Have seen Cuckoo's Nest and long ago, Amadeus.

In some of those old eastern block countries, the censors were not exactly very smart. Many directors based there simply had to become more creative about how they made assertions... abstract enough to get past the censors, while still easy enough to reach the viewers upon some reflection.

And as you hinted, the West has had its share of past and present censorship as well. In fact, we are currently in a time when viewpoints that are disliked receive demands to be silenced. It is in part due to an education system which is failing, whether purposely or by simple distraction and ineptitude, that values relating to things like free speech or the right to be left alone and live one's life, or even the simple idea of the worth of a right to basic privacy... are not being instilled anymore. This is dangerous. It is worrisome. It needs to be addressed. I hope it will be.

Apart from that, we are dealing with fabrications of social problems which in fact do not exist, or not on any sort of scale some with political uses for them wish for people to believe. Perhaps there is a film which shows a rampant allowance and syndrome of violence against one particular group of people. Readily available and accurate records and stats show this to simply be a flat out lie, probably with the intent to inflame divisions within that country's population. Where is the line for freedom of expression here? What is the correct response? Is it to counter the film by yelling out corrections? Does this sway people as much as the emotional effects of a movie? Is the answer to make another movie that is more factual?

Free expression can be used as an itinerant method to simply undermine societies as well. The less responsible, more selfish, and less willing to settle differences people become, well then the more reckless they are in using any freedoms they have (not just speech), and the more those freedoms begin to be taken away. We used to see it in action at this very board. Haters and fakes would invoke free speech rights whenever they wrought havoc and flame wars, and got reprimanded for doing so.

Is someone yelling "FIRE" in a crowded theater when they inflate problems or inflame tensions between peoples and trying to undermine a society, within a film or whatever medium of expression it may be? They are probably not, if that society is truly oppressive, but then what makes it oppressive, and who decides if a current system is beneficial or oppressive?

The lines are not always so easy to define.