. However, the Review Board attached the following conditions.

Direct the Film Censorship Board to classify 'R' without deletions for no more than two screenings at each capital city of Australia as part of a Lothar Lambert retrospective season in 1985.

101 Acts of Love

Directed by Eric Jeffrey Haims / 1971 / USA / IMDb

In March 1976, an 1896.00-meter (69:06) print of 101 ACTS OF LOVE was banned because of 'indecency'.

Columbia Pictures were the applicant.

A 72m videotape passed with an X-rating in July 1984. It was awarded for sex, which was found to be:
Frequency: Frequent
Explicitness/Intensity: High
Purpose: Gratuitous

This was followed in August by a censored 54m tape, which was passed with an R-rating. In this version, the sex was described as being:
Frequency: Frequent
Explicitness/Intensity: Medium
Purpose: Gratuitous

In both cases, 14th Mandolin was the applicant. The two versions were probably released on their Pink Video label.

200 Motels

aka Frank Zappa’s 200 Motels

Directed by Tony Palmer - Frank Zappa / 1971 / USA / IMDb

In February 1972, an 8894-feet (98:49) version of 200 MOTELS was banned because of 'indecency'. United Artists made an unsuccessful appeal to the Film Board of Review in March 1972.

In August 1981, Valhalla Films had a 1053.12-meter (95:58) 16mm print passed with an R-rating. It was awarded for language, which was described as being:
Frequency: Frequent
Explicitness/Intensity: Medium
Purpose: Gratuitous

200 MOTELS on video

In September 1988, Corporate Video had a 95m tape passed with an R-rating. The reason was the same as the Valhalla Films submission.

This was followed in February 1998 by Warner Home Video, who had a 96m tape passed with an R18+ (Sexual references) rating.

Apart from the initial United Artists submission; all others went under the title of FRANK ZAPPA’S 200 MOTELS.

3 A.M.

Directed by Gary Graver / 1975 / USA / IMDb

In September 1978, an 1891.30-meter (68:56) print of 3 A.M. was banned because of 'indecency'.

G.H. Photography was the applicant.

In October 1981, a 77m tape was banned because of sex, which was said to be:
Frequency: Frequent
Explicitness/Intensity: High
Purpose: Gratuitous

Videolink was the applicant.

4 In A Bed

Producer Jack Films / 197? / USA / IMDb link required

In December 1981, a 628.50-meter (57:16) 16mm print of 4 IN A BED was banned because of sex, which was said to be:
Frequency: Frequent
Explicitness/Intensity: High
Purpose: Gratuitous

14th Mandolin was the applicant.

40 Graves for 40 Guns

Directed by Paul Hunt / 1971 / USA / IMDb

In April 1973, a 2434.43-meter (88:44) print of 40 GRAVES FOR 40 GUNS was censored by 66.84-meters (02:27) for an R-rating. The cuts were made to remove 'excessive violence'.

Regent Trading Enterprises was the applicant.

40 GRAVES FOR 40 GUNS was released on tape in the early 80s by K&C Video. Image courtesy of John C.

40 GRAVES FOR 40 GUNS - What was cut?

Review by Matt
MACHISMO (On screen title)
Sunrise Tapes (Netherlands)
90:39 (PAL)

The bulk of the 02:27 of cuts must have been in the very violent final act, when Wichita and his gang finally attack the town. THE WILD BUNCH was an obvious inspiration for the bloody mayhem. Interestingly, it was retitled THE REVENGE OF THE WILD BUNCH in 1989 for a US VHS reissue. The violent shootout begins at 81m, and does not let up for another 5-minute.

Other violent scenes include a smaller shootout when three of Wichita’s gang are gunned down by the Mexicans (50m), the Doctor being hit in the face (58m), and a nearly two-minute sequence of a topless Lil being pushed around by Wichita’s gang (73m).

If the print that was originally submitted to the censor only ran 88:44, then that is already short when compared to the Dutch Sunrise tape. After cuts, the Australian version would have run only 86:17! It would be interesting to know what print was released by K&C Video.

According to pre-cert.co.uk, the 1982 UK tape on the VRO (Video Network) ran 90:44.

6-9 the Daily Double

Produced by Leonard Kirtman / 1970 / USA / IMDb

In April 1980, a 1589.62-meter (57:56) print of 6-9 DAILY DOUBLE was censored by 10-meters (00:22) for an R-rating. The cuts were made to remove sex, which was found to be:
Frequency: Infrequent
Explicitness/Intensity: High
Purpose: Gratuitous

The censorship reduced the sex in the R-rated version to:
Frequency: Frequent
Explicitness/Intensity: Medium
Purpose: Gratuitous

14th Mandolin released it theatrically, and on tape through their King of Video label.

60 Second Relief

Directed by Rupert Owen / 2006 / Australia

60 SECOND RELIEF was a one minute short that was due to screen in 2007 at the 8th Melbourne Underground Film Festival.

MUFF 8 Program Notes

Melbourne Underground Film Festival 8
Program Notes
Mini MUFF
Local & International Short films curated by Jason Turley
Session 1 7pm Mon 24 Sept LOOP.

60 SECOND RELIEF
Dir: Rupert Owen/2006/Australia/1 min/Experimental
A challenge to the OFLC.

The OFLC prevent MUFF from screening the film

The screening of 60 SECOND RELIEF was abandoned after the OFLC's Amy Wooding refused to grant film festival exemptions to it, and six other features. This is not the first time that MUFF had run into problems with the censors.

Free True Crime Documentaries

In 2004, the OFLC demanded that THE TOOLBOX MURDERS (1978), WIFE TO BE SACRIFICED, GUINEA PIG: DEVILS EXPERIMENT and GUINEA PIG: FLOWERS OF FLESH AND BLOOD be pulled from the festival.

The Melbourne Underground Film Festival issued the following press release.

MUFF 8 films banned!
September 20th 2007

The Following films have been banned from the OFLC:

70k
Schulmädchen-Report: Was Eltern nicht für möglich halten (aka The Schoolgirl Report)
Sex Wish
The Farmer's Daughter
Ashley & Kisha: Finding the Right Fit
Whore
60 Second Relief

We will replacing them with other films from the MUFF program.

This Sunday 70k will be replaced with a second screening of Streetsweeper… a good MUFF Neu that we can play. Whore and 60 Second Relief are withdrawn and nothing will fill their place. The Other films will be replaced. More details on Monday.

Will the media even cover this? Do people care about censorship in this country?

Letter to OFLC

Here is a copy of a letter sent to our OFLC contact Amy Wooding. Any response we will share with our MUFF audience:

Hi Amy, I thought I'd write to you about this year's decision.

So the films I cannot play at MUFF 8 are the following:

70k, Schulmädchen-Report: Was Eltern nicht für möglich halten (aka The Schoolgirl Report), Sex Wish, The Farmer's Daughter, Ashley & Kisha: Finding the Right Fit, Whore and 60 Second Relief

Is this correct?

I will comply and withdraw them from screenings and replace them with films you have granted permission for me to play (like Moonlight and Magic, Left Ear, etc).

A few small questions, you might be able to answer or maybe the OFLC director can answer them (If you have his email I'll cc this to him):

Why is pornography of the most gross and offensive nature (like shitting and pissing films) available for sale in most Adult bookshops in Victoria?

Also: Are not X rated films only supposed to be available in Canberra but for sale in 90% of Adult shops in Vic and NSW and in other states?

Why is MUFF referred to the justice department for wishing to screen a couple of classy or forgotten pieces of erotica with artistic merit to an audience over 18 (who are keen to see them) and nothing done about the illegal X rated sale of videos and DVD's in sex shops that is rampant?

Is there not a hint of corruption or hypocrisy and definitely absurdity here?

Why are X rated films banned at all! It begs the question given the ready availability of it in on the Internet? Available on any PC, anywhere.

A MUFF screening is a minor problem compared to the flaunting of your rules every day of every year by the Adult Sex Industry.

Why are films like Shortbus and 9 Songs passed though they clearly contravene some of your guidelines?

Why is MIFF allowed to play a film like Exterminating Angles in a section that focussed on perversity and erotica though that too contravenes your guideline? And we cannot do it? We will comply with your absurd ruling out of fear of prosecution to our small festival but register our complaint also that this is neither fair or just. We believe strongly it represents a violation of the basic human rights of Australian citizens to freedom of speech, assembly and expression.

Enabling a festival like MUFF or MIFF to play whatever they choose from the classy end of the sex industry will lift both festivals standing in the International community and not reveal a backward 1950's attitude to sex and censorship in Australia. Your own guidelines date from over 50 years ago. Surely a review is in order?

I am cc-ing this email to the MIFF Festival Director Richard Moore for his interest. His comments and feelings on the matter I would be interested to hear.

Any answers to these questions or our complaint will be greatly appreciated from the OFLC.

This letter is not written in disrespect but in a wish for better clarification of the important issues it contains.

Best Regards Richard Wolstencroft

PS. Why is 70k banned it has no sex or violence at all does it?

MUFF opens tonight at Toff in Town come down and support a festival that believes in fighting censorship!

The Director, Rupert Owen speaks.

Rupert Owen's Blog
snuffboxfilms.blogspot.com
Friday, September 21, 2007

Film banned from screening at MUFF

My film got banned from MUFF as did Tony Comstock's 'Ashley and Kisha: Finding the Right Fit', as did others. Funny how my short film played the One Minute Film Festival in Switzerland; which was not an underground festival but a fairly mainstream international one without a peep of protest from the chocolate loving Swiss.

I don’t understand the processes at work here. An underground film festival with a target market of people completely prepared for challenging or sense flexing cinema, totally aware of the potential content of the films they are going to see, possibly one hundred percent supportive of subversive or fringe cinema, get audited by a kind of mauve (Pink trying to be purple - to borrow some Whistler) militia who has consulted the mob (to borrow a Henry Miller favourite) and decided that they, and only they shall have the final say on what kind of material is suitable for us as a public to subscribe to.

Why does sex cause all the controversy? It’s sex for goodness sake. It is fucking, humping, fornicating, rooting, copulating, and it is done by billions of people worldwide every day – and that is why there are billions of people worldwide to do it – even if all you want in life is kids, then you got to screw to get them. If I want to add some sort of pseudo religious mockery over the whole process, I’d say that God invented the fuck as some sort of heavenly porn channel. I imagine the angels with their robes hitched, spread eagled on the couch shaped clouds, having a wank to some couple in Greenland going at it in the kitchen.

If I made a short film that had me say spitting on the street – why not pull that film? Surely spitting on the street is considered disgusting? Surely we don’t want our impressionable minds confronted with the slow motion ricochet of mucus bouncing off the pavement and onto the sandal of someone waiting at a bus stop. Surely this anti-social act must be considered something we only do in private in the shower with the lights off and the curtains drawn. It all goes around in circles though doesn’t it? Just look at all the periods in history when values and morals loosened, you see them wedged between periods of rigid conservatism. A younger generation comes bursting through with new ideas, fresh outlooks and approaches, and then they get old becoming stifled and conservative – then their children grow up only to try and tip the scales again … so goes this revolving door of human development.

I’ve never had a film banned by the Office of Literature, Film and Classification before. The thing is that my film was a challenge to the OFLC because their definition of pornography is material intended to arouse, looks like they got aroused in sixty seconds, good for them, it that may just kick their libidos back into business.

60 Second Relief (2006) - A Brief Review

The film starts with:

60 Second Relief
A Film by Rupert Owen
The Office for Film, Literature, and Classification states that 'Pornography is sexually explicit media that is primarily intended to arouse the audience' so....
Set
Go!

What follows is one minute of speeded up film of a couple having sex on a bed. It is hardcore, but contains nothing that could not make it into an X18+ (or even a R18+ art film) rating.

70k

Directed by Jamie Howarth / 2006 / Australia

In June 2006, 70K was banned by the OFLC. The applicant was The Kingdom of Sad Machines. The DVD features the work of the Melbourne graffiti crew 70k.

In their 2005-2006 Annual Report, the Classification Board explained the reasons for the RC-rating.

The Classification Board also refused classification for the film, 70K, because it deals with crime (the defacement of public property) in such a way that it offends against the standards of propriety generally acceptable to reasonable adults. The film features documentary footage of people, with masks, disguises or their faces blurred out, vandalising passenger trains and applying graffiti to walls in Australian cities, including Brisbane and Melbourne.

The film is edited to rock music and does not feature commentary, interpretation, justification or explanation. In the Board’s majority view, the film glamourises and attempts to legitimise what are criminal acts committed in Australia and which have a negative impact on Australia and the Australian people.

Michael Atkinson's Graffiti censorship proposal

The South Australian Attorney-General Michael Atkinson put the issue of graffiti on the table at the 2005-2006 Standing Committee of Attorneys General Censorship meetings. His proposal was to make it even easier to ban films, games, and books that feature graffiti.

Annual Report to the Council of Australian Governments 2005-06
Standing Committee of Attorneys General (Censorship)

In response to a request from the South Australian Attorney-General a proposal to lower the threshold of the RC guidelines to deal with graffiti crime, was added to the agenda.

Michael Atkinson's proposal was voted down at the 2006-2007 meetings.

Annual Report to the Council of Australian Governments 2006-07
Standing Committee of Attorneys General (Censorship)

Ministers in relation to RC Guidelines and Matters of Crime:
Graffiti expressed their views on a proposal to expand the current guidelines so that matters portraying crime in a favorable light would be refused classification, with a majority expressing opposition to the proposal. Ministers agreed to remove this item from the agenda.

70K at MUFF 8

70K was due to screen in September 2007, at the 8th Melbourne Underground Film Festival.

Melbourne Underground Film Festival 8
Program Notes
70K (2006)
Australia
Dir: Jamie Howarth
[Dur: 46 mins]

The work of 70K can be regularly seen sprayed on trains and other parts of public transport systems across the country. I had to walk underneath a 70K adorned bridge to get here. But besides aerosol cans, 70K have also been aiming cameras at their walls and the result is essentially a clip collection culled from more than a few years of regularly going on and off the rails. While the quality of a lot of the footage is understandably rough at best, there’s not a lot to learn about the artists at work in 70K other than their ability to digitally mask any recognizable presence and their choice in music that includes Thin Lizzy, Dolly Parton and the obvious Ozzy Osbourne track, “Crazy Train”.

At 26 minutes there’s 30 seconds of narration but other than an even shorter snatch of a train Left Ear worker reporting graffiti over a radio, the only brief footage towards the end demonstrates that, “there is more to life than just vandalism”, like vomiting, staggering and falling down. Recommended for gunzels, potential gunzels and those who just can’t get enough graffiti.

tullski@gmail.com
www.thekingdomofsadmachines.com
6pm Sun 23 Sept 2007
LOOP
23 Meyers Place
Melbourne
VIC 3000

The OFLC prevent MUFF from screening 70K

The screening of 70K was abandoned after the OFLC's Amy Wooding refused to grant film festival exemptions to it, and six other features. This was not the first time that MUFF had run into problems with the censors.

In 2004 the OFLC demanded that THE TOOLBOX MURDERS (1978), WIFE TO BE SACRIFICED, GUINEA PIG: DEVILS EXPERIMENT and GUINEA PIG: FLOWERS OF FLESH AND BLOOD be pulled from the festival.

The Melbourne Underground Film Festival issued the following press release.

MUFF 8 films banned!
September 20th 2007

The Following films have been banned from the OFLC:

70k
Schulmädchen-Report: Was Eltern nicht für möglich halten (aka The Schoolgirl Report)
Sex Wish
The Farmer's Daughter
Ashley & Kisha: Finding the Right Fit
Whore
60 Second Relief