Ruling Pleases Censor (Press, 3 April 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: Ruling Pleases Censor (Press, 3 April 1971)
On 2 April 1971, the Film Censor, Mr D. C. McIntosh, expressed his satisfaction with the Film Censorship Board of Appeal's reversal of certain decisions made by his department regarding three films: “Watermelon Man,” “Getting Straight,” and “Sweden, Heaven and Hell.” The Appeal Board did not approve the cuts that McIntosh had previously enforced, which had been categorised under ratings R16 and R18 for the respective films. He acknowledged that the board's decisions were not a surprise, considering their role in determining film classifications. McIntosh noted that the decisions from the board serve as important guidelines for the future operations of the censorship office. He stated that while the board might sometimes take a more lenient stance, the addition of cuts by the board for two of the films indicated a tougher perspective in some respects. The original cuts made by McIntosh were based on reasons covered by the censorship act, including scenes depicting violence, breaches of public order and decency, or the use of obscene language. In contrast, although the board upheld the appeal for “Watermelon Man,” they concurred with the majority of cuts for “Getting Straight” and “Sweden, Heaven and Hell,” ultimately adding extra cuts to these films. The decisions prompted criticism from anti-indecency campaigner Miss Patricia Bartlett, who voiced her disappointment in what she perceived to be a decline in standards due to the Appeal Board's rulings. She argued that the board's actions would lead to a situation where the Film Censor would be inclined to make fewer cuts in the future. Bartlett expressed a desire for transparency regarding the board's reasoning in overruling the Film Censor’s decisions, questioning the justification behind reinstating certain aspects of the films. The chairman of the Appeal Board, Mr W. H. Carson, stated that the board's decisions were based on the individual opinions of its members, although each case relied upon different criteria without a singular specific reason behind every ruling. This complex interaction between the Film Censor's office and the Appeal Board illustrates the ongoing debate regarding film censorship and the balance between public decency standards and artistic expression.
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