Censor (2021) User Reviews

A brilliant idea and lead actress wasted on a weak script

[kuner-59029 · 6/10 · 28 June 2021]

As someone who has a soft spot for Giallo and other "Video Nasties" of the 70s and 80s, I was intrigued by concept. It reminded me of "Evil Ed", a classic 90s film about a censor going mad, another film I have fond memories of (and which I can highly recommend to anyone who enjoyed this).

Censor starts strong - extremely strong. The photography is gorgeous, the use of color and sound are excellent and create a wonderful eerie, filthy arthouse feeling. Early gory scenes keep you on your toes for what may come.

Multiple plot points are set up: the media hype about violent movies and censorship, a killer supposedly imitating a killing from a movie the protagonist passed, someone leaking her identity to the press, a strange relationship with a coworker who seems to want to pass everything and of course her childhood trauma, manic search for her sister and relationship with her parents and a mysterious director who wants her to view his film after imitating her sister's childhood disappearance.

Considering all these excellent setups, it's a surprise then as the movie stumbles past the halfway point and leaves most plot points unresolved by the end. Yes, it's not that type of movie, it's not murder mystery or run of the mill thriller, but it fails to be a meaningful statement on censorship, video nasties or about someone's descent into madness.

I hate to say it, but "Evil Ed" did it better.

I still recommend the movie for its brilliant first half and a star making performance by Niamh Algar. She carries this movie, and it's hard to imagine it working with another actress in the part. There's a lot of talent here both in front of the camera and behind it. Sadly the film is less than the sum of its parts.

Prano Bailey-Bond's visual style is splendid; the plot feels half-baked! [+59%]

[arungeorge13 · 6/10 · 20 June 2021]

Censor is set in the UK during the '80s video nasties era and primarily revolves around Enid (Niamh Algar), a video censor. Enid starts to connect the exploitation films she works on with her own tragedy (involving her sister who went missing), eventually unable to distinguish between reality and hallucination. The first act really caught my interest - co-writer/director Prano Bailey-Bond acknowledges the era for its crime boom (which was wildly attributed to the rise of violent, low-budget horror films), and recreates the appropriate aesthetics.

The tone is seriously bleak and accentuated by the right colour grading. Seeing VHS tapes, VCRs, picture-tube TVs on one side and a deteriorating mind on the other - that's how I would sum it up. While Enid seeking closure regarding her sister is an intriguing direction that the makers went in, I'd have loved to see more meta-references to film-making and film-censoring in those times. That's what the first act, in fact, sets up. Enid's descent into mental chaos becomes the film's focus in the second act, and the meta elements only serve as background noise from that point on. The slick production aside, both the social commentary and the completion of Enid's character arc come off as relatively underdeveloped.

The final act goes bonkers. I like how the skewed aspect ratio offers a different visual perspective. The way the Welsh director uses VHS fuzziness to enhance the horror quotient is also quite impressive. Now, whether the writers' decision to take the film in a 'psychologically affecting' route instead of the 'investigative mystery' route excites you (or not) will ultimately determine your amusement levels. I did like Censor to a fair extent, and will definitely be looking forward to the director's next.

The censorship theme is great

[tripysix · 5/10 · 23 June 2021]

I liked how it started. The censorship theme is great and original. I didn't like how the story played out in the second half. All in all, not a great movie for me. Not a great horror or thriller or drama film. But still I enjoyed some parts of this movie.

A surreal horror character study that is... not for everyone

[andrewbelcherc · 7/10 · 2 July 2021]

I'll start by saying I am very glad I did not watch the trailer before viewing this film, and it is easy to see why some felt duped. To be clear, this is NOT a thriller. Do not go into this film expecting answers. Instead, it is an often-surreal (and in my opinion fascinating) look into a character's downward spiral. It is stylish, well-acted, and especially considering this is Prano Bailey-Bond's first feature it is surprising brave and bold with its narrative decisions. The film's greatest strength is its ambiguity, I also think this is where the film loses a lot of people.

I see a lot of reviews here complaining that this film has nothing to say, which is absolutely not true. However, it doesn't spoon feed you a concrete moral message such as "censorship = bad". It instead confronts these topics from multiple angles, both showing how ridiculous the conversation was around film during the video nasty era and also showing how a film can actually affect a vulnerable person's mind. I wouldn't go as far as to say it'll blow your mind with it's insightfulness, but it is at least trying to give the audience something worth thinking about, and I appreciate that.

Also, 84mins! Perfect length for a film like this, in fact some of my favourite films of the past couple of years have been below the 90min mark and I hope this trend continues.

Love the idea, but not the execution

[jtindahouse · 6/10 · 20 June 2021]

The synopsis for 'Censor' sounds ridiculously good. It's such an intriguing idea for a movie. Sadly, as is usually the case, the reality isn't quite as entertaining as the concept. The movie started off well and actually had a really gripping and clever set-up period. But as the film went on it chose to go further and further down the strange and bizarre route and it just lost me.

This is a debut effort for filmmaker Prano Bailey-Bond. He shows some real promise. Even though I didn't love the direction the film chose to go in, the writing was still very sound. At least he picked a route and went with it convincingly. Usually the dialogue in these low-budget, debut films is noticeably bad, but here it was well above average I would to say. It was interesting and felt natural. There's certainly some talent behind the scenes here.

The film is short at only 84 minutes and it moves a long at a reasonable pace, so you are never caught checking your watch. There's enough to like here for people to enjoy, and it's possible some people will prefer the plot-path the film decided to go down more than I did. I will give this one a light recommendation. It might just pleasantly surprise you.

This one's a thinker! Leaves to the imagination. Has layers.

[Laura_Ratings · 7/10 · 17 February 2022]

Great story, the movie builds up slowly but it isn't neccessarily boring. The mystery builds early, we learn that Enid lost her sister when she was younger, but she can't remember what happened. Her job is to censor movies that are too grotesque and need editing/cutting/banning. She supposedly green-lits a movie that is rumored to lead to a man going insane and murdering his family. He later claims that he cannot remember anything about the incident and he is dubbed The Amnesiac Killer. This incident triggers Enid: how come he doesn't remember? The same way she can't remember what happened to her sister. A colleague tells her that the brain often can't remember things that were too traumatic.

She watches a movie that needs reviewing, but it seems eerily similar to certain "memories" Enid seems to have from the day her sister dissappeared. This incident sends her spiralling and we soon learn than Enid is an unreliable narrator.

Things aren't as they seem anymore.

She believes she saw her sister in one of the movies she reviewed and goes on a search. She visits a movie rental store and you can see her look at a movie that decipcts a happy family and rainbows on the front, which is important for the end of the movie.

We watch her visit someone she met at work and she accidentaly kills him, however, the morning after she is imagining that he calls her to yell at her for running out, which reinforces the point that Enid is unstable and NOT a reliable narrator. You can't trust her point of view any longer.

She goes to a set where her "sister" is supposed to perform her last movie. She is in too deep into her psychotic break and goes insane. She kills one of the actors because she thinks she is finding out the truth, while everyone around her is just following the script.

What we then see at the end is basically 2 movies layered on top of each other, a reference to an earlier point in the movie. For the most part we are watching Enid believing that she is living in the "happy family movie with rainbows" that she was looking at earlier, but we get short cuts from where we see a much darker story; a woman crying in a car, concerned parents in the front yard, a woman screaming for help. This tells us that Enid is hallucinating; she believes that she has found her sister and brought her home to her parents to be a happy family again, but nothing is further from the truth. She has kidnapped a woman who looks like her sister and killed people during her psychotic break, the same way "The Amnesiac Killer" has.

I personally would have loved a shot at the end where we can see clearly (as viewers) that Enid is the one who did all the bad things and that we would still get some answers. We know that Enid killed the director and one actor, but we don't know if it was her who killed her sister or that she only witnessed it. But then again, this also leaves the movie up to the imagination and can leave viewers debating amongst themselves about what really happened.

The movie definitely has layers, so you need to be present while watching, but I do recommend it.

Scare score: a 5 out of 10.

Ultimately, starts off incredibly interesting and by end I was incredibly disappointed

[ppettipiece · 4/10 · 13 July 2021]

Really nails the time period, the atmosphere, and while there are a lot of who-cares type scenes and engagements between side characters, it's a compelling beginning. I think the biggest let down of all, is you never find out what happened to the missing sister, and we made our lead protagonist just your average, ordinary, off-the-rails insane who loses it by the end.

So much potential, and the lead-in and mis-en-scene is really gripping, but in the end, i was very very very let down. I appreciate the attempt at commentary and atmosphere building, but if it's silly and pointless why bother?

feature debut for midnight

[ferguson-6 · 7/10 · 11 June 2021]

Greetings again from the darkness. Will Hayes is likely the only film censor most movie buffs can name, and it's been more than ninety years since the "Hays Code" first went into effect. Despite the relative obscurity of the profession, the first feature film from Prano Bailey-Bond, places censor Enid Baines (Niamh Algar, WRATH OF MAN, 2021) at the forefront of a prime midnight movie ... a horror film about horror films. Ms. Bailey-Bond has adapted her own short film NASTY (2015) with the help of co-writer Anthony Fletcher, and for the most part, the changes work quite well.

The story is set in 1985 when "video nasties", the U. K. label for slasher films, were at the peak of their popularity thanks to the convenience of VHS tapes. Many argued these films, typically independent and low budget productions, were influential in allowing sadistic violence to seep into society. As a film censor, Enid (an excellent Algar), who dresses and carries herself like a 1950's librarian, is responsible for making sure the fictional violence on screen doesn't cross the line of what's acceptable and clearly fictional. Enid takes her job extremely seriously and is annoyed when people mistakenly assume she is in "entertainment". For Enid, it's all about protecting the public.

Bailey-Bond jams a lot into 84 minutes ... much more than most horror films attempt. Enid's backstory, and really the driving force for the film, involves her sister's disappearance when they were kids. It remains an unsolved mystery, and Enid often suffers flashbacks and dream sequences - none more vivid than when one of the movies she's watching triggers hope of resolution and a mash-up of fiction and reality. This kicks the movie into a different gear, as we are no longer caught up in Enid's stress censoring movies, but rather in her desperate search to solve the mystery of her sister.

Multiple sub-plots (or at least story lines) exist, including Enid's strained relationship with her parents - with an underlying theme of blame - and a real world tragic event that may implicate Enid's work. At play throughout is the existence of violence against women, and Michael Smiley (FREE FIRE, 2016) portrays a sleazy producer whose actions are likely similar to many in the mid-80's. Much of the third act is surreal as Enid crosses over onto the set of director Frederick North's (Adrian Schiller) latest movie after she sees a possible connection to her sister in North's previous film "Don't Go in the Church". The production design by Paulina Rzeszowska (SAINT MAUD) and the cinematography of Annika Summerston are noteworthy. With Enid wielding both a pen and an axe, the film is a bit deranged and disorienting, but a nice fit for the midnight movie crowd.

In theaters June 11, 2021.

Wait.. what?

[SameirAli · 4/10 · 8 December 2021]

From the beginning, the film gives you an expectation that you are going to watch something great, and definitely something amazing is going to happen, until the end; unfortunately, many things happens and you have no idea whatsoever. Just adding random confusions, glitch, and random gimmicks cannot help in creating a great amazing mysterious horror movie. This is below average movie under the skin of a good movie.

A surreal indie horror gem.

[rflaks612 · 8/10 · 13 June 2021]

I thoroughly enjoyed this movie! While is a great homage to the video nasty era in UK, the film itself is grounded more psychological horror. So much better than the polished and glossy "horror" peddled by big Hollywood studios. Subtle and surreal, this movie captures a wonderfully nightmarish quality that so many movies try but fail.

"Censor" written by Gregory Mann

[gregorymannpress-74762 · 7/10 · 30 May 2021]

"Censor"

1985. When film censor Enid Baines (Niamh Algar) discovers an eerie horror that speaks directly to her sister's Debbie (Erin Shanagher) mysterious disappearance, she resolves to unravel the puzzle behind the film and it's enigmatic director Doug Smart (Michael Smiley); a quest that will blur the lines between fiction and reality in terrifying ways. The film takes pride in her meticulous work, guarding unsuspecting audiences from the deleterious effects of watching the gore-filled decapitations and eye-gougings she pores over. Her sense of duty to protect is amplified by guilt over her inability to recall details of the long-ago disappearance of her sister, recently declared dead in absentia. When Enid is assigned to review a disturbing film from the archive that echoes her hazy childhood memories, she begins to unravel how this eerie work might be tied to her past.

In writing a character like Enid, you need her to have enough deep flaws there to begin with to enable her to go on the journey she's going to go on. There's a lot of discussion in the development process about how cracked and how reliable she's to begin with, and where and when we start to see those little cracks emerging. Enid as a character is quite cold in a way, she's very closed off. Enid has an emotional journey throughout the film. "Censor" breaks down into worlds, so we've Enid's reality, the video nasties she's watching, and then the dreams, which is where the video nasties and reality start to weave together. The film fuses and weaves props, colours, locations etc from one world to the next. Even though we're going from one polar to another it's important that the journey feels fluid. She starts as someone that feels in complete control of her life and her work then by the end of the film she breaks through this psychological threshold into another world. It's an incredibly rewarding journey to go on, as this character. She's so extraordinary and even she doesn't understand everything she's experiencing. And as an audience you're on that journey with her of self-exploration. She brings an empathy to the character that makes the audience lean into her, that makes you feel for her. She's completely electric; you don't want to look away. The focuses on Enid's trauma and how to express that through the score. There's a version of this score that could be very 'Carpenter'-esque, really '80s' and synth-y. "Censor" creates something glorious, warm, everything Enid ever dreamt of, but underneath all this there's something really dark and painful. You feel how Enid feels in that moment. It's psychological, dramatic; but peppered with comedy; nuggets of light relief. Film is the art form that most closely resembles our dreams. Cinema can transport us. Watching films can be cathartic, that we can have a happy ending in films, even if that's not always the case in real life.

At the start you think 'OK, I think I know what this film is about' then you get to halfway and think, 'oh my god, I've no idea'. "Censor" is about 'The Hammer Horror' era. It's about the world of video nasties. Watching films like "The Evil Dead" and "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre", but what went on around these films, socially and politically in 'The UK', is as fascinating as the films themselves. One of the things film censors looked out for at this time was blood on the breast, as they believed that seeing this would make men likely to commit rape. So any image of 'blood on breast' would be instantly cut from these films. They've to be both objective and subjective in their roles all at once, but what happens if the subjective element takes over? In the early to mid '1980s' when 'VHS' first came about there was a boom in low-budget horror being created, as these films could now go direct to video and direct to the home. There was no form of censorship in place for video as it was a new piece of technology; the films being censored were those screening in cinemas. So, off the back of this there was an outburst of social hysteria and moral panic, people thought that these videos were going to corrupt society and give birth to the next generation of murderers and rapists. At the same time, you've the backdrop of 'Thatcher', industrial collapse, job losses. It's really interesting, you've this rise in crime being reported, probably because there was a lot of poverty, and then there's 'VHS' and violence in film, the easy scapegoat for what was going on politically. There's a certain hypocrisy. It poses this idea that as humans we're so afraid of ourselves, like in some people's minds we're just one step away from becoming a murderer, as though you could just watch a film and your moral compass is completely thrown out of the window.

Steeped in glorious '1980s' aesthetics, "Censor" is a bloody love letter to 'The VHS Video Nasty' horror classics of the past. The film invokes imaginative worlds, fusing a dark vocabulary with eerie allure, revealing how beauty resides in strange places. "Censor" is a way to dive into some of these ideas, the idea of the moral compass, and how that fear of ourselves can be the most dangerous thing of all. The look of the film includes photography from 'The 80's' such as 'Martin Parr' and 'Paul Graham'. 'The Thatcher'-era look of 'Britain' bleak and muted. Then on the other end of the spectrum, films like "Suspiria" and "The Evil Dead", also Lucio Fulci films like "The Beyond", really lurid/vibrant colours. The censors office iis always an underground space. One of the inspirations, which might seem strange, is the rabbit warrens of 'Watership Down' with these whispering, haunting voices of other rabbits floating through the long tunnels. The film creates an underground warren of censors; a claustrophobic space, but rather than whispering voices coming down the corridors.

Written by Gregory Mann.

Started off interesting, then nosedived quickly.

[nytol1-798-466578 · 3/10 · 17 August 2021]

I think this could have been a really interesting film, but unfortunately it was not.

It became very irritating towards then end, trying to be clever and 'artistic' yet ultimately just succeeded in being annoying.

I've no idea what the point was, or if there was even meant to be one?

Confusing

[Gordon-11 · 20 June 2021]

The story is not so engaging, and it didn't go anywhere. The ending is confusing too.

Horror movies don't provoke violence. Period. Long live the "Video Nasties"

[Coventry · 7/10 · 9 September 2021]

Enid Baines, an extremely introvert and inconspicuous woman in her late twenties, works for the British Board of Film Censors during the early 1980s; - around the time of the infamous "video nasties". She has the reputation of being strict and prudish, but she also carries with her the unprocessed childhood trauma of when her sister Nina disappeared in the woods although Enid was supposed to be looking after her. During the censor screening of a horror film named "Don't go in the Church" - got to love the title -, Enid sees scarily accurate details from the day of Nina's disappearance, and even recognizes her now adult sister in the B-movie lead actress Alice Lee. Enid goes on a private quest to discover whether or not the mysterious director Frederick North kidnapped her sister.

Being an obsessive horror fanatic, with a particular fondness for extreme stuff from the 70s and 80s, I was obviously very attracted by the thematic. My movie-buddies and me have seen all titles on the legendary "video nasty" list, and it was definitely interesting to see an actual genre film truthfully incorporating the modus operandi, parameters, internal debates and decisions of the censorship commission. And, of course, writer/director Prano Bailey-Bond simply must underline the main moral a couple of times, namely "NO to censorship". Movies don't provoke violence, people with unsane minds commit violence. It's a moral I support for a full 100%, evidently!

The mystery/thriller plot itself is also better than expected, with some compelling sequences and a forceful performance by Niamh Algar. Enid's descent into paranoia is far from plausible, but there's pitch-black humor and a bit of nice gore.

Tip for fellow video-nasty fanatics: spot all the little references, clips and homages to contemporary horror classics and guess the titles!

Horror Movie about Horror Movies

[siluaarskelvig · 7/10 · 6 July 2021]

I don't usually enjoy horror movies for being scary. Loud noises and hectic editing doesn't frighten me.

This movie left me with a real sense of dread afterwards.

A very visually pleasing movie, good use of colour and camera work to tell the story.

The set up kept me intrigued until the lead took over as the focus for the film.

That being said, not a movie you put on to spend 40% of it looking at your phone waiting for the scares. If you don't enjoy a slow and low tempo, give this one a miss.

First feature of the director, I am certainly looking forward to future projects!

some strong moments and some weak ones

[trashgang · 6/10 · 6 July 2021]

This is a weird one because the most gory moments are in the beginning of this flick. And in fact have nothing to do with this flick.

It's a compilation of some gory shots from video nasties. From there on it's all about the video nasties with again, some news from back then with Tatcher and so on.

From there this one goes between fiction and reality all done with editing. Confusing, it is. Is it good or bad, well, it depends what you want from a horror, if you want gore and red stuff then this one isn't going to be your stuff. It do offers some slashing but it's more about the mind of the girl who decides what the viewer will see and what not, censor you get it.

I'm still left with a lot of questions and still don't know what to think about this one. Even as it is all there, it even has an ode to the Giallo's with the saturated coloured lighting. I grew up in full video nasties era so yes, I do understand it all, but will younger viewers get it? Did they know about the nasties? The censorship? Just have a view at this weird flick.

Gore 4/5 Nudity 0/5 Effects 2/5 Story 2,5/5 Comedy 0/5.

Fine debut, good horror!

[kelvynchin · 7/10 · 22 June 2021]

Ignore the lower than expected user ratings, the critics are right on this one. Prano Bailey-Bond's debut feature is a fine shocker and the slow pacing complements the pic well. Enid (Niamh Algar) is a censor in the British Film Censorship office whose constant exposure to the gore from video nasties in Thatcher's Britain begin to affect her already brittle psyche - already scarred from a childhood incident where she mysteriously lost her sister Nina in the woods . 70's gloomy brit aesthetics (think faded colours and green wallpaper) proves a perfect counterpoint to Enid's steady spiral into madness, ably captured by a finely tuned performance from newcomer Algar. A brilliantly subversive closing scene too, and some memorable gore including death by a mini puppet ax(!). Both Bailey-Bond and Algar are people to watch.

Got baited by the raitings

[kuarinofu · 5/10 · 18 June 2021]

Censor isn't really a horror, nor is it a good slasher. They also tried to build up Giallo-like atmosphere, but I'm not sure what this has to do with anything, since it does not correspond well with the time period the film is set in.

The story is very short and basic, there's minimal acting and not that many details to make it interesting. There are no supporting characters, the main lead isn't particularly interesting as well. The ending is predictable and understandable (no ambiguity whatsoever).

It looks like they have used the setting only to oversaturate the film with hipster imagery, never going further with it.

Censor isn't a bad film, it just isn't interesting or engaging, they never try to show anything besides the visuals that serve no purpose other than eye candy for the hipsters (or how are these called today, IDK).

VIDEO NASTY

[js-66130 · 7/10 · 23 June 2021]

It's 1984, you can tell by the chorded phones, but more importantly by the explosion of horror VHS tapes. A banned film loophole, tapes bypassed the cinema system, allowing the production of what was salaciously labelled in Margaret Thatcher's Britain as Video Nasties. These were convenient targets in the rising crime blame game and made for perfect tabloid fodder. A rating system was quickly cobbled in place, and a dedicated team of censors with sharp scissors decided the fate of the new art form. It was an interesting time.

As bookish, spectacled and hair-bunned Enid, Niamh Algar is delightfully stoic as a choice cutter who seems unaffected by the steady stream of B-movie drek she has to wade through on a daily basis. Enid debates screen violence with her co-workers in a professional, clinical, detached manner, like she was dead inside. Turns out a part of her may be just that, in the form of her missing sister. A mysterious disappearance from childhood days that is quite the obsession. Even though their parents want to move on, Enid is defiant and desperate to find her younger sibling. Things get interesting.

What begins as a moody mystery slowly morphs into psychological thriller as Enid traverses from her boring reality into the surreal world of horror movie making. With not so subtle nods to David Cronenberg's "Videodrome", "Censor" plays with the blurry lines of fact and fiction, steadily ramping up the pitch before climaxing to a bizarre finale. Enid finally lets her hair down, the screen turns red, and things get super crazy.

Not for the squeamish, "Censor" becomes the film within the film, deliver some ketchuppy eighties gore, startling video style glitchy edits, a host of creepy performances, and an ending sure to fire up the discussion boards.

• hipCRANK.

A great premise and it turns out to be one that is executed excellently

[r96sk · 9/10 · 7 March 2022]

Very, very good!

'Censor' features a great premise and it turns out to be one that is executed excellently. The feel of the film throughout is near perfection, with the tone all right and the 1980s aesthetic seemingly on point. It's paced ideally, with zero moments of drag.

Niamh Algar puts in a super performance as lead. I recently watched her also impress in television's 'Deceit' - which was broadcast within a week or so of this production's cinema release, there are actually some (minor) similarities between the two; a set of dark roles for Algar, that's for sure! She's the clear standout, though props to the support cast too.

Looking at a few other reviews, it seems to come down to how effective the ending is to you. For me? I think it's a great conclusion.

If you have a keen eye for cinematography and enjoy slow burn horrors then ignore the low reviews and give this one a shot

[shikarihybryd · 7/10 · 25 October 2021]

I'll admit I went into this film with no expectations, yet found myself captivated by Niamh Algar's performance and the general concept of the film. If you're not a fan of ambiguity in films or artistic and expressive camerawork then you'll probably be joining the people who have been giving this 3/10 reviews. That said, if you stick with the slow burn you'll appreciate the looming feeling of dread and discomfort as the film progresses, even if you can already predict the outcome. The important part is how these revelations are presented, which I think deserves a lot more credit than the film has received so far. Finally, it would be misleading if I told you that this is some kind of modern masterpiece as it isn't without its drawbacks. There are some cliche moments with certain character interactions and the elements of mystery that had helped keep my interest just seemingly fizzle out just before the film's climax. Overall, though, it's a decent concept which has been executed well. As the title to this review says, give Censor a shot if you enjoy horror films which focus more on the presentation and talent rather than scares and gore.

Goes nowhere, slowly.

[Otkon · 4/10 · 18 June 2021]

Then gets artsy in the last five minutes. Not sure what it was trying to say about anything. Not even Michael Smiley can save this.

Zombie and haunted house aficionados may want to skip this one.

[fedor8 · 5 May 2022]

The kind of movie that is guaranteed to annoy a lot of people. For two very different reasons though. Some people will be extremely confused by the second half, while others will hate the movie despite understanding it because they'll hate the way it was done.

I'm neither. I not only understood the ending, I predicted the censor's insanity early on. It was pretty clear that the option that she is losing her marbles is a very viable option. One of her colleagues even says at one point "I think she's losing the plot".

It is very clear that the censor was so distraught by her parents' decision to declare her missing sister dead, that she went bonkers soon thereafter. There is much mystery regarding HOW her sister disappeared. There are vague hints that the censor killed her sister when they were kids, but that is an asinine option, not just because little girls never kill their younger sisters (or anybody else) but also because how many little girls could hide a corpse so well that nobody finds the remains, or even signs of violence. So obviously, the censor didn't kill her. The fact that she was so shaken up by the movie scene in which a girl kills her sister has to do with the trauma of this childhood disaster, the sense that she blamed herself all her life for her sister's disappearance. She was riddled with guilt, not because she killed her (she didn't) but because she took her to the woods that day.

Sure, one can criticize the script for being extremely vague about what actually happened on that day in 1965, because it makes little sense that one sister survived without any injury, wasn't even attacked by anyone - whereas her sister simply vanished into thin air. This was a bit of a cop-out by co-writer/director Prano.

Does the movie have a great ending in terms of dramatic significance? Yes. Censor fell into a schizophrenic state; she invented a perfect world in which she solved the mystery, found her sister and reunited her with their parents. The director's over-the-top morbid Disney feel made that abundantly clear to the audience - not to mention the very brief glitches when this fantasy was shattered by the reality of Alice Lee screaming in terror. So why are so many people confused by the ending?

It is pretty obvious what had transpired. Censor lost her mind, projected all her suspicions and guilt onto Frederick North and his movies, concocted a "film" in her head that North had abducted her sister decades ago and was using her for snuff horror films - only to get rid of her when he no longer found a use for her. Sure, there are PLENTY of movies and directors dumb enough to use this shtick, but this movie appears to be too smart to expect us to believe such a nonsense theory. Which is why I was increasingly sure censor was going insane.

Does the movie's director handle the complexities of portraying a double-interpretation conclusion in a way that is elegant, neat, and logical? No, she doesn't. (Prano is a woman.) This is where criticism is valid. Prano's messy handling of the events in the last 15 minutes show some ineptitude, both in terms of writing and direction. She tries to cheat the viewer and offer him truth at the same time - a feat that very few film-makers can pull off convincingly.

Still, not for a lack of trying.

But what is most important of all is that the movie is interesting throughout. Anyone who claims it's boring is maybe as insane as the central female character. There are logic holes and far-fetched situations on occasion, but how is that a boring movie? Corny zombie films and generic haunted house flicks are boring. This one is at least quite original, offering a plot-line that may not be ultra-unique but in terms of how corny 95% of all horror-film plots are, it is a standout of sorts.

Some haters of this film were clearly VERY disappointed by the lack of anti-Thatcher propaganda (the film takes place in 80s Britain), and some horror film fans were annoyed that the movie suggests that extreme horror films can in fact affect certain audiences in a negative way.

But come on... Anyone who actually believes that a person will be the same regardless whether they watch 1000 kiddie animations or 1000 butcher orgies is deluded. Naturally, the vast majority of horror fans don't go out killing anyone, but there is no question that extreme trash negatively affects morons - and morons do make up a significant % of the population. It is a given among left-wingers to fanatically oppose any form of censorship (except when it suits THEM; you know who you are), but this is based on an extremely naive belief that people are so emotionally stable and so intelligent that they are impervious to any negative side-effects from "the arts". Very delusional indeed.

Besides, who the hell's talking about art here? We're talking about trash, i.e. Movies not much better than 10-dollar snuff films.

A mixed bag

[haustierrr · 6/10 · 9 November 2021]

"Censor" should on paper be a film that I would be instantly in to. Set in the "Video Nasties" time in the UK, it's about the story of a video censor and her descent into madness.

Similar stories have already been told in the likes of Berberian Sound Studio or Evil Ed - and while Censor has some brilliant moments of atmosphere and a haunting ending, the whole thing didn't really fully come together for me in the end.

I think maybe the psychological state of our protagonist was not established enough to fully believe her transition, so it all felt a bit too forced.

But there's still a lot to admire in Prano Bailey-Bond's debut feature, it just wasn't as engaging as I had hoped.

Delusion is a sign of psychosis

[saruhantankur · 7/10 · 2 April 2022]

Is it delusion or reality? We've got a great movie about well depicted the beginning of the psychosis. Despite of the other reviews I think the movie ended up with enough clearity that explains what happened to our protogonist. Having an ending gives one more plus to a movie but is it enough to make it great?

Like you guessed, I've got some complainings about the movie and these are not minor things. From now on, in order to get deeper, I need to give some spoilers.

Spoilers;

Foremost, the movie is boring. If you're a regular viewer, the only thing keeping you on chair is that the kidnapping or missing incident. If you think they'll answer the questionmark in your head about the incident, you're wrong. Thankfully, I knew this from the beginning by looking at the movie's time. Because the movie proceeds in a slow pace and it's obvious can they cannot fit everything in that timeline. As a matter of fact, they haven't had an intention to explain everything. The director wanted to use that incident as a tool in order to make character development and create an initial point. In terms of drifting into the psyhcosis, second things we need is a trigger point. Therefore the director uses her parents' request about declaration of death regarding her sister's incident in addition to the pressure comes from the work and the society. You know what? He did it well what he wanted to do. Because after this point, everything messes up for her and the delusions comes up. I mean, she is starting to see and twist the reality the way she wanted it.

Everything is perfect so far but the main problem is that the mystery of the incident more intriguing than character development and that's why people couldn't be satisfied at the end. Viewers had waited on the answers. Buty aspect, there are very creative scenes especially at the end and the director deserves a compliment for the cinematography.

The last thing I wanna say is about Niamh Algar. This is the first movie I watched of hers. She earned a new fan and I can't wait to see the other movies she's in. She is so talented, beautiful and fascinating. Her aura influencing the viewers as well as strongly transfers the emotion which is needed. I felt the guilt, agony and regret she has to burden.

Summary we've got a good movie about the pressures and the trigger points that drag you into the insanity. Before I finish I wanna recommend a movie named Night Shift if you like this thype of movies.

10/7.