still missing.

Just a quick note for all of our American cousins that keep stumbling across my blog whilst searching for your next filthy Megan is Missing fix.

Megan: She might look apprehensive now but just wait till the mooth shite-in' starts.

I don't know how to break this to you all but the film is PRETEND!

Yup that's right....IT'S NOT REAL, she's an actress, she's even on Facebook and I know this will dissapoint you but alas I never killed her.

Yes that's right she's alive and not really in my basement.

which does mean that there's room for YOU!

Thanks for listening.

big bloody plug.

If you enjoy my inane ramblings here why not visit my day job?

Just promise to be kind (plus I only have one follower so I'm getting kinda lonely).

have a good one!

the festive thing.

raiders of the lost arse.

Whilst sorting out the obscenely large pile of straight to DVD shite I get sent on a (semi) regular basis I came across this 'classic' that I received this thru' the post from an anonymous benefactor (under the pretence of a late birthday present) a couple of years back.

And frankly I'm as scared now as I was then.

Who knew the world needed a movie regarding one mans sordid fantasies about raping Oscar winner Steven Spielberg's (albeit peachy for an old guy) arse?

Featuring no cast or crew list, the film tells the story of an angry faced, anal entry obsessed young actor who aspires to the big time.

Taking the advice of a whorish, has-been actress he decides to fuck his way to the top of the Hollywood pile.

And who better to aim for than the aforementioned Mr. Spielberg?

Spielberg: He's got something to put in you.

You see, the actor reckons that if he rapes Spielberg with all his passion and might, the experience will turn the Oscar winning director of Jaws into a sex slave, unable to resist casting the aspiring actor and making him the world's biggest movie star.

But all actors need to rehearse, so he decides to practice his skills on his balding alcohol neighbour.....

Insert cock here.

Based on the real-life story of Jonathan Norman, a mentalist stalker who was arrested outside the directors home whilst carrying handcuffs, duct tape and a razor knife (but no copy of Hook? - see? even nutters have some taste) back in 1998, the unknown writer/director of RSS has taken the much publicized case and used it as the basis for a heartfelt story of tolerance and the importance of accepting people for who and what they are.

And of the little guy in all of us sticking it to (and into, obviously) 'the man'.

Which would be all well and good but for the fact that it's mind numbingly shite for the entire length of it's scant 35 minute running time and that it happens to feature the second most unattractive cast ever seen on celluloid.


And the film with the most unattractive cast ever?


Extra Terrestrian: Die Ausserirdische (1995).
Dir: Lidko Entinger and Siggi Entinger.
Cast: Mary Millman, Fabien Barone, Attila Roll, Freddy Dalton and Silvia Squire.

 In this (unofficial) sequel to the Spielberg classic, a female E.T. is sent to Earth in order to learn more about our customs and beliefs.

Oh yes, and how to have the sex.


You see it turns out that although our alien chums still have all the right bits, they've completely forgotten how to do it.

"Laugh now!"

Arriving on Earth via bad matte work and a big silver dildo cum rocket our warty wench soon finds herself stumbling thru' a thick fog (thanks to a completely visible smoke machine) toward a large(ish) cardboard cut-out castle.

Silently entering the building and hiding behind a curtain (shades of Peeping Blog), E.T. watches silently as the local sex obsessed aristocrats that live there indulge in every porn cliché imaginable all in grusome, harshly lit close-up.

Arse, quim, tits and mooth....you name it and those dirty Germans will try to fuck it.

Revenge for Dresden no doubt.

In a surprise move, the rotting corpse of Jade Goody re-enters the Big Brother house.

After what seems like hours of furiously masturbating as only a skinny woman in an ill-fitting latex alien suit can, E.T. decides to learn our strange sexual customs first hand and proceeds to spend the rest of the movie having stomach churning sex with a variety of moustachioed, pot bellied foreigners.

Exactly like your sister.

He's touching your weans.

After having every orifice stuffed full of enough man muck to sink the Bismark, our alien friend heads home to teach her planet about shagging.



Oh and probably pass on a variety of interesting STD's to the rest of her species.

Before you laugh, phone childline or fire off another death threat, spare a moment to think of poor Silvia Squire, the woman playing E.T.

The poor cow deserves some kind of award (or at least psychiatric help) for managing against all odds to make that green, muck encrusted E.T. costume (with obligatory holes cut in it for her nipples, mouth and fanny to stick out) even a wee bit sexy.

Megan....the return.

Look, it might not be the best alien cum sex movie ever made but it's a damn sight more erotic than Inseminoid.

And a helluva lot more fun than watching a tiny cocked fat man stick it in a famous directors arse.


But only just.

blind date.

Occasionally dear reader a film comes along that is so powerful, so disturbing that it leaves you speechless.

This is one such movie.

Tho' possibly not for the reasons the director intended.

Megan is Missing (2010).
Dir: Michael Goi.
Cast: Amber Perkins, Rachel Quinn and Dean Waite.

Opening with a very serious title card that informs us that the movie we are about to see is based on a true story (scary), the film then hedges it's reality bets and throws all hope of suspense to the wind by revealing this:

And not a single fuck was given.

Yup, two minutes in and we already know the ending but we can still live in the vain hope that we'll probably get some top-notch Larry Clark 'Kids' style acting or at the very least shots of Megan stripping seductively for her mysterious online stalker Josh or even some fumbling girl on girl action between the leads.

But all chances of these things happening quickly disseminate into the ether when the film starts good and proper and you realise that you're about to experience an incredibly dull seventy odd minutes of the horse faced, Bratz doll made flesh Megan (Quinn from Gene DePaul's Chicago-based stage version of Seven Brides for Seven Brothers) whining constantly about school, her hair, parties, boys and the sex.

In arse numbingly graphic detail.

Amazingly all the close-ups of Megan's luscious lips and scarily elongated face as she chats in-depth about blow jobs, descriptions of spunky undies and tales of underage nookie to anyone that's listening are so tedious as to make the thought of doing anything remotely sexual again (especially with any abducted teens you may have in your cupboard) nay on impossible thanks to her nasally voice as it burrows ever deeper into your brain like a bloated cranium worm.

Cheers for that hen.

"You want me to do WHAT in your cup?"

And rather than make us care about Megan with all these heart felt teenage chats, writer/director/closet fetishist Goi only succeeds in making her not only totally repulsive but also deserving of a bloody good kicking.

To be honest you actually start counting down to her abduction, knowing that you'll finaly get a break from her constant, self-absorbed bollocks.

At one point I honestly thought that moon-faced best buddy Amy had done it just so she could get a word in edgeways the poor cow.

"Crap chat police! You're under arrest sugar!

Anyways, between all this talking shite and applying lipgloss it appears that Megan has been flirting online to a hunky skater-boi named Josh and has arranged to meet him.

Surprise, surprise Josh is a bad man who violently snatches Megan away never to be seen again.

And worse than that is the fact that Josh isn't even his real name!

The bounder!

She might look upset now but just you wait till arse banditary starts.

Amy upon realising that she has no idea how to start a conversation now motor-mouth Megan has gone decides to turn all Nancy Drew on us (minus the pop socks obviously) and investigate the disappearance of her pal.

Weeks later tho', Amy also vanishes.




So far, so TeeVee movie of the week but hark! the director has one final trick up his sleeve.

 You see it appears that after weeks of searching that the police have discovered Amy's camera in a bin.

And someone seems to have been posting vaguely embarrassing pictures of what could be Megan on a bizarro bondage fetish site.

"Shite in mah whiny American mooth!"

Bring on the real-time footage of Amy, stripped to her undies, caked in mud and chained up in a cellar as she's systematically abused, raped and sworn at by 'Josh' in gloriously unflinching eighties nasty style sleaze-arama.

But if you think that this is all a wee bit too exploitationy for a public service mocumentary then you ain't see owt yet because dirty boy Goi has an ace in the bag.

Or more precisely Megan's rotting corpse in a barrel.

Which I'll admit was unexpected.

Bored by all this torture and tears, Josh decides to pop Amy into the barrel too as our family friendly director closes the film by filming Josh's feet as he digs a hole big enough to put the barrel in as the soundtrack is filled with Amy's screams.

for almost twelve and a half minutes.

"Laugh now!"

Like a living, breathing copy of Chat Magazine with it's wholesome, family friendly tales of holiday rape and cheery infanticide stories, Megan is Missing seems to exist in a bizarre void where public safety films and early eighties sleaze, both drunk on cheap gin and high on poppers have shagged each other senseless in a grimy back alley before spewing forth an ultra-foul, faux Cinéma vérité baby, misshapen, and twisted yet still managing to vomit ill-conceived torture porn cunningly masquerading as scaremongering public service propaganda from it's lipless mouth.

Available from all good newagents!

Utilising the by now criminally clichéd found footage scenario, Megan is Missing is made up of around 70% camcorder and mobile phone stuff, 20% CCTV footage and news reports with the final 10% appearing to be the directors private fantasy files made flesh.

Possibly.

If so then he wont have been the first director to put his wildest sexual dreams on film but at least the others were a wee bit more honest and didn't wrap them in public service cotton wool.

Tho' maybe I'm being too harsh about the poor guy (harsh, me?) and Michael Goi  did actually have his heart in the right place whilst making this.

If that's the case then it's just a pity he appeared to have his free hand shoved firmly down the front of his underpants for the last twenty or so minutes really.

Fuck I really need a bleach shower now.

criminalising kinkiness.

"Anyone who doesn't agree with the new law has serious mental health issues..."
Daniel, Oxford via the BBC News website.

Your mum in your bed
whilst you were in the pub last night.

Fantastic news for all fans of Unwell style movies (oh and freedom of speech I guess) as next week sees a bill outlawing the possession of "extreme pornography" set to become law.

But many fear it has been rushed through and will criminalise innocent people not just with a harmless taste for 'unconventional' sexual practices but that the wording of the bill will also criminalise many (non-pornographic) movies too .


The campaign to ban the possession of 'violent sexual imagery' is spearheaded by Liz Longhurst whose daughter was by murdered five years ago.

It emerged that her killer had been compulsively accessing websites such as Club Dead and Rape Action, which contained (fake) images of women being abused and violated. Supported by her local media hungry MP, Martin Salter and bastion of moral decency David Blunkett, the then home secretary planned to introduce the legislation to ban the possession of "violent and extreme pornography" which gets its final reading this week and will get Royal Assent on 8 May.

Enjoy wearing masks in the bedroom?
then you're a filthy Pervert!

Until now the smut peddlers, rather than the consumer, have needed to operate within the confines of the 1959 Obscene Publications Act, but while this law will remain, the new act is designed to reflect the realities of the internet age, when pornographic images may be hosted on websites outside the UK.

Under the new rules, criminal responsibility shifts from the producer (not the musical journey that is 'Hey Mr. Producer!') - who is responsible under the OPA - to the sweaty palmed, gimp masked consumer.

Jodie shows how many
of her movies
will become illegal
under the new law.

But campaigners say the new law risks criminalising thousands of people who not only use violent pornography as part of consensual sexual relationships but also anyone that owns any motion picture that can be deemed to feature 'violent sexual imagery'.

As defined by this new bill it will be illegal to own (or produce) imagery that features:

An act which threatens or appears to threaten a person's life

An act which results in or appears to result in serious injury to a person's anus, breasts or genitals

An act which involves or appears to involve sexual interference with a human corpse

A person performing or appearing to perform an act of intercourse or oral sex with an animal

The main problem according to civil liberty groups is the use of the word 'appears' in the bill as this can be taken to mean scenes appearing in a non-pornographic, dramatic setting.

That's most of your DVD collections screwed dear readers.

Films that can fall foul of the new bill (and therefore can be seen as illegal to own) include amongst others:

Casino Royale (alongside most Bonds)
Visitor Q
The accused
Scum
Taxi Driver
Blue Velvet
Cape Fear
Evil Dead (it's been a long time since this was deemed obscene!)
Pulp Fiction

(fake) corpse sex: illegal from next week.

Some sensible MP's (yup there are a few surprisingly) are also worried about the wording of the bill. The sultry Baroness Miller said "You have to be very careful about the definition of 'extreme pornography' and they have not nearly been careful enough."

She has suggested the new act adopt the legal test set out in the OPA, which bans images which "tend to deprave and corrupt" (a wee bit like photobucket does here) but our Parliamentary masters have refused.

Mrs Longhurst acknowledges that libertarians see her as "a horrible killjoy" but replied "I'm not. I do not approve of this stuff but there is room for all sorts of different people. But anything which is going to cause damage to other people needs to be stopped."

To those who fear the legislation might criminalise people who use violent pornography as a harmless sex aid, she responds with a blunt "hard luck".

"There is no reason for this stuff. I can't see why people need to see it. People say what about our human rights but where are Jane's human rights?"
A horrible Killjoy? No. Just a grieving mother coming to terms with a deep loss by trying to find a reason for her daughters death, rather than blaming the sick individual who would have killed with or without his fetish.

Truth be told the extreme pornography sites probably satisfied him enough to stop him killing earlier, without them he would still have had the same urges just no 'safe' (to begin with) release.

How long before people realise that bad things happen without the use of films, books, photo's and specialist websites?

See?
Too much does make you go blind.

The recent jackbooted rompings of Formula 1 Fuhrer Max (son of Oswald) Mosley have served as a reminder that kinkiness is found in all walks of society.

And just as Herr Mosely is calling the revelations an invasion of his private life, so Baroness Miller says the new law also threatens people's privacy:

"The government is effectively walking into people's bedrooms and saying you can't do this. It's a form of thought police." She says there's a danger of "criminalising kinkiness".

Blue Velvet: A sick and vile film for sick and vile people.
Probably.

"How many tens or hundreds or thousands of people are going to be dragged into a police station, have their homes turned upside down, their computers stolen and their neighbours suspecting them of all sorts?" Such "victims" won't feel able to fight the case and "will take a caution, before there are enough test cases to prove that this law is unnecessary and unworkable".

Mosley: Nazi whore loving fan
of fisting (but aren't we all?).

Another opponent of the new law is Edward Garnier, an MP, skin care expert and part-time judge, who questioned the clause when it was debated in the Commons.

"My primary concern is the vagueness of the offence," says Mr Garnier, his voice cracked and worried. "It was very subjective and it would not be clear to me how anybody would know if an offence had been committed."

But the Ministry of Justice is arrogantly unrepentant, saying the sort of images it is seeking to outlaw are out of place in modern-day Britain (except when indulged in by Tory MP's obviously).

"Material which depicts necrophilia, bestiality or violence that is life threatening or likely to result in serious injury to the anus, breasts or genitals has no place in a modern society and should not be tolerated," says a spokeswoman for the ministry.

Well that's us told then.

Craig: illegal bollock beating.

Yet opponents have also seized on what they see as an ideological schism (no idea what that is but it does sound impressive, a bit like that rift in Cardiff) in the new law, noted by the brave hearted Lord Wallace of Tankerness during last week's debate in the House of Lords.

"Och, If nae sexual offence is being committed it seems very odd indeed that there should be an offence for having an image of something which was not an offence, you ken?" he said before riding off to fight the English or something.

Wallace: You'll never take
his freedom (to fuck animals).

That mad bald bloke from Mediawatch, John Beyer has been conspicuous by his absence throughout it all tho.

barmy brazier.

For your enjoyment his bill to tackle video violence can be found in full here.

"How many killings?"

Don't forget to leave a message and tell him who sent you.

chinned.

Good news for film fans! Freakishly faced Tory rat boy Julian Brazier's plan curb the release of 'explicit films and games' has been opposed!

Brazier: rodent
like control freak.

Barmy Brazier's private member's bill failed when the debate ran out of time as he ranted and drooled like the controlling loon that he is.

He demanded more of a say over the BBFC's membership and guidelines, which he argued had been "progressively liberalised" and also wanted a change to the system that currently only allows appeals against BBFC classifications, or decisions to cut footage, by the entertainment industry, citing "The growth in violent offences is linked to the growing availability in the media of extremely violent and explicitly sexual material."

His evidence? a 'borrowed' copy of the 1976 snoozefest SS Experiment Camp.

No surprise that he was supported by Labour MP's Keith (where's the sick child for a photo opportunity?) Vaz and Stephen Pound, who uttered the classic quote that "the sanctity of life becomes diluted" with regard to violent films.

A violent film like those mentioned.

Judi Dench-alike Culture Minister Margaret Hodge said the government had responded to concerns by asking beautiful boffin (and Unwell pin-up) Dr Tanya Byron to review whether more regulation to protect children was needed - due to report back next month.

Hodge: dirty pillows (probably).

Urging MPs to await that report she said legislation would not be effective on its own. Parents, internet service providers and others would also have to take responsibility. She was still speaking as time ran out at 1430 GMT and the bill now stands no chance of becoming law.

Meow.

It's bad news for Gunnar Hansen fans tho' as late on Friday, the BBFC rejected his new film Murder Set Pieces amid concerns about it's violent sexual scenes - the ruling means it cannot be legally supplied anywhere in the UK but can be found here for free.

God I love the internet.

1984 and all that.

Thought I'd gone back in time this morning after hearing the news that big chinned Tory MP Julian Brazier announced that 'Explicit and extreme video games and films are fueling a tide of violence in Britain' and that MPs should have more of a say over appointments to the board of British Board of Film Classification and its guidelines.

Brazier: looks like a pervert.

Power mad Mr Brazier wants MPs to be able to trigger an appeal against BBFC decisions to restore cut footage or lower a classification of film and during a recent Commons debate, he cited the example of the previously banned SS Experiment Camp (again, what year is this Julian?) - which was re-examined by the BBFC and released in 2005.

"The film shows in voyeuristic detail women being tortured to death by SS camp guards," he said, obviously assuming that it was a documentary and not as we all know a badly made Italian exploitation epic from 1976.

On the subject of the French 'arthouse' classic Irreversible, he added "If this is not glamorising rape then it is difficult to imagine what would be."

He then told MPs, whilst foaming at the mouth and stamping his fist on his desk like the jumped up little Hitler he is that: "The growth in violent offences is linked to the growing availability in the media of extremely violent and explicitly sexual material."

Obviously he has no evidence to back this up but thought it sounded good.

Vaz: Ambulance chasing vulture.

Unsurprisingly he was backed by tragedy jumping Labour MP Keith Vaz, who represents a seat in Leicester where the mother of 14-year-old murder victim publicly attributed his death to his killer's 'obsession' with the Manhunt video game - although the trial judge (and police) did not confirm her view, blaming robbery.

Vaz is particularly concerned about video games (particularly if they can get him column inches and re-elected), arguing they were different from films because they are "interactive".


"When they plan with these things they are able to interact, they can shoot people, they can kill people, they can rape women and that's what is so wrong about the situation we have at the moment."

As we all know, you can't actually 'kill' people in games because it's not real.

A fake death scene from a film: not real.

Luckily the comedy genius of John Whittingdale, chairman of the Commons culture, media and sport select committee is here to raise a giggle.

He said he had been 'lent' a copy of SS Experiment Camp (right, like it's not his own) but dismissed it as a "truly dreadful film".

He explained: "It is what is called Italian Schlock (is it? is it really? or are you just making words up now to look cool and hip you sad misguided man) and many people will find it offensive because of the subject matter, because it involves Nazis and extermination camps".

Do you think he figured that out from the title?

I have to say there is not a single scene in that film that I could argue should be banned. "Actually the scenes of so-called torture and the scenes of sex are mild compared to anything you can go and see today in the Odeon down the road."

What? anything? even in kids films? and Rambo? even tho' the Odeon aren't showing it? Generalization? Never!

However, he did say he was concerned about big budget "torture porn" films like the Saw and Hostel series of films, which he said should have been cut "more than they were" even tho' he admitted he hadn't seen them.

Mr Brazier's bill has cross-party support but would need the government's backing to become law.

Let's pray to God he gets hit by a bus before then.

why does my blog keep getting.....

Is Keith Vaz reading it?

censorsh!t.

Scarily enough for a blog based around Zed grade smut (and kids TeeVee) I've never been targeted by the photobucket censor before (I know it's surprising). Until today that is.

And for a blog full of penile monsters attacking Japanese schoolgirls, naked lesbian vampires, zombies and killer kiddies I never thought in a million years that the two pictures complained about would be David Tennant's penis and Joan Collins' arse.

Makes you think doesn't it?

seduction of the gullible.

The calm before the censorship storm?....BBC news brings a 'lively' debate on 'torture porn' (the new name for horror movies featuring "sadistic torture, mutilation and murder - often with women as the victims - are central to the plot".) Which is nice.

Tim Masters full article can be found here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6238204.stm

but I figured it'd be more entertaining to take the piss (well at least I'm honest). Enjoy:

"The last three weeks alone has seen Vacancy, Captivity and Hostel: Part II playing in cinemas across the UK" an obviously terrified Tim writes.

"Hostel: Part II is the follow-up to Eli Roth's box office hit from early 2006 in which a group of male backpackers fall prey to a torture ring in Slovakia" (obviously this can't be one of the culprits as the main victims are men but there you go) "And a poster campaign for Captivity (one that was mistakenly used and actually pulled by the distributors, but that doesn't make good copy) was pulled earlier this year in the US after complaints about the graphic images featuring the film's lead Elisha Cuthbert" (the new one featuring her being buried alive with her breasts pushed towards the viewer is ok tho').

The original poster pulled for being too violent or
just too cluttered and badly designed? you decide!

The acceptable face (and breasts) of fear.

In an attempt to bring an experts opinion to the proceedings Master's quotes Mark Kermode's review of Captivity from Radio Five Live:

"It's a grotty, nasty, sleazy, infantile piece of dung" said the bequiffed skiffler. Lets be honest tho' if you're a 'proper' serious fan of the horror genre you just know that something like Captivity is going to be utter rot and the only folk that'll enjoy it are the ones like the really awful woman in pink that appeared on the Dawn of The Dead remake ads going "It's sooo much better than the original!" when you knew for a fact that she wouldn't know the Romero version if it came up behind her and took a chunk out of her ample arse.

Kermode: sleazy
and infantile.

"Last year, another torture-flavoured film, Saw III, grabbed headlines after reports of punters fainting in the cinema".

But if you're gonna pay good money to see factory produced lowest common denominator bollocks like a Saw movie then fainting in the cinema is the least of your worries.

The only way you'd get
me watching Saw III.

"A clever marketing ploy perhaps, or are these films really pushing the boundaries of violence and on-screen bloodshed?" pushing the boundaries of dumbing down films perhaps....

Masters then goes on to review the movies (worth reading for a laugh at least) before 'bumping into' top horror bod and Argentofile Alan (our mate John has shagged him) Jones (I never just happen to bump into him in the street after seeing a movie....why?)

"Caught enjoying Vacancy? fined £300!"

"There is nothing new in this," he says. "People have been on stone slabs being tortured by people since Frankenstein."

"But is there a difference when the horror has no fantasy element?" Asks a somewhat confused Tim because obviously 'horror without a fantasy element' is something like Schindler's List or The Killing Fields but seeing as they're 'proper' films they don't count.

"That's the problem - most people can write off the Hammer movies because they can be explained away as fairytales" answers Jones. "But with Hostel it's dealing with what people don't really want to address. And that is that the guy who's standing next to you in the supermarket queue could be a serial killer. Not just somebody who is obviously evil." He adds before running home to check for The Third Mother updates: "People like Eli Roth remember the first time they went to see a horror film and how much it shocked them, and they want to replicate that for today's audiences."

I can see this running and running......at least till the 'moral majority' find another scapegoat for societies ills. Surprisingly tho' John Beyer, head of Mediawatch and self appointed moral guardian of Britain has been conspicuous by his absence during this debate. He's no doubt too busy with his good Christian pursuits like outing gay police officers and sending threatening letters to BBC employees after the Jerry Springer Opera contraversy. Probably.

Beyer: Self righteous arse.

ban this sick filth.

After a nice peaceful lull in British censorship (Ex-DPP banned list films getting released uncut, no moral outrage...almost normal i guess) it's back on the agenda with the BBFC banning a 'violent' video game (the first one in over a decade).
Oh dear.

Just looking at this screencap can make you a killer.

Reported over on auntie Beeb it appears that:

The video game Manhunt 2 was rejected for its "unrelenting focus on stalking and brutal slaying", according to a British Board of Film Classification spokesperson.

It means the Manhunt sequel cannot be legally supplied anywhere in the UK.

Rockstar Games the designers of Manhunt 2 have six weeks to submit an appeal.

The last game to be refused classification was Carmageddon in 1997. That decision was overturned on appeal.

And this one as well.

David Cooke, director of the BBFC, said: "Manhunt 2 is distinguishable from recent high-end video games by its unremitting bleakness and callousness of tone and there is sustained and cumulative casual sadism in the way in which these killings are committed, and encouraged, in the game."

The original Manhunt game caused huge controversy amongst our moral protectors and those who hadn't played it upon it's release and was blamed for the murder of Stefan Pakeerah. who was stabbed and beaten to death in Leicester in February 2004. Although Police said robbery was the motive behind the attack on Stefan, his parents believe the killer, Warren LeBlanc, 17, was inspired by the game, much in the same way Rambo was to blame for the Hungerford killings even tho' Michael Ryan didn't own a video recorder.

Artists impression of someone
who has played the game.

Stefan's mother has branded the gaming industry "morally irresponsible".

"We have been campaigning against these games for a long time and the BBFC made the right decision," she said.

Manhunt's maker Rockstar North has always insisted its games are geared towards mature audiences and are marketed responsibly.

Leicester MP and professional band wagon jumper Keith Vaz, who campaigned with the family against the original version of Manhunt, praised the decision to ban Manhunt 2.

Vaz: Smug bandwagon jumper
(kids with cancer for a good photo
opportunity not shown).

He said: "This is an excellent decision by the British Board of Film Classification, showing that game publishers cannot expect to get interactive games where players take the part of killers engaged in 'casual sadism' and murder."

Strangely he never mentioned social inadequacies and care, lack of support amongst communities or unemployment etc. for any of societies ills.

Good job he's found that it's really video games and films to blame for all of the countries problems. He deserves a medal.