0:00:06 > 0:00:09This programme contains scenes of sexual violence, very strong language
0:00:09 > 0:00:12and scenes which some viewers may find upsetting.
0:00:17 > 0:00:21Right in the heart of London is the smallest cinema in the world.
0:00:21 > 0:00:24It only has four seats. That's all.
0:00:24 > 0:00:27Yet this little cinema wields immense power,
0:00:27 > 0:00:30and presiding over it is the ogre, the man who decides what
0:00:30 > 0:00:33and what not you're going to see in your local cinemas.
0:00:33 > 0:00:37So I'd like you to meet now the Secretary of the British Board of Film Censors.
0:00:37 > 0:00:41Well, here we are. One of the ogres in question.
0:00:41 > 0:00:46I'm quite sure that the average member of the public never sees a censor.
0:00:46 > 0:00:50From his office in Soho Square, the film censor keeps an eye
0:00:50 > 0:00:54on Wardour Street, filmland's headquarters, just round the corner.
0:00:54 > 0:00:57His job's to protect the public from the excesses of the industry
0:00:57 > 0:00:59and the industry from the intolerance of the public.
0:00:59 > 0:01:02Honestly, we cannot have language like this.
0:01:02 > 0:01:08I'm sure you'll use your discretion and keep the language as mild as you can.
0:01:10 > 0:01:11Dear Max.
0:01:11 > 0:01:14Delete shot of chicken hanging outside the door.
0:01:14 > 0:01:18Remove all shorts of her kissing the phallic bone.
0:01:18 > 0:01:22I have considered the cuts you suggest, but I feel they would reduce the film to nonsense.
0:01:22 > 0:01:26What you've got in the archives of the BBFC is a sort
0:01:26 > 0:01:29of map of British taste and sensibility.
0:01:29 > 0:01:32Too much gratuitous nudity.
0:01:32 > 0:01:35Take out people smoking pot, lesbians and homos.
0:01:37 > 0:01:41Cut the shot of Mother Superior masturbating.
0:01:41 > 0:01:45We have no rules, which I think is important.
0:01:45 > 0:01:48- I think it's the only way to do it. - That's interesting.
0:01:51 > 0:01:54If you've got a body regulating film,
0:01:54 > 0:02:01with a relatively narrow range of options - ban it, cut it, classify it -
0:02:01 > 0:02:04Then sometimes they're going to get it right.
0:02:04 > 0:02:06Sometimes they're going to get it wrong.
0:02:06 > 0:02:10Dear God, that's Sylvester Stallone's dick and it's going up.
0:02:10 > 0:02:12Going up and down and up and down and up and down.
0:02:21 > 0:02:24I thought "Hello, hello."
0:02:24 > 0:02:26"This is actually going a bit far."
0:02:32 > 0:02:36The whole point of the movie is "Blah!"
0:02:38 > 0:02:43But you've got to turn it into something that goes "Bleurgh?"
0:02:43 > 0:02:44I did warn you!
0:02:52 > 0:02:54Life couldn't be sweeter for the Smiths.
0:02:54 > 0:02:58Joan is cutting flowers for the table, and this weekend
0:02:58 > 0:03:00they're off to the pictures.
0:03:02 > 0:03:06In the earlier years of the board, the film industry often shared the
0:03:06 > 0:03:10board's view that cinema was meant to be a place for family entertainment.
0:03:10 > 0:03:14The films should be clean, they should be entertaining.
0:03:16 > 0:03:19From the 50s onwards, cinema audiences declined,
0:03:19 > 0:03:23the emphasis changed to showing more adult content,
0:03:23 > 0:03:26material that would appeal to teenagers.
0:03:28 > 0:03:32And material that, arguably, sections of the public wouldn't accept.
0:03:32 > 0:03:36and it was really at that point that the board
0:03:36 > 0:03:39entered into its period of friction with distributors.
0:03:39 > 0:03:43The Wild One would expose the board to justifiable criticism,
0:03:43 > 0:03:48for certificating a film so potentially dangerous on social grounds.
0:03:48 > 0:03:50Arthur Watkins, Secretary.
0:03:51 > 0:03:55The censor in the early 50s was a man called Arthur Watkins, a rather kind
0:03:55 > 0:04:01of patrician figure, and a man who fancied himself as a writer as well.
0:04:01 > 0:04:05But had slightly kind of fusty ideas about what interesting writing should be.
0:04:05 > 0:04:10If you can look at Monroe and keep your virtue,
0:04:10 > 0:04:13or talk with Rank, nor lose the common touch.
0:04:15 > 0:04:19If you can fill five hours of every day,
0:04:19 > 0:04:21with 60 minutes' worth of footage run,
0:04:23 > 0:04:26the cinema is yours and everything that's in it,
0:04:28 > 0:04:32and which is more, you'll be a censor, my son.
0:04:35 > 0:04:42And that, with your permission, is what I and my colleagues must now be.
0:04:53 > 0:04:58Arthur Watkins' reign as censor coincides with the post-war
0:04:58 > 0:05:01explosion of movies that had been held up by the Second World War,
0:05:01 > 0:05:04and suddenly an awful lot of films are appearing on the scene,
0:05:04 > 0:05:07and also an awful lot of films that deal with adult subjects.
0:05:09 > 0:05:10All of you stand back.
0:05:10 > 0:05:12Where can I get me one of these jazzy suits?
0:05:12 > 0:05:16I want to look like a street cleaner too!
0:05:16 > 0:05:17Hey, who are you?
0:05:17 > 0:05:20What are you doing here, are you a cop or something?
0:05:23 > 0:05:25Don't push anybody.
0:05:25 > 0:05:27That was a bit of a shock, I think, probably, in early '50s England,
0:05:27 > 0:05:31where you didn't mock figures of authority in that way.
0:05:31 > 0:05:35That was thought to be sort of surly, bolshy behaviour.
0:05:37 > 0:05:39Note from examiners.
0:05:39 > 0:05:43Brando is certainly an accessory to larceny, malicious damage to property,
0:05:43 > 0:05:49false imprisonment, assault and battery, insulting behaviour and reckless driving.
0:05:49 > 0:05:52And the problem with the film for the censors wasn't that there was
0:05:52 > 0:05:54some scene of outrageous violence in it,
0:05:54 > 0:05:59it was more to do with the kind of sneer of contempt that the
0:05:59 > 0:06:03film expresses in every frame, towards adult authority.
0:06:03 > 0:06:07Brando is attractive. Admirable. Imitable.
0:06:07 > 0:06:11You've got a lot of anxiety about young people in this country.
0:06:19 > 0:06:22The teddy boys were quite tough people to deal with.
0:06:22 > 0:06:26You know, they carried their chibbies, their little razors, and
0:06:26 > 0:06:30fights between razor gangs in London, you know, it was not undocumented.
0:06:40 > 0:06:44"But once the trouble was on the way, I was just going with it."
0:06:44 > 0:06:46Brando says in the dialogue.
0:06:46 > 0:06:50This is precisely the psychology of the teddy boys.
0:06:51 > 0:06:56It was banned outright in '53, and when you see it today,
0:06:56 > 0:06:57you can't imagine why.
0:06:57 > 0:07:01I mean, these juvenile delinquents are all played by middle-aged men,
0:07:01 > 0:07:03which is rather far-fetched.
0:07:03 > 0:07:05They just don't seem like delinquents at all.
0:07:09 > 0:07:11Don't do that.
0:07:17 > 0:07:20Dear Sirs, we regret we are unable to issue
0:07:20 > 0:07:25a certificate for this spectacle of unbridled hooliganism.
0:07:26 > 0:07:30The film company are desperate to get it passed with cuts.
0:07:30 > 0:07:34Dear Arthur, have you any suggestions at all that could be
0:07:34 > 0:07:38the means of changing the board's present decision?
0:07:38 > 0:07:41It is terrible that a costly picture will have to be placed
0:07:41 > 0:07:45on the shelf without a penny worth of revenue accruing from this territory.
0:07:48 > 0:07:50Dear Max.
0:07:50 > 0:07:53Our concern about this film is related to the subject as a whole.
0:07:53 > 0:07:57That is, the basic story, the beginning, middle and end.
0:07:59 > 0:08:00My dear Arthur Watkins,
0:08:00 > 0:08:06what our film portrays is a matter that could not happen in England.
0:08:06 > 0:08:11The distributor brought the film back to the board again and again and again.
0:08:11 > 0:08:16My dear Arthur Watkins, while in your fascinating city I do wish to mix
0:08:16 > 0:08:20some business with whatever pleasure visits to London do provide.
0:08:20 > 0:08:26This includes a respectful petition that you once again view The Wild One.
0:08:26 > 0:08:30I am glad to hear you are shortly coming to London, but I do not think
0:08:30 > 0:08:34there can be any question at this stage of our re-opening the subject.
0:08:38 > 0:08:43We take no pleasure whatever in cutting or banning films.
0:08:43 > 0:08:47There is no truth in the cartoon which depicted our President
0:08:47 > 0:08:51and his colleagues, outside this theatre, and the President saying
0:08:51 > 0:08:56"Gentlemen, let's see it through once again and then ban it."
0:08:56 > 0:09:00The ban stuck until 1967, by which point it had become this
0:09:00 > 0:09:04rather innocuous, rather archaic object.
0:09:04 > 0:09:06A little message from the past.
0:09:10 > 0:09:14The film that came along after The Wild One, that sort of tested it,
0:09:14 > 0:09:19was Rebel Without A Cause, which was obviously the must-see film of 1955.
0:09:19 > 0:09:21You're tearing me apart!
0:09:22 > 0:09:24What?
0:09:24 > 0:09:27You! You say one thing, he says another and everybody changes back again.
0:09:27 > 0:09:30That's a fine way to behave.
0:09:30 > 0:09:32Well, you know who he takes after.
0:09:34 > 0:09:37Notes on Rebel Without A Cause.
0:09:37 > 0:09:40It is another story involving delinquency, this time
0:09:40 > 0:09:45with the accent on the sins of neglectful and quarrelling parents.
0:09:45 > 0:09:51When Rebel Without A Cause was submitted to the BBFC, the distributor was keen to obtain
0:09:51 > 0:09:54an A classification rather than an X.
0:09:54 > 0:09:59Obviously because the X certificate at the time not only limited the audience,
0:09:59 > 0:10:02but limited the number of cinema chains that were prepared to show the film.
0:10:02 > 0:10:05We have given the most careful consideration to
0:10:05 > 0:10:10the request about regrading Rebel Without A Cause in the A category.
0:10:10 > 0:10:13The main obstacle is the behaviour of the parents in the film.
0:10:13 > 0:10:17It's in fact James Dean's rather caricatured dad.
0:10:17 > 0:10:21This sort of effeminate figure played by Jim Backus, Mr Magoo,
0:10:21 > 0:10:25who you see wearing an apron and being henpecked or whatever.
0:10:25 > 0:10:28It's sort of suggested that if he were more of a man,
0:10:28 > 0:10:31then James Dean wouldn't be such a screw-up.
0:10:33 > 0:10:35Dad.
0:10:42 > 0:10:45Dad.
0:10:48 > 0:10:50Stan... Don't...
0:10:50 > 0:10:52I mean, you shouldn't... Don't...
0:10:56 > 0:10:58What are you...?
0:11:01 > 0:11:05Children, even accompanied, should not be allowed to witness
0:11:05 > 0:11:08the spectacle of ridiculous and ineffectual parents.
0:11:10 > 0:11:14You know, for the director, Nicholas Ray, this was the whole point of the film.
0:11:14 > 0:11:17The weakness of these authority figures.
0:11:17 > 0:11:20Dear Arthur, I have considered the cuts you suggest we make
0:11:20 > 0:11:23in order to gain an A certificate,
0:11:23 > 0:11:26but I feel they would reduce the film to nonsense.
0:11:28 > 0:11:33Rebel Without A Cause was seen by us on 14th October 1955,
0:11:33 > 0:11:36and after considerable deliberation amongst ourselves,
0:11:36 > 0:11:38passed in the X category.
0:11:49 > 0:11:52John Trevelyan was this wonderful scholarly, lined face.
0:11:52 > 0:11:54He looked like the headmaster of Eton.
0:11:54 > 0:11:58And he could go on television and defend his decisions,
0:11:58 > 0:12:00and he washed away all opposition.
0:12:00 > 0:12:04Mary Whitehouse, everybody. They looked silly compared to him.
0:12:04 > 0:12:06He looked like the Brain of Britain.
0:12:06 > 0:12:10John gave the same impression of a very senior citizen
0:12:10 > 0:12:13who knew what he was talking about.
0:12:13 > 0:12:17And, when John sat there holding his hand up with his cigarette,
0:12:17 > 0:12:19you really believed what he was saying.
0:12:19 > 0:12:21We had no rules,
0:12:21 > 0:12:24which I think is important. I think it's the only way to do it.
0:12:24 > 0:12:29If you have your rules, you've either got to stick to them right through,
0:12:29 > 0:12:32or you've got to interpret them, and I think either is foolish.
0:12:32 > 0:12:37So therefore, we've tried to assess what we believe
0:12:37 > 0:12:41are public attitudes at any one time, and to work on those.
0:12:47 > 0:12:51The Garden of Eden was an American naturism film
0:12:51 > 0:12:53that arrived at the Board in 1955.
0:12:53 > 0:12:58At the time, the Board had a pretty strict policy on nudity.
0:13:01 > 0:13:04"Note from examiners."
0:13:04 > 0:13:07"I think the Garden of Eden would produce very noisy reactions
0:13:07 > 0:13:10"at tough cinemas like The Elephant."
0:13:10 > 0:13:14"There are some unconsciously funny nudes,"
0:13:14 > 0:13:17"especially one young lady with peculiar gluteal muscles."
0:13:19 > 0:13:23"The question of precedent must be the overriding one here."
0:13:23 > 0:13:26The British Board of Film Censors
0:13:26 > 0:13:30couldn't actually legally oblige a film to disappear.
0:13:30 > 0:13:35This was just advice for councils when they were handing out permits.
0:13:35 > 0:13:39And it produces odd anomalies, so that the Board could disapprove
0:13:39 > 0:13:41but that a council could pass it.
0:13:41 > 0:13:46So, at first the board decided to resist the march of the nudists.
0:13:46 > 0:13:51But this was something they couldn't get local councils to agree with.
0:13:51 > 0:13:55And so councils allowed these films to be shown against the advice
0:13:55 > 0:13:59of the BBFC, which made them seem very old-fashioned,
0:13:59 > 0:14:01very out of touch.
0:14:04 > 0:14:06So, in 1958, John Trevelyan,
0:14:06 > 0:14:09a man really of deeply liberal instincts,
0:14:09 > 0:14:13who can see that this is a preposterous situation
0:14:13 > 0:14:16that is making them look utterly foolish.
0:14:16 > 0:14:20"This film was recently reconsidered by this Board,
0:14:20 > 0:14:24"and it was decided to rescind the previous decision,
0:14:24 > 0:14:29"and to pass the film with an 'A' certificate. John Trevelyan, Secretary."
0:14:29 > 0:14:34I think Trevelyan revoked the ban on Garden Of Eden
0:14:34 > 0:14:37with a certain degree of reluctance.
0:14:37 > 0:14:40This was probably because he felt that
0:14:40 > 0:14:43this was the beginning of a slippery slope.
0:14:43 > 0:14:48Other film-makers with perhaps even less reputable intentions
0:14:48 > 0:14:50would try to jump on the bandwagon.
0:14:50 > 0:14:55All the cheap distributors, and I was working for them at the time, said,
0:14:55 > 0:14:59"This is it, we can make a fortune! We'll make a film with nudists." There had to be nudists.
0:14:59 > 0:15:04My people rang me up. They said, "In two or three weeks' time, we're starting a nudist film."
0:15:04 > 0:15:05"Where is it? You write it."
0:15:05 > 0:15:09So I wrote this ludicrous film called Some Like It Cool.
0:15:10 > 0:15:12Who are you writing to?
0:15:12 > 0:15:13Mum and Dad.
0:15:13 > 0:15:15I bet they haven't recovered from your last letter.
0:15:15 > 0:15:17- We haven't.- My darling girl.
0:15:17 > 0:15:21- Please, mother, don't make a scene. - "Don't make a scene," she says!
0:15:21 > 0:15:22Put yourselves in our place.
0:15:22 > 0:15:23Have a cup of tea.
0:15:23 > 0:15:25Tea? At a time like this?
0:15:25 > 0:15:27Well, it is tea time.
0:15:27 > 0:15:34The film was officially sold to the BBFC as an educational work of some sort.
0:15:34 > 0:15:37But, of course, the Board knew that it was nothing of the sort,
0:15:37 > 0:15:42and that it was an excuse to show breasts and buttocks.
0:15:42 > 0:15:44It cost £9,000.
0:15:44 > 0:15:47It made its budget back the first week.
0:15:47 > 0:15:49Unheard of in the history of cinema.
0:15:49 > 0:15:53And, strangely enough, although it was a rubbish film,
0:15:53 > 0:15:56it greatly impressed people in Wardour Street
0:15:56 > 0:15:58which was then the movie capital of London.
0:15:58 > 0:16:03"My God, Winner's made a film for £9,000, he's making £200,000!"
0:16:03 > 0:16:08"We're not getting results like this with our films, with people with clothes on."
0:16:08 > 0:16:12The horse had very much bolted after Garden of Eden,
0:16:12 > 0:16:16and the Board simply had to concede that it had lost the argument on nudity.
0:16:20 > 0:16:25I believe that John Trevelyan created the sexual revolution.
0:16:25 > 0:16:30Suddenly, nudity and pubic hair could be shown.
0:16:35 > 0:16:38Trevelyan wasn't the man who stood aloof from the film business.
0:16:38 > 0:16:43There are lots of pictures of him hanging out with Andy Warhol, and people like that.
0:16:43 > 0:16:48He was a member of a cinema club in Soho that showed uncertificated films.
0:16:50 > 0:16:54When he came back from a very good lunch at a local restaurant,
0:16:54 > 0:16:57he would say to us, "Who's fucking who today?"
0:16:59 > 0:17:01Which went down very well!
0:17:03 > 0:17:07You love the idea of being the guy who would go through Soho,
0:17:07 > 0:17:10and everyone knew who was, because in a way,
0:17:10 > 0:17:13he was the person who was keeping everyone's house in order.
0:17:15 > 0:17:18So, throughout the 60s, Trevelyan is overseeing this process
0:17:18 > 0:17:23of liberalisation and permitting more and more as the decade progresses.
0:17:23 > 0:17:27So, in 1967, you get the first use of the word "fuck",
0:17:27 > 0:17:30in the film of Ulysses.
0:17:30 > 0:17:35In the same year, you get full frontal female nudity in Blow-Up.
0:17:35 > 0:17:37And in Hugs And Kisses.
0:17:37 > 0:17:41And in 1969, you get full-frontal male nudity,
0:17:41 > 0:17:45historically much more problematic but there it is in Ken Russell's
0:17:45 > 0:17:49film, under that candlelight, on that Axminster carpet.
0:18:04 > 0:18:05That's good.
0:18:05 > 0:18:09We've got two pretty big stars, pretty hip stars at the time as well.
0:18:09 > 0:18:14Full-frontal nudity, lots of it and quite a protracted scene.
0:18:16 > 0:18:20I think it needs to be remembered that this is only two years
0:18:20 > 0:18:26after sodomy for men over 21 is made legal in Britain.
0:18:26 > 0:18:31We have a scene here which may be a healthy heterosexual bit of
0:18:31 > 0:18:37wrestling, but is probably something else and Lawrence's novel and his
0:18:37 > 0:18:41prefaces to the novel, evidences that there is certainly something else going on.
0:18:43 > 0:18:48This was an extraordinary climate in which film-makers are in cahoots
0:18:48 > 0:18:51with sensors from the outset, from the shooting script.
0:18:52 > 0:18:55Larry Kramer, who writes the screenplay of Women In Love
0:18:55 > 0:18:59and produces it and collaborates very closely with Ken Russell,
0:18:59 > 0:19:03wrote to Trevelyan asking that he be part of the creative journey.
0:19:06 > 0:19:10"Dear John, I have pleasure in enclosing my final draft script
0:19:10 > 0:19:13"on the DH Lawrence novel, Women In Love.
0:19:13 > 0:19:16"We would very much like to lunch with you after you have read the script.
0:19:16 > 0:19:19"We feel we are embarking on an extraordinary creative experience
0:19:19 > 0:19:24"which we would like to have you share with us. Larry."
0:19:24 > 0:19:28There is some sense in which the film-makers are operating
0:19:28 > 0:19:30in a climate of collaboration with the censors,
0:19:30 > 0:19:35which is extraordinary these days, the idea that you can see the chief censor as one of your buddies.
0:19:35 > 0:19:39"Dear Larry, this seems an exciting production.
0:19:39 > 0:19:41"I know Ken Russell and his work well,
0:19:41 > 0:19:43"and I am very happy that he is
0:19:43 > 0:19:46"going to do this picture with you. John."
0:19:46 > 0:19:49Women in Love had been discussed with Trevelyan,
0:19:49 > 0:19:55as was common at the script stage and Trevelyan had urged the makers of
0:19:55 > 0:20:00the film to be cautious in how they shot the famous nude wrestling scene.
0:20:01 > 0:20:06"Dear Larry, I think we should have a talk about your script.
0:20:06 > 0:20:09"I got the impression you had probably hotted up Lawrence
0:20:09 > 0:20:11"a bit here and there.
0:20:11 > 0:20:14"Scene 105.
0:20:14 > 0:20:18"If they were just indulging in horseplay as two friends,
0:20:18 > 0:20:21"there would not be problems, but we have already had clear
0:20:21 > 0:20:25"indications that there are homosexual feelings between them
0:20:25 > 0:20:29"and this kind of scene could be troublesome if not handled discreetly.
0:20:29 > 0:20:34"I can only advise you to be very cautious about it."
0:20:34 > 0:20:35It is a gay scene.
0:20:35 > 0:20:37It is a gay scene as well as a straight scene.
0:20:37 > 0:20:41It is a sexual scene which is going in all sorts of directions
0:20:41 > 0:20:43and all the more powerful for that.
0:20:43 > 0:20:45But Trevelyan really wanted that toned down
0:20:45 > 0:20:50because he felt the public climate wasn't ready for such
0:20:50 > 0:20:53explicit representations of this on screen.
0:20:53 > 0:20:55Alongside penises,
0:20:55 > 0:20:59we can't also have penises engaging in homosexual activity.
0:21:00 > 0:21:05When the film finally came in, there was a lot of horse trading
0:21:05 > 0:21:08between the distributor and the board.
0:21:08 > 0:21:11"While we are prepared to accept the wrestling scene,
0:21:11 > 0:21:13"we would like you to remove, if possible,
0:21:13 > 0:21:17"full-length shots in which genitals are clearly visible.
0:21:17 > 0:21:22"The main trouble lies in shots where the two boys are standing still.
0:21:22 > 0:21:24"Sincerely, John."
0:21:24 > 0:21:29When they are moving around, maybe everything is flapping around but it's not quite so visible.
0:21:29 > 0:21:32When they are standing still, you can focus on everything.
0:21:32 > 0:21:37"Dear John, I gather there is one full-length shot of Gerald which gives offence.
0:21:37 > 0:21:42"The only way out of this is to darken the shot and this I would be quite prepared to do.
0:21:42 > 0:21:45"I have not included anything in the film that is contrary
0:21:45 > 0:21:47"to the ideals and philosophy of the author.
0:21:47 > 0:21:52"Throwing myself on your good judgment, Ken Russell."
0:21:52 > 0:21:55I think that they knew that this was done with good artistic intent
0:21:55 > 0:21:59and I think the censors really prized this.
0:21:59 > 0:22:01They were not just gatekeepers.
0:22:01 > 0:22:04They were actually trying to foster a kind of aesthetic.
0:22:04 > 0:22:07"We all think it is a brilliant film
0:22:07 > 0:22:11"and are taking this in account in our judgment of it.
0:22:11 > 0:22:15"We would like you to make some small trims in the early part
0:22:15 > 0:22:18"of the scene so as to avoid undue emphasis on genitals."
0:22:19 > 0:22:22"Dear John, can I say how grateful Ken and I are
0:22:22 > 0:22:26"for your understanding help throughout these past months.
0:22:26 > 0:22:27"Sincerely, Larry."
0:22:28 > 0:22:32"Dear Larry, we will accept the wrestling scene
0:22:32 > 0:22:37"on the understanding that the prints are darkened. Yours, John."
0:22:37 > 0:22:40The darkening also had the effect of giving it a more classical,
0:22:40 > 0:22:45fire-lit aura so they seemed like figures from a Greek drama,
0:22:45 > 0:22:48rather than male figures from a porno movie.
0:23:12 > 0:23:13Was it...
0:23:14 > 0:23:15too much for you?
0:23:15 > 0:23:19It became incredibly talked about, although I think some people
0:23:19 > 0:23:20were rather impervious to it.
0:23:20 > 0:23:24Ken Russell tells a story of going into a cinema in the middle
0:23:24 > 0:23:27of nowhere somewhere, sitting in a very badly attended
0:23:27 > 0:23:30screening where there are just two old ladies and him in the audience.
0:23:30 > 0:23:34He sits behind the two ladies and he watches their responses
0:23:34 > 0:23:37during the wrestling scene and they look at the screen
0:23:37 > 0:23:40and it comes to an end and one says to the other,
0:23:40 > 0:23:42"Lovely carpet."
0:23:42 > 0:23:44# Alleluia!
0:23:44 > 0:23:46# Alleluia!
0:23:46 > 0:23:49# Alleluia, alleluia...#
0:23:49 > 0:23:52I think I am the saviour of the British film industry.
0:23:54 > 0:23:56Trevelyan liked Russell.
0:23:56 > 0:23:59Of course, he had allowed Women In Love to be passed
0:23:59 > 0:24:01pretty much intacto.
0:24:01 > 0:24:03I think one thing Ken Russell learned was,
0:24:03 > 0:24:08it really paid to have Trevelyan on side.
0:24:08 > 0:24:13I care very much about the kind of film that the artist makes.
0:24:13 > 0:24:17The artist may well be in advance of public attitudes.
0:24:18 > 0:24:21And he may shock but shock deliberately.
0:24:21 > 0:24:23I think this is fair enough.
0:24:23 > 0:24:291971 is a big year for British censorship and for extreme images on
0:24:29 > 0:24:33British Screen and it is also a big year in the career of Ken Russell.
0:24:33 > 0:24:37He has done Women In Love, he's done The Music Lovers.
0:24:37 > 0:24:44These are films with extreme context and extreme content.
0:24:44 > 0:24:48We get to The Devils and it is really pushing it even further.
0:24:48 > 0:24:51Once I had decided to do this film,
0:24:51 > 0:24:54I just had to go along with the truth as it was reported.
0:24:57 > 0:25:01On August 18th, 1634, in the small French town of Loudun,
0:25:01 > 0:25:07sister Jeanne of the Angels declared herself the victim of satanic visitations.
0:25:07 > 0:25:10Jeanne's claim of diabolical rape brought a team of exorcists
0:25:10 > 0:25:13to the convent and these good men soon provoked
0:25:13 > 0:25:16all the nuns into spectacular obscenities.
0:25:16 > 0:25:19Loudun was visited by tourists from all over Europe,
0:25:19 > 0:25:22who came to view the antics of the nuns.
0:25:22 > 0:25:26In 1952, Aldous Huxley published his famous account which formed
0:25:26 > 0:25:29the basis for a film by Ken Russell.
0:25:29 > 0:25:33When the BBFC first saw The Devils, there were
0:25:33 > 0:25:38members of the board who thought that it should be banned outright.
0:25:41 > 0:25:46"I consider this to be a nauseating piece of film-making.
0:25:46 > 0:25:49"Whatever the deeper meaning intended by Ken Russell,
0:25:49 > 0:25:53"it comes to the screen with such elements of sadism, cruelty,
0:25:53 > 0:25:58"pornography and blasphemy, it will appeal chiefly to the prurient."
0:25:58 > 0:26:02It is, of course, brilliant, but the question it raises is
0:26:02 > 0:26:06whether brilliance justifies complete artistic freedom?
0:26:06 > 0:26:09You carry on in the background, enjoying ourselves
0:26:09 > 0:26:12all nudging and saying, "Isn't it camp?"
0:26:12 > 0:26:16There were sequences all through it that seemed to go beyond anything
0:26:16 > 0:26:18we had passed until that time.
0:26:19 > 0:26:21"I have no personal knowledge
0:26:21 > 0:26:24"as to the shape of nuns under their habits,
0:26:24 > 0:26:28"but I doubt they all look like the playmates of this film.
0:26:28 > 0:26:30"Ken Pinry."
0:26:33 > 0:26:37The main sequence was the orgy with the nuns and there were
0:26:37 > 0:26:40so many shots in that that were way over the top at that period
0:26:40 > 0:26:44of time, that I was quite convinced it could never be shown
0:26:44 > 0:26:49in public without a police prosecution following it.
0:26:49 > 0:26:54Essentially, what you're dealing with here is what came to be
0:26:54 > 0:26:56known as the rape of Christ sequence.
0:27:14 > 0:27:19Well, I didn't think it was suitable for public viewing.
0:27:20 > 0:27:23"Reel 9, 10 and 11.
0:27:23 > 0:27:27"There is far too much of the orgy, too much nudity,
0:27:27 > 0:27:29"too much masturbation.
0:27:29 > 0:27:32"Scenes of nuns making love to the effigy of Christ which seemed
0:27:32 > 0:27:34"to me to be prohibitive."
0:27:35 > 0:27:41On a visual level, that film is so fiery, so Russellian, so everything
0:27:41 > 0:27:44turned up to 11, it is the distilled essence of what Russell does.
0:27:44 > 0:27:46If you see that film
0:27:46 > 0:27:49and you don't feel like you have been run over by a truck,
0:27:49 > 0:27:51you didn't watch the film properly!
0:28:14 > 0:28:18The Devils - points for discussion with Ken Russell.
0:28:18 > 0:28:21Russell says that the way that he described to him was,
0:28:21 > 0:28:25"I'm just about to cut your best scene but don't blame me, that's my job."
0:28:25 > 0:28:30Removed shots of Mother Superior masturbating.
0:28:30 > 0:28:34Further reduce the orgy, removing all shots of nuns masturbating
0:28:34 > 0:28:37on the figure of the crucified Christ,
0:28:37 > 0:28:40Father Mignon masturbating on the gallery
0:28:40 > 0:28:43and shots of the nun rubbing the candle sexually.
0:28:43 > 0:28:48There's this wonderful sequence of letters batting backwards and forwards,
0:28:48 > 0:28:53with Russell pleading to keep his film for reasons of integrity.
0:28:55 > 0:29:00Dear John, I did not set out to make a cosy religious drama that would please everyone.
0:29:02 > 0:29:04Actually, I have turned this down of my own accord.
0:29:04 > 0:29:08For instance, I do not show the nuns throwing their habits over their heads
0:29:08 > 0:29:12and running through the audience, inviting them to "Fuck me".
0:29:12 > 0:29:19I have butchered the film at your bidding far and away beyond anything I dreamed of.
0:29:19 > 0:29:24I beg you now it to leave it as it is. Sincerely, Ken Russell.
0:29:24 > 0:29:27He's a Catholic himself. He sees that as really important.
0:29:27 > 0:29:32This is a film about blasphemy and I need to retain it as it is now,
0:29:32 > 0:29:34please, please, please, otherwise,
0:29:34 > 0:29:39the meanings of it will break apart and blasphemy as an issue will
0:29:39 > 0:29:43not be represented in the way that I want it to be represented.
0:29:43 > 0:29:47"Dear Ken, we saw your modified version of The Devils today.
0:29:47 > 0:29:51"The orgy sequences have been very substantially shortened,
0:29:51 > 0:29:56"but remove the shot of the naked girl twirling on a kind of swing."
0:29:56 > 0:30:01Look, do this, all right, I've done that, but can I have that? You've taken the shit off the altar.
0:30:01 > 0:30:04I've done the thing, can I please have the nun with the candle?
0:30:04 > 0:30:07I mean, it's that level of almost comic interplay.
0:30:07 > 0:30:09I'm sure it wasn't funny at the time.
0:30:09 > 0:30:13"Dear John, I have cleared up the shit on the altar,
0:30:13 > 0:30:17"slashed the whipping and cut the orgy in two.
0:30:17 > 0:30:23"I hope you don't feel tempted to tamper with the sequence as it now stands.
0:30:23 > 0:30:29"Christ must be debased and must be seen to be debased.
0:30:29 > 0:30:30"Yours, Ken."
0:30:30 > 0:30:35What happened was that essentially, a block sequence came out.
0:30:35 > 0:30:41That block sequence came out, little elements of it remained in the various versions of The Devils,
0:30:41 > 0:30:44but the hints about the whole sequence of the cross coming down,
0:30:44 > 0:30:47of the big statue coming down and being ravaged went in its entirety.
0:30:49 > 0:30:52"We are satisfied with what you have done to meet our wishes
0:30:52 > 0:30:56"in the way of further cuts on The Devils.
0:30:56 > 0:31:00"Passed X with deletions."
0:31:00 > 0:31:04Well, I've always been idealist and I've always been a libertarian
0:31:04 > 0:31:08and that means I've always hoped that some day, censorship would not be necessary.
0:31:08 > 0:31:10I think it's necessary now.
0:31:10 > 0:31:15I don't think it will disappear entirely, maybe even in my lifetime.
0:31:15 > 0:31:18It may disappear in my children's lifetime,
0:31:18 > 0:31:24but it means a whole lot more personal responsibility than exists today with just a few people,
0:31:24 > 0:31:27who are out to make money out of human weakness.
0:31:27 > 0:31:30John Trevelyan, thank you very much for talking to us.
0:31:30 > 0:31:35John Trevelyan knew what was going to come
0:31:35 > 0:31:39and it was a case of apres moi la deluge.
0:31:39 > 0:31:43And Stephen Murphy, who took over from him, caught the lot.
0:31:51 > 0:31:54I don't know how far society can go
0:31:54 > 0:31:57and it's not a question that I'm called upon to answer.
0:31:57 > 0:32:02People will submit films to the Board and even talk about
0:32:02 > 0:32:06the films before they make them and a great deal depends on
0:32:06 > 0:32:09the quality and integrity with which those films are made.
0:32:12 > 0:32:14What happened with Stephen Murphy was that
0:32:14 > 0:32:17he inherited a very difficult situation,
0:32:17 > 0:32:21which was that he came to power in the middle of the most almighty shit-storm.
0:32:24 > 0:32:28The whole world has a problem with moral culture and once again,
0:32:28 > 0:32:34Britain has the chance today to give leadership to the whole world.
0:32:46 > 0:32:49The Devils comes out in a climate of worry.
0:32:49 > 0:32:53Once it reaches the sort of wider environs of British society
0:32:53 > 0:32:57it's picketed by the Festival of Light.
0:32:57 > 0:32:59It becomes a scandal film in a much wider sense.
0:33:01 > 0:33:03Lots of letters arrive on his desk.
0:33:06 > 0:33:09"Dear Mr Murphy, I saw The Devils yesterday.
0:33:09 > 0:33:15"I was disgusted at the blasphemous implications."
0:33:15 > 0:33:19"Pornographic to the worst degree, moronic and depraved."
0:33:19 > 0:33:26"I found this demoralising, highly indecent and blasphemous and certainly harmful."
0:33:26 > 0:33:29"We are amazed the confidence that the people of Britain
0:33:29 > 0:33:33"have placed in your wisdom has been so sadly abused."
0:33:33 > 0:33:35Stephen Murphy has to pick up the flak.
0:33:37 > 0:33:39"Your letter makes me very sad.
0:33:39 > 0:33:44"My personal knowledge of The Devils is not great since, in fact,
0:33:44 > 0:33:48"the work on it was done by my predecessor.
0:33:48 > 0:33:51"I am grieved that you should find the film so hurtful.
0:33:51 > 0:33:54"Yours sincerely, Stephen Murphy."
0:33:54 > 0:33:56Stephen Murphy was very much the family man.
0:33:56 > 0:34:01He'd made films before and in fact,
0:34:01 > 0:34:06the tallest transmitter in the Pennines was the subject
0:34:06 > 0:34:09of one of his documentaries, which he took me to see at the time.
0:34:16 > 0:34:211971 is a huge year for scandal movies.
0:34:28 > 0:34:35Suddenly, there were movies before him that, to this day, remain controversial.
0:34:36 > 0:34:41# Oh dear land I fought for thee... #
0:34:48 > 0:34:50'Seeing Clockwork Orange,'
0:34:50 > 0:34:53the two things that were genuinely shocking were one,
0:34:53 > 0:34:55at the beginning, where the tramp
0:34:55 > 0:34:58gets kicked to death in this underpass.
0:34:58 > 0:35:03And secondly, Adrian Corry being raped while they all sang Singing In The Rain.
0:35:03 > 0:35:08Which, by the way, upset Gene Kelly mightily at the time.
0:35:08 > 0:35:13"Examination notes: The visuals, however restrained,
0:35:13 > 0:35:16"could not possibly get into even the X category
0:35:16 > 0:35:23"unless we're willing to turn our existing standards upside-down for the sake of this one film."
0:35:23 > 0:35:30Even to this day, it's reckoned it was a very, very brave move on the part of the Board to pass it.
0:35:30 > 0:35:35"Passed, X. Stephen Murphy."
0:35:35 > 0:35:37Well, it was the usual outcry.
0:35:37 > 0:35:41But basically, the Board stuck to its guns and said,
0:35:41 > 0:35:45"No, we consider that this film should be shown in its entirety."
0:35:45 > 0:35:51And of course, this myth develops that Clockwork Orange was withdrawn from distribution because of Murphy.
0:35:51 > 0:35:53It wasn't, was entirely because of Stanley Kubrick.
0:35:53 > 0:35:56It was passed, it went the rounds, I saw it
0:35:56 > 0:36:01and then Stanley Kubrick got this rather unfortunate letter, threatening his family,
0:36:01 > 0:36:03saying that violence would happen to his family
0:36:03 > 0:36:07and he was rather a paranoid disposition anyway, so he insists
0:36:07 > 0:36:11only in England - the only territory insisted on - that this film gets withdrawn.
0:36:11 > 0:36:13He's so powerful, Warner Brothers agree.
0:36:13 > 0:36:16So, it had nothing to do with Murphy.
0:36:16 > 0:36:19You will judge each film on its own individual merits?
0:36:19 > 0:36:21On its own individual merits.
0:36:21 > 0:36:23And I'll be wrong and it'll be for the public
0:36:23 > 0:36:25to decide how often I'm wrong,
0:36:25 > 0:36:28how often I'm right, I can't give you the answer to that.
0:36:32 > 0:36:36Straw Dogs really upset people.
0:36:36 > 0:36:38# Hello, darkness, my old friend
0:36:38 > 0:36:41# I've come to talk with you again... #
0:36:41 > 0:36:43It's a stomach-turning movie.
0:36:43 > 0:36:46Even the author of the original novel on which it was based
0:36:46 > 0:36:48disassociated himself because he thought
0:36:48 > 0:36:51there was too much mayhem going on.
0:36:51 > 0:36:54I wouldn't like to be sitting in the censor's chair
0:36:54 > 0:36:56making the decision about Straw Dogs.
0:36:59 > 0:37:03In the case of Straw Dogs, it has the infamous rape sequence.
0:37:05 > 0:37:06PANTING
0:37:09 > 0:37:10PANTING AND MOANING
0:37:22 > 0:37:23Easy.
0:37:31 > 0:37:36The problem of the Straw Dogs scene is the same now as it ever was.
0:37:36 > 0:37:39It's a scene which has a philosophical problem,
0:37:39 > 0:37:43which is if you read it one way, you can say that it says, "No means yes."
0:37:45 > 0:37:50I think it's more problematic now than it would have been in 1971.
0:37:50 > 0:37:54Nevertheless, it was really pushing buttons in 1971,
0:37:54 > 0:37:56but was passed with minimal cuts.
0:37:58 > 0:38:00It was released to this howl of public outrage,
0:38:00 > 0:38:03which wasn't to do with individual shots,
0:38:03 > 0:38:05it was the whole tenor of the movie.
0:38:05 > 0:38:10One of the main critics at that time was Alexander Walker
0:38:10 > 0:38:14of the Evening Standard and he really disliked the film.
0:38:14 > 0:38:17"After this, anything goes.
0:38:17 > 0:38:20"What the film censor has permitted on the screen in Straw Dogs
0:38:20 > 0:38:26"makes one wonder whether he has any further useful role to play in the cinema industry."
0:38:26 > 0:38:30I think a big moment of crisis comes for the censors in the '70s,
0:38:30 > 0:38:34when you get films like Straw Dogs and Death Wish,
0:38:34 > 0:38:43that are films that ask for the privileges of liberal art but aren't liberal art themselves.
0:38:43 > 0:38:46They're films that are against the idea of liberalism.
0:38:46 > 0:38:49They don't profess liberal opinions.
0:38:49 > 0:38:53Yet to exist at all, they require the existence of the liberal society
0:38:53 > 0:38:55which they seem to be at war with.
0:38:56 > 0:38:57God damn rich cunt!
0:38:57 > 0:39:00I kill rich cunts!
0:39:00 > 0:39:02Mother's getting the shit kicked out of her.
0:39:05 > 0:39:11The rape scene in Death Wish is comparatively mild.
0:39:11 > 0:39:17I can't remember now the stupidity letters that I sent and they sent.
0:39:17 > 0:39:26"Dear Stephen, as you know, the picture has had great critical and public acclaim in America.
0:39:26 > 0:39:28"I'm hopeful and I believe, realistically so,
0:39:28 > 0:39:33"that we can have this receive a certificate in this country without any to-do.
0:39:33 > 0:39:36"Your sincerely, Michael Winner."
0:39:36 > 0:39:39"We saw Death Wish on Friday.
0:39:39 > 0:39:43"As it stands, the rape scene is likely to be very offensive
0:39:43 > 0:39:47"to some British audiences, not only on account of its visual content,
0:39:47 > 0:39:50"but on account of some of the language used."
0:39:51 > 0:39:56On...page 18, scene 37...
0:39:58 > 0:40:01..honestly, we cannot have language like this.
0:40:01 > 0:40:06He was crazy, this idiot. Crazy.
0:40:06 > 0:40:11"Dear Stephen, I'm genuinely surprised (though why I don't know)
0:40:11 > 0:40:16"that you take exception to any of the rape scene. I'm still hopeful
0:40:16 > 0:40:19"this picture can be released without being savaged by you..."
0:40:19 > 0:40:22"And without a public fracas."
0:40:22 > 0:40:24It's always good to threaten them with TV and public fracas
0:40:24 > 0:40:27because I'm good at public fracas. I'm better than they are.
0:40:27 > 0:40:32"Let us hope our meeting will permit this". We had a meeting!
0:40:32 > 0:40:33HE LAUGHS
0:40:35 > 0:40:39"Dear Michael, personal accusations and hints of a public fracas
0:40:39 > 0:40:43"are not likely to help us reach a positive solution."
0:40:43 > 0:40:47Positive solution?! The answer is they DID help us!
0:40:47 > 0:40:51And the final paragraph in this letter from these idiots...
0:40:53 > 0:40:58"In two respects, the aerosol and repeated use of the word "cunt",
0:40:58 > 0:41:01"this sequence goes further than anything we have seen.
0:41:01 > 0:41:06"You may find it illogical that a society can accept many shootings
0:41:06 > 0:41:11"and still object to a word of dialogue. But it does."
0:41:11 > 0:41:13Society does not! Murphy does.
0:41:13 > 0:41:18What are you talking about, society? He doesn't represent society.
0:41:18 > 0:41:21He's some individual moron who happened to get a job.
0:41:21 > 0:41:24He didn't stand on any of this. He collapsed on all of this.
0:41:24 > 0:41:28"Passed X, all cuts waived."
0:41:28 > 0:41:32Page 22, scene 36.
0:41:32 > 0:41:36This shooting, as it stands,
0:41:36 > 0:41:38is far too gruesome.
0:41:38 > 0:41:43'In a way, in histories of censorship, Stephen Murphy is unfairly treated.'
0:41:43 > 0:41:47He's been dumped on, partly because he was the right person
0:41:47 > 0:41:51at the wrong time, and partly cos all these films came out
0:41:51 > 0:41:54and things happened to them which weren't in his control.
0:41:55 > 0:41:57"An open letter to The Times.
0:41:57 > 0:42:01"Sir, we wish to draw attention to the now serious
0:42:01 > 0:42:04"and growing inconsistencies of film censorship."
0:42:04 > 0:42:07And it was very, very unfortunate for Stephen,
0:42:07 > 0:42:09who was a very nice man,
0:42:09 > 0:42:11but I'm afraid it all proved rather too much for him.
0:42:11 > 0:42:14Mr Murphy is the present censor.
0:42:14 > 0:42:16Are you calling for his resignation?
0:42:16 > 0:42:20I don't think that he is necessarily the man to be the final arbiter.
0:42:20 > 0:42:23I think he would be better employed maybe on a panel
0:42:23 > 0:42:27or as an examiner, but not as the final arbiter for the job.
0:42:27 > 0:42:29For that, I think he's the wrong man.
0:42:30 > 0:42:33Due to this extreme pressure on Stephen -
0:42:33 > 0:42:39and he told me that his family even received obscene phone calls -
0:42:39 > 0:42:42this was really proving too much for him,
0:42:42 > 0:42:48and I don't think that when he did retire from the Board he was at all sorry to go.
0:43:02 > 0:43:05James Ferman had impeccable credentials,
0:43:05 > 0:43:10perhaps the best of anybody for this role in charge of the BBFC.
0:43:10 > 0:43:14He knew about filmmaking, he'd trained as a TV director,
0:43:14 > 0:43:17he'd made documentaries about drug problems, children problems,
0:43:17 > 0:43:20and I think he had the best of liberal intentions when he arrived.
0:43:20 > 0:43:24I had enormous respect for Jim when first I joined the Board.
0:43:24 > 0:43:30He was a man of intellect,
0:43:30 > 0:43:34he came from a background, as he constantly told us,
0:43:34 > 0:43:37of making films for television, dramas,
0:43:37 > 0:43:40so he said he knew about these things.
0:43:40 > 0:43:44To be fair, we are the most conservative censorship body
0:43:44 > 0:43:48of any of the major Western countries as far as sex is concerned,
0:43:48 > 0:43:52and although there was quite a restrictive backlash a few years ago,
0:43:52 > 0:43:54I don't think there has been now,
0:43:54 > 0:43:57I think they do realise that we have held a line.
0:43:57 > 0:44:02On the other hand, what I've tried to be is more reasonable about the line we hold.
0:44:02 > 0:44:05He ran headlong into various moral panics,
0:44:05 > 0:44:09as tended to be of the times, late '70s, early '80s.
0:44:09 > 0:44:14Salo by Pasolino which would push anyone's definition of taboo,
0:44:14 > 0:44:21this film set in 1944 in North Italy which was based on De Sade's 120 Days Of Sodom
0:44:21 > 0:44:24where virtually every deviation in the book is gone through
0:44:24 > 0:44:29by these four aristocrats including coprophilia - eating shit to you and me -
0:44:29 > 0:44:33which is not exactly something that's featured very often in the movies.
0:44:58 > 0:45:01HE SPEAKS ITALIAN
0:45:03 > 0:45:05'There is a lot of sex in it.
0:45:05 > 0:45:11'It represents what power does to the human being, to the human body,
0:45:11 > 0:45:15'that is to reduce the human body to a saleable commodity.'
0:45:28 > 0:45:32When Pasolino's Salo was submitted to the BBFC,
0:45:32 > 0:45:35it was pretty clear to everyone within the Board that the film
0:45:35 > 0:45:40was beyond any of the standards that the Board had accepted to that point.
0:45:40 > 0:45:44However, it was accepted by James Ferman in particular
0:45:44 > 0:45:47that it was an important and interesting film
0:45:47 > 0:45:49and that it should be shown.
0:45:49 > 0:45:52When the film opened in club cinemas,
0:45:52 > 0:45:54it was seized by the police
0:45:54 > 0:45:59and the Director of Public Prosecutions stated his view
0:45:59 > 0:46:03that the film was likely to be obscene under the Obscene Publications Act.
0:46:07 > 0:46:10"Dear Mr Ferman, the decision to seek a search warrant
0:46:10 > 0:46:15"under Section 3 of the Obscene Publications Act in respect of Salo was taken.
0:46:15 > 0:46:18"The film now having been seized, the matter is sub judice.
0:46:18 > 0:46:23"Sir Thomas Hetherington, Director of Public Prosecutions."
0:46:23 > 0:46:28James Ferman disputed this, saying that the point of Salo
0:46:28 > 0:46:33was that it showed material that was depraved and corrupt,
0:46:33 > 0:46:36but that the film itself would not deprave and corrupt an audience.
0:46:36 > 0:46:42The whole point of Salo was to show revolting, disgusting behaviour
0:46:42 > 0:46:46in order to revolt and disgust, not to turn people on.
0:46:47 > 0:46:49"Dear Sir Thomas,
0:46:49 > 0:46:53"this would be the first case in 20 years
0:46:53 > 0:46:56"in which the work of a major internationally acknowledged artist
0:46:56 > 0:46:59"has been prosecuted in the British courts.
0:46:59 > 0:47:03"The sexual and other horrors are presented either in long shot or offscreen.
0:47:03 > 0:47:07"There is no exploitative sensationalising.
0:47:07 > 0:47:10"This is a turn-off film, and not a turn-on."
0:47:12 > 0:47:15When it came to the negotiations with the DPP
0:47:15 > 0:47:18as to whether the film should be cut or not,
0:47:18 > 0:47:21James Ferman sent a very long and memorable letter
0:47:21 > 0:47:24to the Director of Public Prosecutions,
0:47:24 > 0:47:30informing him that, in his opinion, the DPP had misunderstood the law.
0:47:32 > 0:47:36"It seems to me that your advisers have misunderstood
0:47:36 > 0:47:38"the law of obscenity in Britain,
0:47:38 > 0:47:41"and have allowed their own sense of outraged propriety
0:47:41 > 0:47:44"to colour their view of the film's legality.
0:47:44 > 0:47:46"The portrayal of evil in works of art
0:47:46 > 0:47:49"is not the same thing as its endorsement."
0:47:49 > 0:47:53It was quite typical of James to feel that he understood the law
0:47:53 > 0:47:56better than the law-enforcement agencies.
0:47:56 > 0:48:01Indecency, in other words the control of sexual manners,
0:48:01 > 0:48:05should no longer be criminal, because I do think that in a modern society
0:48:05 > 0:48:07what is criminal should be what is harmful,
0:48:07 > 0:48:10and I think simply to be embarrassing or offensive
0:48:10 > 0:48:12is not really a criminal activity.
0:48:12 > 0:48:15The DPP reached an agreement with James Ferman
0:48:15 > 0:48:20where James would cut the film in the event by seven minutes,
0:48:20 > 0:48:24simply so that a legal version could be shown in club cinemas.
0:48:28 > 0:48:33The film was never formally submitted to the Board again until 2000,
0:48:33 > 0:48:35when it was passed uncut.
0:48:35 > 0:48:38Imagine a machine that plugs into your television
0:48:38 > 0:48:42and records programs from the aerial onto a two-and-a-half hour cassette.
0:48:42 > 0:48:46A machine that records one channel while you're watching another,
0:48:46 > 0:48:48and even switches itself on.
0:48:51 > 0:48:5440% of five- and six-year-old children have seen a video nasty,
0:48:54 > 0:48:57showing scenes of sadistic sex and violence
0:48:57 > 0:49:00horrific enough to have been seized by the police.
0:49:00 > 0:49:03# It's close to midnight
0:49:03 > 0:49:05# Something evil's lurking in the dark... #
0:49:05 > 0:49:09There was no certification system for home entertainment,
0:49:09 > 0:49:14so all these videos are coming out, uncertificated, between '82 and '84.
0:49:14 > 0:49:16We see a lot of blood,
0:49:16 > 0:49:20we see a lot of people getting their heads chopped off
0:49:20 > 0:49:22and slaughtered all over the place.
0:49:22 > 0:49:23It turns into a huge moral panic.
0:49:23 > 0:49:26# Creatures crawl in search of blood
0:49:26 > 0:49:29# To terrorise your neighbourhood. #
0:49:30 > 0:49:35Distributors of videotapes want to introduce classifications
0:49:35 > 0:49:37similar to those operated at the cinema.
0:49:37 > 0:49:39They warn which films need parental guidance,
0:49:39 > 0:49:43and which should be limited to the over-15s and the over-18s.
0:49:43 > 0:49:45Suddenly, in '84, it's legislation.
0:49:45 > 0:49:48For the first time in the history of the BBFC,
0:49:48 > 0:49:52it is a statutory body, it has a statutory duty to censor videos,
0:49:52 > 0:49:57to watch them all and to censor them, and this completely changes its role in society.
0:49:57 > 0:50:01It's no longer a voluntary industry body, a self-regulating body
0:50:01 > 0:50:04that the industry sees the value of, it's a wing of government.
0:50:05 > 0:50:09Ferman just locked everything down and said, "I'll deal with it,"
0:50:09 > 0:50:12and sort of restored this sense of patrician authority, which is,
0:50:12 > 0:50:14"OK, trust me, I'm dealing with it."
0:50:14 > 0:50:18We've had to classify every video in the shops by tomorrow,
0:50:18 > 0:50:21so at midnight tonight, the job has to be done.
0:50:22 > 0:50:27And on top of having this tremendous job, you've also had Rambo III
0:50:27 > 0:50:29and The Last Temptation Of Christ thrown in on top.
0:50:29 > 0:50:31Just the month we didn't need it!
0:50:31 > 0:50:33How many more videos have you to do?
0:50:33 > 0:50:36I'm going back to the office after this programme tonight.
0:50:36 > 0:50:39The BBFC was James Ferman.
0:50:39 > 0:50:43He did a very interesting job of essentially becoming
0:50:43 > 0:50:47the judge and jury and having the final word.
0:50:47 > 0:50:51Even getting an interview with him was like an audience with the Pope.
0:50:51 > 0:50:53It's like, "I've actually got to interview James Ferman."
0:50:53 > 0:50:55APPLAUSE
0:50:57 > 0:51:01Arising out of all this storm of controversy in '84,
0:51:01 > 0:51:05the name of the organisation changes from Censorship to Classification.
0:51:05 > 0:51:08Which was Ferman's idea, and it's very clever.
0:51:08 > 0:51:11You don't look heavy-handed - you're not a censor -
0:51:11 > 0:51:14you're a classifier. It's an objective thing,
0:51:14 > 0:51:17you're like a library person who does library cards
0:51:17 > 0:51:19and does all the index numbers. You classify.
0:51:19 > 0:51:22Classification is very different to censorship, and so it has remained.
0:51:25 > 0:51:27Good evening. The headlines at 6:00.
0:51:27 > 0:51:29An armed man has opened fire
0:51:29 > 0:51:32with an automatic weapon in a Berkshire town.
0:51:32 > 0:51:35At least nine people are dead, 14 are injured.
0:51:35 > 0:51:38From my impression, he was playing Rambo.
0:51:38 > 0:51:41Tonight, the town of Hungerford has been sealed off.
0:51:41 > 0:51:44The gunman is still at large, and still armed.
0:51:44 > 0:51:48The day after Hungerford, we had a board meeting,
0:51:48 > 0:51:51these monthly board meetings that we would have.
0:51:51 > 0:51:56And Jim came into the meeting in a state of mind that
0:51:56 > 0:52:02I would only describe as hysterical - that is, completely beside himself.
0:52:05 > 0:52:09And the hysterical response was to say, "As a result of this,
0:52:09 > 0:52:12"we must absolutely look at how guns are portrayed in films,
0:52:12 > 0:52:16"and we must absolutely hack it back, because this is what's happened."
0:52:16 > 0:52:22Because there was... a completely ill-advised linking
0:52:22 > 0:52:26in the media's mind between what Michael Ryan did in Hungerford
0:52:26 > 0:52:28and the Rambo films.
0:52:28 > 0:52:31First and second Rambo, certificate 15.
0:52:31 > 0:52:34Rambo III, certificate 18. Hungerford had happened in between.
0:52:38 > 0:52:39"Examiner report.
0:52:39 > 0:52:42"This silly, rather enjoyable movie is likely to be
0:52:42 > 0:52:47"a political red-hot potato, what with all the hoo-haa about Rambo II,
0:52:47 > 0:52:49"and then Hungerford."
0:53:01 > 0:53:05"Two thirds of the film - that is, about an hour and a quarter -
0:53:05 > 0:53:10"is non-stop shooting, explosions, bodies falling, impact shots.
0:53:10 > 0:53:15"It's not so much what is shown but how much and how relentlessly."
0:53:15 > 0:53:21The issue was a category issue - that is, whether it should be 15 or 18,
0:53:21 > 0:53:24and whether it should be cut for either or both categories.
0:53:26 > 0:53:28"Notes on viewing.
0:53:28 > 0:53:31"Another all-action attempt to further the Rambo cult
0:53:31 > 0:53:33"and swell Stallone's bank balance.
0:53:33 > 0:53:36"Given that we've passed the second film and the cult is here,
0:53:36 > 0:53:40"I reluctantly go for a 15."
0:53:40 > 0:53:42"Expertly made, pity about the script
0:53:42 > 0:53:43"and the wooden actor in the lead.
0:53:45 > 0:53:49"My inclination in the current climate would be to pass 18."
0:53:49 > 0:53:52"My instinct would be to pass it 15.
0:53:52 > 0:53:54"Give Rambo a break!"
0:53:57 > 0:54:01There was a feeling at the BBFC that Rambo III was probably a 15
0:54:01 > 0:54:04under normal conditions, but at the time,
0:54:04 > 0:54:06if they gave it a 15, they would just have
0:54:06 > 0:54:12such a howling storm of protest that it wouldn't be worth their while.
0:54:14 > 0:54:16"Public disquiet is at its height.
0:54:16 > 0:54:19"It is naive to believe we can always act without regard
0:54:19 > 0:54:21"to political realities.
0:54:21 > 0:54:24"Indeed, I would go further and argue that it's irresponsible.
0:54:25 > 0:54:27"Pass 18."
0:54:27 > 0:54:31The final decision was it was made an 18, but a cut version.
0:54:31 > 0:54:34What we all want is a quiet life.
0:54:37 > 0:54:41It's fascinating what they thought... It's fairly unpleasant throughout,
0:54:41 > 0:54:43but what they thought was particularly unpleasant.
0:54:43 > 0:54:45One is a little boy fingering a knife delightedly.
0:54:45 > 0:54:47In other words, the emulation effect,
0:54:47 > 0:54:50somebody, "I want to be like Rambo." That upset them.
0:54:50 > 0:54:51What is this?
0:54:53 > 0:54:55- It's a knife.- Can I see this?- Sure.
0:55:03 > 0:55:05Very good. Can I have it?
0:55:05 > 0:55:07No!
0:55:09 > 0:55:13"Remove sight of Rambo's knife being twirled by young boy
0:55:13 > 0:55:14"after he takes it from holster."
0:55:17 > 0:55:22James developed the Board's weapons policy to such an extent that
0:55:22 > 0:55:24any sight of certain weapons,
0:55:24 > 0:55:29including certain types of knives, was just unacceptable.
0:55:29 > 0:55:31The examiners knew it was unacceptable,
0:55:31 > 0:55:34and it came to a point by the 1990s where generally
0:55:34 > 0:55:38it wasn't worth an examiner even making an argument.
0:55:38 > 0:55:44I do think there is a problem in the gradual increase, step by step,
0:55:44 > 0:55:48drip, drip, drip, over the '80s, of slightly more violence in films.
0:55:48 > 0:55:51Even in junior-category films.
0:55:51 > 0:55:55It is a worry, because kids nowadays are becoming acclimatised to
0:55:55 > 0:55:58more violence than kids 20 years ago.
0:55:58 > 0:56:01I think, on the whole, that is not a healthy phenomenon.
0:56:01 > 0:56:03I think for James Ferman it was a key thing,
0:56:03 > 0:56:05"Movies are harmful, or can be harmful,
0:56:05 > 0:56:08"and you have to trust me on this, I know better than you."
0:56:12 > 0:56:17James' most famous concern was with the so-called chain sticks,
0:56:17 > 0:56:19which are two pieces of wood with a chain between them,
0:56:19 > 0:56:21most famously used by Bruce Lee.
0:56:24 > 0:56:28Probably the silliest and most notorious example of James' obsession
0:56:28 > 0:56:32was the film Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles II,
0:56:32 > 0:56:37where there's a sequence in which one of the turtles uses
0:56:37 > 0:56:41a string of sausages in a manner that suggests that they are chain sticks.
0:56:41 > 0:56:45Of course, they're not actually chain sticks - they are sausages.
0:56:49 > 0:56:51Combat cold cuts!
0:56:55 > 0:56:57James was having none of it,
0:56:57 > 0:57:00and decided that the sequence had to be removed.
0:57:00 > 0:57:03We were only able to reinstate the sausage sequence
0:57:03 > 0:57:05after James' departure.
0:57:05 > 0:57:10Now I have actually a great deal of sympathy with James Ferman.
0:57:10 > 0:57:17I think that he at least was trying to do an extremely difficult job.
0:57:29 > 0:57:33In a way, talking about the BBFC today is like
0:57:33 > 0:57:36talking about it 100 years ago, exactly the same issues.
0:57:36 > 0:57:39If you're too heavy-handed, the liberals don't like you,
0:57:39 > 0:57:42if you're too light-handed, then the conservatives don't like you.
0:57:42 > 0:57:45You've got to walk this narrow path between the two extremes
0:57:45 > 0:57:47who don't like you whatever you do.
0:57:47 > 0:57:49Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
0:57:56 > 0:58:00We only allow access to files and correspondence
0:58:00 > 0:58:03up until the last 20 years.
0:58:05 > 0:58:07Partly to protect the identity
0:58:07 > 0:58:12and comments of the Board's current examiners, but also because a lot of
0:58:12 > 0:58:16the Board's work is commercially sensitive to the distributors.
0:58:16 > 0:58:20Well, of course there are now 20 years of film notes that are
0:58:20 > 0:58:23still under lock and key, that we don't know about.
0:58:23 > 0:58:27Natural Born Killers, Reservoir Dogs...
0:58:29 > 0:58:33There is, for example, some very interesting material
0:58:33 > 0:58:36between James Ferman and Oliver Stone on Natural Born Killers,
0:58:36 > 0:58:40but I'm afraid, for the time being, you'll just have to wait to see it.
0:58:53 > 0:58:57Subtitles by Red Bee Media Ltd
0:58:57 > 0:59:01E-mail subtitling@bbc.co.uk