Film Censorship (Press, 18 January 1971)
This is a Generative AI summary of this newspaper article. It may contain errors or omissions. Please note that the language in the summary is reflective of the original article and the societal attitudes of the time in which it was written.
Summary: Film Censorship (Press, 18 January 1971)
On 18 January 1971, opinions on film censorship laws in New Zealand were expressed through letters to the editor addressing the current state and recent changes in the film censorship landscape. Peter Boyes, the Secretary of the Campaign for Action Against Censorship, responded to a correspondent supporting the liberalisation of film censorship. He highlighted concerns that the public, when sufficiently motivated, would confront perceived abuses of power, as demonstrated by the significant petition led by Patricia Bartlett the previous year, which garnered over 50,000 signatures. As a result of this petition, there was a tightening of film censorship regulations, with nine films being rejected by censors in 1970 compared to just one rejection in 1968. Boyes pointed out that more than half of the films rated with an "R" certificate underwent severe cuts, suggesting that the petitioners did not reflect the broader film-going audience. He argued that their campaign aimed to rally support for a more liberal approach to censorship which he believes currently compromises films with artistic integrity. Conversely, D.B. Capill presented a contrasting viewpoint, expressing concern about the increasing prevalence of themes of perversion in films as reported by several retired censors from Britain and New Zealand. Capill argued for the protection of children from such influences, criticising contemporary filmmakers for their perceived lack of respect for traditional institutions, including marriage and patriotism. He portrayed these filmmakers as intelligent but lacking constructive messages, instead capturing modern society's struggles and confusions. In Capill's view, while he acknowledged the potential for a society where censorship might be unnecessary, he supported the continuation of a thoughtful form of censorship in light of the current societal attitudes that prioritise personal pleasure over the welfare of others, particularly the youth.
Important Information
The text on this page is created, in the most part, using Generative AI and so may contain errors or omissions. It is supplied to you without guarantee or warranty of correctness. If you find an error or would like to make a content suggestion please get in contact
The text on this page is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 New Zealand