BBFC - 1950s

1951

The new ‘X’ category is introduced to deal with controversial subjects. It incorporates the former ‘H’ category. The category excludes children under the age of 16. Many films are still cut to get into this category for things such as nudity, sex and drugs.

An increase in television ownership erodes the family cinema audience and causes teenage audience to increase. The popular Press suggests that certain films cause teenage criminality.

1954

‘The Wild One’ is rejected until 1967 because the BBFC describes it as ‘a spectacle of unbridled hooliganism’. Some authorities overturned the rejection and allow local releases. The Board cites 1964 riots in English seaside towns (Margate and Clacton) as justification for their decision.

1956

John Nichols replaces Watkins for two years before being replaced by John Trevelyan in 1958.

1960

‘Beat Girl’ fails to impress the Board with the film’s script about a teenage girl considering becoming a stripper to rebel against her father. It is judged to be 'the product of squalid and illiterate minds'. The film is cut several times to get an ‘X’ classification. It is currently a ‘12’ on video.

BBFC - 1912-1949

1912

The British Board of Film Censors is established.

1916

T.P. O’Connor is appointed President of the BBFC. He lays down 43 grounds for deletion for examiners. The list was so strict to earn the trust of the public.

1918 – 1939

Between the First and Second World Wars, several film genres and themes cause concern. These include horrors, gangster films and films dealing with sexuality.

Some councils bar children from ‘A’ rated films in this period.

1948

Arthur Watkins is appointed Secretary to the Board. He was a successful playwright coming from the Home Office. They give advice to many film-makers on scripts.

Watkins and the new President, Harris formulate terms of reference for the BBFC on based on the following:

• Was the story, incident or dialogue likely to impair the moral standards of the public by extenuating vice or crime or depreciating moral standards?
• Was it likely to give offence to reasonably minded cinema audiences?
• What effect would it have on children?

Besides the ‘H’ (for horror) category (which many councils used), there was no category excluding children. An ‘adults only category was seen as desirable to protect children and to allow film-makers to deal with adult subjects.

‘Frankenstein’ (1931) had a sequence cut from it in which the monster drowns a small girl. The film received the ‘H’ category in 1932 to suggest its unsuitability for children. The London County Council and Manchester City Council banned children from seeing it.

BBFC Seminar Reflections

I think that this seminar was particularly useful because I got a better understand of how the actual process works, as opposed to just the final result. It was also very useful to hear about the BBFC from a personal angle.

Although I learnt a lot from this talk, I have 5 interesting facts:

• The BBFC used to be about censoring films, not classifying them, hence why the C stood for Censors
• BBFC board members are much public than they used to be in the past, they now stand for transparency
• Every country’s classification system, including ours, is mainly based around people’s values
• Films must be watched in the same way that audiences would see them (in 3D, with subtitles, etc.)
• If somebody believes a film was classified incorrectly, that classifier must reply and justify their rating

Ways to improve the film classification system

The two main problems I have with the way films are classified are that:

1. It doesn’t necessarily work for everyone
2. Not enough people know about it

In relation to my first point, I don’t actually think there is another practical way to classify film for people; the system we have isn’t perfect but it’s the best one we have.

Concerning the fact that not enough people know about the BBFC and that they can access information on ratings, I believe this can be solved with some promotion.

For a start, the BBFC’s website gives information as to why every film receives the rating it does. If this information was available in cinemas or placing selling films, I believe this would drastically reduce the number of complaints with the BBFC’s guidelines (from parents who take their child to see a more mature film).

Alternatively, an advertising campaign in cinemas, on TV or otherwise encouraging parents to check the BBFC site for classification information would definitely benefit the BBFC.

Does the film classification system work?

I believe that the system should work but due to the nature of people, it doesn’t completely.

Although I believe to an extent that children must be protected to an extent, the fact that there is no evidence for films causing harm makes me believe that the vulnerable must be protected in other ways.

For example, I don’t believe that somebody would witness criminal activity, drug – taking etc. in a film and then go to do it unless they already had plans to do it in the first place. If anything, society needs to be protected from these people instead of the films that allegedly made them think and act this way.

I do however believe that a young child should not see certain things in case they start to develop concepts such as profanity from an early age but I don’t see why films must be one of the few media that actually has to teach them morality. There are other media; books, art, music that very rarely compromise in a similar way.

Pros and cons of current film classification

For

• It is relevant our modern culture and society
• The system is regularly updated based on audiences’ views
• Focuses on protecting younger generations from harm
• People (local councils) are able to act against guidelines
• The BBFC takes the work very seriously

Against

• Not upheld very effectively in the real world
• Unable to completely protect children
• Encourages production of ‘safe’ but ‘dull’ movies (for a wider audience)
• Can’t be applied to everybody because people are different
• The BBFC is relatively unknown, parents don’t seek out information
• No evidence that films actually cause ‘harm’
• Films may be classified with only the working classes in mind

18 > R18

‘18’ and ‘R18’ are very similar except that ‘R18’ may have:

• Unjustified sexual context
• Explicit images of sexual activity

15 > 18

‘15’ and ‘18’ are very similar except that ‘18’ may have anything acceptable in a movie unless it serves to stimulate.

12a > 15

‘12a’ and ‘15’ are very similar except that ‘15’ may have:

• Drug taking but not generally encouraged in the film
• Strong threat and menace
• Frequent use of strong language and the strongest terms, e.g. ‘cunt’ if justified
• Any nudity if educational or non-sexual
• Nudity in a sexual context without strong detail
• Detailed sexual activity
• Strong verbal references to sexual behaviour
• Any theme suitable for the age group
• Detailed references to sexual violence
• Portrayal of sexual violence if justified

PG > 12a

‘PG’ and ‘12a’ are very similar except that ‘12a’ may have:

• Aggressive discrimination if clearly condemned
• Misuse of drugs, but infrequent, criticised and not shown in detail
• Moderate physical and psychological threat
• Dangerous behaviour (but not dwelled upon or shown to be harm free)
• Moderate language and infrequent use of strong language e.g. ‘fuck’
• Brief nudity in a sexual context
• Discreet portrayal of sexual activity
• More mature themes
• Gory moments if justified by context
• Implied sexual violence if justified

U > PG

‘U’ and ‘PG’ are very similar except that ‘PG’ may have:

• More serious themes
• Discreet mentions of sex and relationships
• Stronger violence and threat
• Scary but not prolonged horror
• Discrimination, if given context

R18

Very little is not permitted for ‘R18’ films although they must be distributed in specialist locations.

‘R18’s must still not breach the BBFC’s guidelines obviously.

18

Little is cut from ‘18’ films as adults can watch what they want, however the following is not allowed:

• Promotion or encouragement of drug taking
• Material produced in breach of the law
• Detailed portrayal of violent or dangerous acts which may cause harm
• Unjustified explicit unjustified sexual activity

15

• The strongest language may be used (such as ‘cunt’) although continued use it not.
• Strong threat and menace is allowed without the strongest gory images.
• Drug taking may be shown as long as the film does not promote their misuse.
• Misuse of easily accessible substances such as solvents is typically unacceptable.
• The following may also be included: strong violence, sexual activity, strong sex references, sexual nudity, brief sexual violence, discriminatory behaviour.

12a

• Strong language (such as ‘fuck) is allowed if infrequent and given context.
• Moderate language (such as ‘bitch’ and ‘twat’) is allowed.
• Discrimination is allowed if not endorsed by the film.
• Sex may be discreetly portrayed.
• Nudity is allowed but must be brief in a sexual context.
• Moderate violence is allowed but should not dwell on detail.
• Gory moments are permitted if justified.
• Sexual violence must be implied and heavily justified by context.
• Moderate threat is permitted if disturbing sequences are not sustained.
• Dangerous imitable behaviour may be present without detail.
• Easily accessible weapons should not be glamorised.

PG

• A ‘PG’ film is suitable for general viewing.
• No theme is prohibited as long as it is treated appropriately.
• Mild bad language is permitted such as ‘shit’ and ‘son of a bitch’ with context.
• Sex is acceptable if implied and lacking detail.
• Bloody violence is permitted if the cause of injuries is not shown.
• ‘Jump’ moments are allowed but realism and sustained threat is not.
• Realistic weapons will be glamorised.
• There must be no strong focus on drug references

U

• A ‘U’ film is suitable for anybody four years and over.
• Very mild bad language is allowed such as ‘damn’ and ‘hell’.
• Characters may kiss or cuddle or make references to covert references to sex.
• Brief moments of characters in danger are permitted if they are quickly resolved.
• Weapons may be permitted if there is no emphasis on it.
• Easily imitable behaviour presented as fun will not be present.
• A children’s work at ‘U’ should contain a positive message.
• Discrimination is unlikely to be present unless clearly disapproved of.
• Drugs references are allowed if brief and given education context.

Discrimination

As of 2009, the BBFC have also had to consider how a film features discrimination.

Discrimination relates to the 5 matters of:

1. Race
2. Gender
3. Religion
4. Disability
5. Sexuality

Classifiers must also take into account the impact of including discrimination.

Less restrictive categories may be given to films which explicitly criticise discriminatory behaviour or seek to challenge such attitudes.

Legal Issues

More information concerning the legal issues involved in BBFC film classification can be found here.

The acts that must be considered are:

• Human Rights Act 1998
• The Licensing Act 2003
• The Video Recordings Act 1984
• The Obscene Publications Act 1959 & 1964
• Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008
• The Protection of Children Act 1978
• The Sexual Offences Act 2003
• The Public Order Act 1986
• The Cinematograph Films (Animals) Act 1937
• The Animal Welfare Act 2006
• The Tobacco Advertising and Promotion Act 2002

Theme

The sensitivity of a theme's presentation will be the main factor affecting classification.

Most themes are allowed to be classified at '15' or '18'.

The most problematic themes are inappropriate for junior levels of classification; these themes include:

• Drug abuse
• Sexual violence
• Paedophilia
• Incitement to racial hatred