Research: Film censorship

what is film censorship?
Film censorship is when a film is re-edited to either cut out or change scenes due to the content it shows as it may be considered harmful to the public. A film can either be banned from a country or asked to be to cut a few times so that the content is not too disturbing and the BBFC find it suitable for a certain age group.

 

 

Role of the bbfc

The BBFC is responsible for the national film classification of the united kingdom. Their job is to protect the public from any harmful and offensive content that could potentially harm any members of the public by stopping it from being released into the cinemas until changes are made to the film. e.g. specific scenes are cut etc. However For cinema releases, the BBFC have no legal power. This in turn means that films do not have to be submitted for classification simply because it is mainly the councils duty to decide which age group should be allowed to see a certain film. Most films apply the BBFC's certificates which make them legally-binding; this means that an agreement has been consciously made between the film creator and the BBFC and the council.

 

 

 

Films get censored to keep the audience away from content that is seen as too disturbing or potentially harmful; In some cases films are sent back to the editing stage due to religious reasons or the representation of real life events e.g. a film that is identical to the story of the twin towers.

Contents of a film that may get censored

• extreme violence
• rape
• sexual content
• drug abuse
• sexual violence
• graphic scenes
• toture

 When a film is Banned it is removed from cinema viewing completely due to harmful or offensive content. This is done to protect the public from any harmful material that they may be exposed to while watching the film. Within a thriller it may be banned or cut due to it being seen as harmful or too disturbing for young audiences.

A example of a banned filmed is the Cannibal Holocaust which is an Italian horror film that is banned to this day in over 50 different countries due to the film's content being too disturbing.

When a film is sent to be Cut certain scenes within the film is then either edited or completely removed. This is done to make the film more appropriate for public viewing.

For example, the Exorcist which released in 1973 was sent to be cut or else it would be banned from cinema viewing. Although changes were made to the film it was still banned in many different towns and countries across the world as the film was described as '' horrifyingly scary ''.The Exorcist eventually passed the British Board Of Film Censorship (BBFC) and was given an age rating of 18 however, the film wasn't available in the UK until 1990 when it finally got the all clear pass from the BBFC.

 Forna Vs. Kermode debate:
In 1999 Channel 4 broadcasted a short season of programmes about censorship. During this season it showed two short programmes; one of them was about a case fighting for the use of censorship, and the other was against the use of censorship.
Fighting for was a journalist and broadcaster called Aminatta Forna and fighting against was a film critic and broadcaster: Mark Kermode.

Three arguments made by Forna for censorship were...

1. The public associate themselves with different characters and may be influenced to put themselves in that situation
2. Some films may start to break down the barriers us as humans put up, for example there may be a film about a woman being raped however the woman starts to enjoy even though before they watched the film the audience would think it wrong for her to do so.
3. The power of words and images featured in some films may affect the audience and have the potential to stir racial hatred etc.

Three arguments made by Kermode against censorship were...

1. Everyone has different reactions and interpretations on what they see in the film.
2. It is unfair that we are being told what we can and can't watch. As human beings we know what is right and what is wrong so it should be our choice whether to watch it or not.
3. The issue of responsibility; policing films is impossible, the films we watch should'nt be seen to be encouraging however they should be seen as showing the audience realistic situations e.g. rape/ murder etc.

Out of these arguments I find Forna the most persuasive because when we go to watch a film we don't always know what to expect  because trailers do not want to give away to much information, however we are able to read the story line on the IMDB website which will enable us to judge if we want to watch a certain film or not and also give us an insight on what we should expect from the film. Furthermore I see Kermode's debate as legitimate however insufficent in key knowledge, this is beause he is relating his arguments to his own beliefs and ideologies, he has not looked at how all different people in the public may react towards a certain film whereas Forna has.