Hustler - Censoring a Film about Censorship

As Flint said, people and Larry Flint celebrate America because "we are the most liberal in the world today, and therefore the most powerful country." The problem is that this movie shows the "evil of censorship" spuriously (clearly obvious), but it is investigating the part that is most controversial hypocratically. Although this movie supports the freedom of speech, it can not visually depict the potentially harmful substances being defended by the first amendment. The content of Flynt's Hustler magazine absolutely and positively requests the protection of the first amendment.

Prior to the public presentation, the Film Review Board will be required to submit an official certificate. You must submit all movies, whether public or private. Film advertisements will also be judged. In the Berlin Court (Filmprüfstelle), the number of films that can ban shooting is increasing. You can prohibit, ban and confiscate anything that is considered to criticize national socialism from "aesthetic style to moral sentiment". New technological innovation of the Empire Film Consultant (Reichsfilmdramaturg) came into force and replaced the former post-production censorship system. This was because RMVP officials took a position before the screening and any suggested changes were not binding on further production of this movie. This is to "prevent content that violates the spirit of the times". As a representative of RMVP, the theater may exceed the censorship system of the Berlin Review Office (Prüfstelle).

Currently censorship is a widely used term, so what is the review? The censorship system is defined in the Macquarie dictionary of Australia as "the officials who examine the actions of inspectors - books, drama, news coverage, movies, radio programs (and the recent Internet)". The censorship system has been in existence since the beginning and has been used as a tool to manage access to others In today's Australia the Constitution is said to guarantee freedom of expression and freedom of reporting. It is said that we need a review, how much is the cost? National security and public interests, why are these justified? Why does the government have to decide whether I can see how to read in a movie theater or in my house? Of course, we must protect young people, but this is the responsibility of our parents, not the government's responsibility.