Greater Union stops screening Aussie gang film in NSW
March 2, 2009 – 9:08 pmI get no pleasure from blogging about any censorship (or anything that warrants the attention of STOTC), but I have to admit I’m a little relieved that this post isn’t about mandatory filtering. A welcome change, even if an unwelcome incident: Greater Union has stopped showing The Combination (MA15+) in their NSW cinemas after ‘violence flared’ among patrons in Parramatta on Saturday according to News.com.au.
The film as described is being a powerful and deeply affecting story of a contemporary Lebanese family in urban Australia and is said to shed light on the racial tension that has often boiled over into incidents like the Cronulla riots.
NSW Police said they received a report of four people involved in an altercation at Parramatta cinemas with about 50 onlookers, on Saturday at 5.38pm (AEDT).
“Police attended the next minute and there were no signs of anyone fighting. The cinema had asked people to move on,” police said.
An earlier incident in Parramatta on Thursday – the first day of the film’s release – involved a security guard being set upon by a group of young people, after a youth was asked to leave the cinema because he was smoking.
The guard was hurt but his injuries weren’t serious, police said.
No one was arrested in either incident but police investigations are continuing.
Greater Union said that maintaining the safety and security of their staff and patrons is their main concern and priority as such all sessions of this film within NSW, but the ban feels like an overreaction to me. The later incident could be unrelated to the film’s content and the earlier incident involving the smoker could have happened during any movie.
Here’s a trailer:
7 Responses to “Greater Union stops screening Aussie gang film in NSW”
An interesting (although irrelevant) side note to this story: “Ali Haider, 19, who plays one of the main characters in the film The Combination, was arrested last month and is on remand in Silverwater Jail on a charge of assault occasioning actual bodily harm.”
http://parramatta.yourguide.com.au/news/local/news/general/actor-in-gang-film-jailed/1411693.aspx
By Stormcentre on Mar 2, 2009
A classic example of CYA security. In this case it’s the security of the patrons and staff. When it comes to CYA security causation is irrelivant, it’s only correlation that matters and if a correlation can be found (whether real or not) it’s acted on in a huge way.
For those who don’t know what CYA security is best observed in the airlines, especially in America by the FTA. CYA stands for “Cover Your Arse” and does nothing to fix the actual problem, it just enacts some rules which make it look like something is being done and (hopefully) stops the same thing that’s already been tried (even if it fails) from happening again to the inconvenience of anyone and everyone else.
By Bastard Sheep on Mar 3, 2009
Could be that this will work out better for the film in the long run? No such thing as bad publicity?
Agreed, bit of an over reaction.
By Sean the Blogonaut on Mar 3, 2009
Greater Union reopens The Combination
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25131902-2702,00.html
Caroline Overington – March 03, 2009
Article from: The Australian
GREATER Union Cinemas has decided today to continue screening the Lebanese Australian gang film, The Combination.
The decision to suspend sessions from cinemas in NSW was based on two incidents at Greater Union cinemas during the film’s opening week.
——-
Australian Film Syndicate has confirmed that together with Greater Union Cinemas, they will provide additional security measures at Greater Union locations and special introductions by film screenwriter and star George Basha at Greater Union Parramatta.
“Any disruptive behaviour or violence in a Greater Union Cinema at any time is not tolerated. Further events that threaten the safety and security of our patrons or our staff will not be accepted and further action may follow,’’ Mr Flynn said.
By Bob Bain on Mar 3, 2009
I think this is an example of an important argument against censorship. The art most likely to be censored is the best kind of art, provocative art.
I believe that art needs to evoke a strong reaction from viewers.
That being said, banning this film based on those incidents is ridiculous. Either they were looking for an excuse or their management is just dead set incompetent.
By Websinthe on Mar 5, 2009
I’m not sure I’d call it censorship. While I agree that it is probably a bit of an overreaction, it seems to me that they decided not to play it not because of the content of the film (to censor the film), but because of the incidents that happened in conjunction with that particular film. It’s a fine line, I know, however it seems to me that the cinema casts no judgement on the film itself. Moreso the audience that it attracts.
By Kath on Mar 6, 2009