The USA government has passed into law the Communications Decency Act, which could, by some people's interpretation, make an honest From Dusk Till Dawn promotional site illegal on today's Internet. So do we censor ourselves and create a sani-version of the film? Or approach the issue head-on and make censorship the center of our official presentation for this movie? We chose the latter route.
The Internet is growing so phenomenally fast because it is an open and collaborative medium, allowing internetworked people to do amazing and unprecedented things. To celebrate that openness and creative energy, we ran a contest to find the best From Dusk Till Dawn site, and invited the Internet Public to create either censored or uncensored Internet presentations. We wanted to see whether the practice of censorship in answer to "decency" laws, or open access to ideas and information produced the better work.
As part of a "starter pool" of resources for contestants, we offered the "official" raw materials we got from the film company--- film script segments, stills, audio and video clips--- as well as provided pointers to other related Internet sites and resources.
This site and the sites constructed during the contest aim to entertain, educate and invigorate people, from vampire freaks to lawmakers. So come on in, visit the Twister, and take a look at the issues raised here concerning censorship in the dawning age of Internet publication. Beyond the fun and the hoopla, as you look at the three doors on the next screen, reflect for a moment on the still uncharted potential of this new Internet medium. Use and legislate its power wisely.
From Dusk Till Dawn draws on a rich tradition of gangster bad-guy and vampire movies, and includes elements of violence, vulgarity, and sex, which some people may find "indecent." When preparing this Internet site, we looked towards Washington D.C. and began to wonder whether this new "indecency" issue means that we would have to censor our presentation for the Internet audience. We could do that, of course, but what would such alteration do to the truth of the artists' work, or the basic right to their free speech?