Horror and Censorship

Horror and CensorshipBy Selina Argyrou

What do we learn about horror and censorship?

Horror films are full of different themes. They can be violent, gory, offensive, scary, funny or just a pinch of a few. However, when a film pushes societies boundaries of these themes, you can guess that they will become victim to the censorship board in some way. Today, horror fans are privileged to the fact that they can see nearly all horror films uncut. When a film is released worldwide throughout cinemas, it is rarely heavily censored, or if it is, you can bet that the 'unrated' DVD and Blu-Ray version would soon be released. Even the more extreme films which were banned such as the 'Cannibal Holocaust' and 'The Exorcist' are available, unrated, on DVD and Blu-ray.

Back in the 80's, video rental shops were around every corner, offering aisles of boxes covered with amazing horror poster art. These video tapes were made to catch the eyes of people wanting a new thrill or chill from the film, but it also caught the eye of other, more influential people. This lead to the creation of the term "video nasties" and soon this term wash splashed across newspapers, trying to ban these video nasties, films such as "I Spit On Your Grave," "Cannibal Terror," "The Fun House" and many more.

What do we learn about horror and censorship?

Video Nasties

Jamie Bulger

Many of these video nasties have been linked to having an influence over real life acts such as murder. A famous case of this was in 1993, of Jamie Bulger who was abducted and killed by two 1o year old boys, who reenacted a scene from the film "Childs Play" where a victim is splashed with blue plaint. This created an uproar of how censored films are available to anyone, of any age, in any place.

No evidence was found, to link video nasties to the death of Jamie Bulger. Britain had the tightest European laws on videos. David Maclean, Minister of State at the Home Office said; 'We cannot see any other way we can make the laws any tighter . . . no matter how tightly Parliament may classify films, what you watch in your own home as viewers is the decision of parents and youngsters.'

Hypodermic needle theoryThe hypodermic needle theory suggests that mass media such as as

films, posters, TV shows etc can be “shot” or “injected” into an audience for them to absorb which then can trigger a response. For

purposes such as adverts, this can be a good thing as it could trigger an audience to go out and buy a new perfume. However, with horror

movies, some people believe that people will absorb the film and become passive, have no thought for themselves and then decide to copy what they have just seen. Although there was no full evidence,

some people believe this is what could have happened to Jamie Bulger’s killers.

Censorship todayThe British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) have banned Human Centipede 2, as they believe it could cause psychological harm for viewers. Today, only 1% of films are rarely banned, and are instead cut, and passed as an over 18 rating. So what makes the Human Centipede 2 so bad?

The examiners of the BBFC, said that this sequel was “rotten” all the way to the very end. They also said that “There is little attempt to portray any of the victims in he film as anything other than objects to be brutalised, degraded and mutilated.”

Tom Six, the films writer and director was outraged, and believed that he made a horrific

film, but isn’t that what horror films are meant to be? Or is

there a limit for what kinds of horror can be

seen?

The Questions

1. Can censorship be controlled?This is a big question as censoring a movie by cutting out parts or, like Human Centipede 2, banning the entire thing, is only one part of control. This stops a film being shown on the cinema to a widespread audience but that’s not the only issue. Online streaming is hugely popular these days with thousands of websites and links to the newest releases of film, HD, on your own computer in your very home, for free. This gives people easy access to all sorts of films, including ones like Human Centipede 2. The BBFC have control on whether a film comes out to the public legally, on cinema or on DVD. But, some people believe the next level of control is up to the household parents, who must keep control of what their children watch, or can gain access to from their technological devices. Overall, censoring horror cannot be fully controlled as it is so easy to get access to films that people are not supposed to watch.

The Questions

2. Why censor some horrors, but not others? This is another interesting question, as some people believe it is up to your own personal opinion on ‘what is horror?’ So how do the BBFC decide what an audience is allowed to watch and what they are not allowed to watch?

Firstly, in the BBFC, a group of examiners will watch the film, if they flag it up as something that may need to be cut or banned, another group of examiners will look at it, and then it will be decided on what they should do. However, to fully decide, they use audience reaction from public view and opinion, and also from critics. This first showing is important to decide whether the film does need to be censored or not from for cinemas, DVD’s etc.

The cultural viewpoint is also crucial in censoring some horrors and not others. This is linked to the time the film is being released. For example, when 911 happened, all films with plane crashes involved were banned from being viewed during that time, and were not shown on cinemas or on TV. However, if done correctly, this can be a good thing for horrors to shock and scare people.

The Questions

3. Do people agree with the censorship of horror movies?The BBFC, and other rating systems all over the world, have to make the decision on whether they think a film can be shown or not. However, once they do decide, some people do not agree.

When looking at the public, many people believe that they should be able to choose what they can and can’t see and shouldn’t be told from rating systems such as the BBFC. They believe that they have their own thoughts and ideas on what is horror, and therefore should be able to choose whether they watch something or not. However, other people disagree and believe that censoring certain films is the best thing to do, to limit the access people have and to stop people from absorbing these films and then triggering a bad response.

For distributors of films that are banned or cut, you can already guess that they disagree with some of the rating systems decisions completely. An example of this is on the next slide.

‘Maniac’

New Zealand's rating system if called The Office of Film and Literature Classification (OFLC). This year, the film “Maniac” a film about a serial killer, is not allowed to be shown on cinema, or be released on DVD. This film is a remake of the 1980’s film with the same name, and is partly shot in first person perspective, making the audience feel as if they are experiencing murders through the killers eyes. The OFLC decided that this film was “so disturbing it shouldn't be seen by anyone.”

The movies distributors were outraged at this, saying that the film is “one of the finest horror films in recent years” and that it is “an insult to the intelligence of the adult population of New Zealand and does little more than to serve as an open invitation to illegally pirate the film” and they were right. A huge 18.4% of people illegally downloaded “Maniac” with UK coming in at 2nd of 8.6% and New Zealand 3rd with 6.7%. This film has gone viral, and although rating systems like the BBFC and OFLC think they have the final say, films are accessible all over the place, for free, even when its tried to be banned.

Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIyVWtVal7Y#t=123