Video Nasties: The Changing Attitudes Towards Film Censorship

The rise in home entertainment and the widespread introduction of video in the 1980's saw new concerns raised about what depraved movies people could be watching behind closed doors. The BBFC addressed these concerns by passing the Video Recordings Act in 1984. This meant a film could be banned if it was unsuitable for home viewing, or the studio would be asked to apply heavy cutting to the movie to make it suitable. Video Nasties such as Cannibal Holocaust, Driller Killer, Evil Dead, Cannibal Ferox and Last House on the Left were either banned or forced to make heavy cuts in order to pass the film.

At the time of the VRA Margaret Thatcher's Conservative government were in office, and often sympathised with conservative agents within the press like the 'Daily Mail' and their calls for these types of films to be banned.

The BBFC can often be pressurised by conservative agents within the press to ban certain types of film , and increase its authority. the Daily Mail is one such newspaper, in 2009 a film called Antichrist was released and passed by the BBFC, this prompted an online article on the Daily Mail website titled: 'What Does it take for a film to get banned these days'? Speaking of the movie Antichrist the article says: ' As censors approve a movie that plumbs grotesque new depths of sexual explicitness and violence, one critic (who prides himself on being broad-minded) despairs...A film which plumbs new depths of sexual explicitness, excruciating violence and degradation has just been passed as fit for general consumption by the British Board of Film Classification'.

The board also has to balance its liberal stances with conservative fears of film harming its audiences. This again shows the BBFC are moving its classification structure with the times, if the conservative government of the early 80s were in power today, the liberal stance of the BBFC would more than likely succumb to the censorship wishes of news organizations such as The Daily Mail.

In the early 90s there was a succession of dealers in illegal videos, who were tracked down in 1992. The people were in possession of titles banned at the time like 'Cannibal Holocaust' and banned pornographic material. The media at this time became increasingly concerned with the clampdown on video censorship, one headline in the Financial Times read: 'Are British VCR Owners Really Happy To Be Subjected To This Mrs Grundyish Nonsense'? . There was also a case in 1999 where two dealers in pornographic film were told by a judge at Nottingham Crown Court on 9th of June that there had been worse programmes he had seen on television.

Robin Duval, who is the current BBFC director, continued the work of his predecessor James Ferman of holding 'road shows' up and down the country in order to gauge public opinion on the boards standards, and in early 2000 had organized 'citizens juries' in Birmingham and Portsmouth, to further gauge public opinion on film and video classification. In September 2000 as a result of the findings, the BBFC published a new set of guidelines describing in detail the rationale behind its classification structure. Speaking in Sight and Sound Magazine in December 2001 Robin Duvall said:

'The public has told the BBFC that the boards guidelines should be more relaxed in the '18' category, but the board should be tougher on violence drug portrayal and bad language at lower classification levels'.

The most striking part about the BBFC'S changed structure was the considerable liberalisation of the R18 (Restricted 18) category. This effectively marked the legalisation of hardcore pornography in Britain, this continued the BBFC's more passive liberal approach when dealing with adult film, but children's classification categories would be heavily cut.

Saw Trailer

Films like Saw (above) in the '18' category are now largley passed without major cuts

The BBFC can no longer prevent widespread viewing of banned films. There are too many new technological mediums available today on the internet to download films, both legally and illegally. Many people of all age groups can access file sharing programmes such as the infamous Pirate Bay, according to a online BBC article ' Seven million people a year are estimated to download files illegally in the UK'. What the BBFC can do however is issue guidance online for users of official film download sites.

Film Censorship Online

In 2008 BBFC launched its voluntary online ratings system, this allowed the BBFC to extend its rating systems to online film downloads and some online games. Film companies that have joined the scheme include Warner Brothers, 20th Century Fox and Disney. This was on the basis that film companies provided their own age verification tools on their respective websites. The move came after the Byron review in to child safety online, it had recommended a clearer ratings system for online gaming, this based on existing BBFC labels.

The service also offered gate keeping systems to parents worried about what their children see online. This development in 2008 saw the BBFC prove that although their DVD classifications for older audiences had become more liberal, the BBFC still have a role to play in advising parents about what their children view online. The British Video Association working in conjunction with the BBFC took 18 months to finalise the concept, Lavinia Carey, the director general of the association, described the online world as 'an open frontier', but said the industry 'is determined to get its own house in order with this new type of business'.