British Board Of Film Classification example essay topic

With opinions becoming more polarized, the government set up a committee, chaired by the philosopher Bernard Williams, to review the laws concerning obscenity, indecency and violence in publications, displays and entertainments in England and Wales, except in the field of broadcasting, and to review the arrangements for film censorship in England and Wales. Appointed on 13 July 1977, its report was published in November 1979. Its recommendations were not followed up by the new Conservative government of Margaret Thatcher. The first censorial move by the Thatcher administration was to bring cinema clubs which of course were mostly showing porn films within the scope of the licensing regulations.

A private members bill, the Cinematograph (Amendment) Bill, was introduced in 1982 but, as was pointed out in a letter to The Times by David Fisher, the editor of Screen Digest (OK, it was me), the bill was so loosely worded in terms of exhibition of moving pictures for commercial gain that it could equally apply to such things as training films and point-of-sale video displays. It was argued that it had never been the intention of the bill to extend to other activities but experience tells us that it is the letter of the law, not the spirit that counts. An Act intended to ensure that only qualified midwives delivered babies, as opposed to unqualified midwives, had just been used to prosecute a man for delivering his wife's baby at home without medical assistance. The bill was hastily redrafted and was passed (and not without a mention in both Houses of Parliament of that letter to The Times and its writer). British law gives local authorities powers of film censorship the basis of the classification system remains self-regulation voluntary and non-statutory. Case law has grown up around BBFC decisions, however.

In November 1996, the European Court of Human Rights upheld the BBFC decision to ban the film Visions of Ecstasy, about the life of St Teresa of Avila, on the grounds that is could be blasphemous. (The concept of blasphemy became a debating point in Britain for a while during the 1990's.) When classifying a film many aspects have to be put into consideration, the use of violence, sex and bad language can change the certification dramatically. British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) is a private body, which has considerable power over the showing of films. The BBFC has developed a system of certification for films that provides guidance on the public acceptability of the film. Distributors pay a certification fee, and the Director of Public Prosecutions will not prosecute films that have been granted certificates.

The Video Recordings Act 1984 gives the BBFC statutory recognition as the regulator of licensing of videos charged with monitoring material that is suitable for home viewing. Censorship bodies have written the rules about what is prohibited in films, and these have been subject to change over time, depending partly on the expressed concern of the public, but mainly on what the government and the main church of the country wants. In more recent times, such censorship bodies have surrendered to their power, particularly in the United States, where censorship has returned to the local level, and the central body only classifies films with respect to their content as suitable for various age groups. In the United Kingdom, the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC), as it is now called, has modified its classifications to tie in with the American model.

British films are now classified U when considered suitable for the whole population, PG (Parental Guidance) when they contain scenes that may be unsuitable for young children, 12 as suitable for children over the age of 12, 15 when suitable for people over 15 years, and 18 when suitable for people over 18 years. However, the final decision as to whether a film can be exhibited still lies with the local authority. The BBFC also classifies videocassette recordings in the same way, and in this area its classifications have more direct legal force. Under provisions of the license of the British Broadcasting Company (BBC) the British Home Secretary has the power to prohibit the BBC from broadcasting any item or program at any time. Furthermore, under recent legislation, commercial television companies are subject to similar restrictions. The discretion of the Home Secretary is extremely wide and can only be challenged on the basis that the Home Secretary is acting improperly.

One example of a legal challenge to a broadcasting ban was the Brand case in 1990 when the Home Secretary exercised his judgment to ban the transmission of interviews with representatives of certain groups, including the Irish political party- Sinn Fein. The House of Lords considered a judicial review in respect of the ban, but upheld the minister's exercise of discretion. The judges did not consider the European Convention on Human Rights, which restricts violation of freedom of expression, to be relevant and found that the minister had not acted unreasonably in utilizes a ban to try to prevent publicity to terrorists. In practice, broadcasters were able to circumvent the ban by dubbing the voices of actors over the voices of the banned speakers. By putting an age boundary on the side of a video box the BBFC hope that it will stop 15 year olds watching an 18 movie or 12 year olds trying to watch a film classified 15. I feel the age boundaries shouldnt stop the public from watching the film; it should just be a warning to the viewer that they are about to watch a film, which more than likely will contain scenes of violence and / or bad language, it is then up to them if they want to view such material.

The BBFC are trying to protect us from seeing things that may disturb us, even though violence, prostitution and foul language goes on all around us everyday. If you dont like horror films and get scared, why watch them? The age guidelines should not tell you if you are or are not allowed to watch the film, it should be your choice, and if you are considering watching an 18 film, at that age you should be old enough to make the decision by yourself. Would it disturb you? If the answer to that is yes, then maybe that film is not for you.

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre is a brutal film involving the deaths of a group of teenagers while they are on holiday. The film was unavailable for decades as it was too disturbing for the public to view, but eventually it was shown on television on channel 4 as part of a horror weekend. This shows that the BBFC is getting more relaxed with classifying films as they realize that we the public should not be kept in the dark.