UPDATES: May 24th 2008
GTA IV: Revised Cuts
R18+ Hardcore: Appeal Fails
AUDREY: SEXUAL FREAK 8 Banned in Australia
PRIVATE TROPICAL 38: Banned in Australia
New Ratings: I AM LEGEND and ZODIAC
END OF THE SPEAR: M and MA15+ Versions
Aboriginal R18+ and X18+ Restrictions
Eros Magazine Vol.9 No.2.
Exclusive Brethren fight Lithgow Adult Store
Belladonna, Adelaide SEXPO, and the X18+ laws
Censorship of Senators Internet Access

UPDATES: May 11th 2008
AUSTRALIAN ROSIE FINNISH EROTICA #2 Censored in Australia
New Ratings: MAGNUM FORCE-THE GODFATHER-RESERVOIR DOGS-CLERKS
MAGNUM FORCE Still R18+
New Ratings for THE GODFATHER Trilogy
RESERVOIR DOGS: Changing Consumer Advice
CLERKS: Finally MA15+ after thirteen years!
Advertising Standards Bureau: Dec '07-Feb '08 Complaints
THE HEARTBREAK KID: Poster Complaint
EAST WEST 101: Poster Complaint
Krystal Adult World: Print Ad Complaint
Sexpo Poster Complaint

UPDATES: May 4th 2008
PUSSY SWEAT: Banned in Australia
Sydney Adult Stores Raided
GIRLS GONE WILD DVD's Censored in Australia
Umbrella's IN THE REALM OF THE SENSES is cut

 

Australian Censorship News 
24th May 2008

 

GTA IV: Revised Cuts

Last update Mick provided us with an outline of the cuts to GRAND THEFT AUTO IV.  With more time to evaluate the game he has now revised some of his observations. Again, if anyone has any other information please send it in. On a related note, the uncut game has now been passed with an R18 rating in New Zealand. Previously the distributor had taken the lazy option and dumped the edited Australian version on the market.

Firstly, when picking up a hooker in the Australian version you’ll notice that you’re unable to select your sexual services (i.e. hand job, fellatio or standard intercourse) and the animations for these services have been completely removed. You’ll merely see the car bounce from a locked rear-view. Although there are glitches one can perform to get a front view of the action the animations are still non-existent. Therefore as in previous GTA games you’re only able to see the hooker and Niko sitting side by side doing absolutely nothing. In the uncut version you’re able to select your services after driving a hooker to a secluded location by cycling through the three different services. For which ever you choose the hooker will begin performing the act on Niko and you’re able to rotate the camera to see the action.

Secondly, in the Australian version no blood pools appear beneath a dead person after shooting or stabbing them to death. Although there are blood splatters, there are no blood pools. In the uncut version blood will slowly ooze out from under a body and you’re able to create bloody footprints by walking through it or bloody tyre-tracks by driving through it. In the censored version I was not able to get this to happen contrary to what others have reported. I can only conclude that I may have been experiencing a glitch or perhaps these elements maybe more difficult to initiate in the Australian release. However, I have put over 80 hours into the game since its release so it’s highly likely I would have encountered these elements by now in the Australian version. So for now bloody tyre tracks and footprints remain unconfirmed in the Australian version. Whether or not it differs between the Xbox360 & PS3 versions is also unconfirmed.

Finally, when Niko or other NPCs are injured in the uncut version light blood patches appear on their bodies which broadly represent bruises/bullet wounds. After having played through both versions of the game I can confirm that no other alterations have been made. Although the changes to the sex scenes come as no surprise one must wonder why Rockstar censored blood pools and body injuries. These elements are present in numerous other games which have been released totally uncut in Australia. It’s also worth noting that there is absolutely no dismemberment in any version of the game despite what some have reported. Rumours such as the alleged “anal insertion scene” were also never in the game.

 

***

 

R18+ Hardcore: Appeal Fails

The mammoth fight by Adultshop.com to get the film VIVA EROTICA rated R18+, and ultimately allow hardcore to be passed with such a rating has again been thwarted.

Back in November 2007 the Federal Court sided with the Review Board who had awarded the film an X18+. Last week, an appeal against the judgment was dismissed.

 

***

 

AUDREY: SEXUAL FREAK 8 Banned in Australia

Calvista have run into problems with the 2006 Digital Playground production AUDREY: SEXUAL FREAK 8. On May 19th the Classification Board rated it RC, and banning it in Australia.

DIGITAL PLAYGROUND Synopsis
Digital Playground’s best selling Sexual Freak line is proud to offer up Audrey Bitoni in all of her gorgeous, freaky splendor. This exotic brunette delivers her best performances to date in two fantastically horny scenes alongside Scott Nails and Jean val Jean. Also featuring superb action by Jenna Presley, Mindy Main and Isis Love, “Audrey: Sexual Freak 8” explores the casts deviant intimacies and exploits their deepest fantasies. Directed by Celeste with real-time audio and state of the art production values, “Sexual Freak 8” is a MUST HAVE title for everyone who masturbates!

 

***

 

PRIVATE TROPICAL 38: Banned in Australia

Capping off a bad day for Calvista, May 19th also saw PRIVATE TROPICAL 38: MOTHER AND DAUGHTER ANAL VACATION join AUDREY: SEXUAL FREAK 8 in being banned in Australia. This Alessandro Del Mar production for Private is due for  worldwide release in June.

PRIVATE Media Release
“Mother and Daughter Anal Vacation,” from Private Tropical 38 is the latest release from director Alessandro Del Mar with a MILF and teen twist. With hardcore sex scenes, the story revolves around a daughter as she searches for studs to satisfy her nymphomaniac mother. Eight scenes feature Winnie, Regina, Daria Glower, Sabrina Sweet, Sandra and Angelina Love.

 

***

 

New Ratings: I AM LEGEND and ZODIAC

I AM LEGEND has now had its rating increased to MA15+ for DVD release. This is a strange one as the Theatrical release and the Directors Cut both have the same M (Moderate horror violence and themes) rating. While the DVD release is now MA15+ (Strong violence and themes). This is possibly to do with one or more of the extras on the disc.

12/07: I AM LEGEND Film (35 mm) M (Moderate horror violence and themes)
02/08: I AM LEGEND - DIRECTORS CUT Film (DVD) M (Moderate horror violence and themes) 
02/08: I AM LEGEND Film (DVD) Classification MA15+ (Strong violence and themes)

 

Meanwhile the Director's Cut of ZODIAC has seen a change to the consumer advice. 

02/07: ZODIAC Film (35 mm) Classification MA15+ (Strong violence)
08/07:ZODIAC Film (DVD) Classification MA15+ (Strong violence)
05/08: ZODIAC DIRECTORS CUT Film (DVD) Classification MA15+ (Strong violence, coarse language and actual crime scene footage)

The differences between the Theatrical and Directors Cuts do not seem to indicate anything which would prompt the change in the consumer advice. Again this looks to be a case of the DVD extras causing the 'coarse language and actual crime scene footage' warning.

 

***

 

END OF THE SPEAR: M and MA15+ Versions

In February 2007 a piece of Christian propaganda titled END OF THE SPEAR was rated MA15+ (Strong violence and themes) by the Classification Board. The distributor, Con Dios Entertainment then censored the film, and in March 2007 was awarded an M (Moderate violence and themes) rating. Since then the M rated version has been playing selected cinemas around the country. A DVD release is due later in the year.

Over in New Zealand they also had two versions, an uncut DVD rated R16, and a censored M-rated theatrical release. This prompted the Society for the Promotion of Community Standards to appeal to the NZ Film and Literature Board of Review to have the R16 of the uncut DVD dropped to an M. 

There is more than a hint of hypocrisy to this as recently the Society for the Promotion of Community Standards has opposed just about every controversial film or game that has been rated in New Zealand. BAISE-MOI, VISITOR Q, IRREVERSIBLE, and most recently GTA IV, are just some of the titles that they have wanted banned.  

 

Morals body seeks lower film rating stuff.co.nz 05.04.08

An edited cinema version of the film has been rated M (with a violence warning) by the Film and Video Labelling Body and has been shown at Coehaven private theatre in Otaki, Queensgate Sky City in Lower Hutt and several other cinemas nationwide. However, a three-minute-longer version of the film available only on DVD has been rated R16 by the Office of Film and Literature Classification because of its violent content.

David Lane, of the Society for the Promotion of Community Standards, went before the Film and Literature Board of Review to argue the DVD's rating should be lowered to M - recommended for a mature audience - so that anyone could see it, with a warning that it contained medium-level violence and depictions of tribal warfare.

There were no "significant differences" between the two versions of the film, and the classification office was "playing up" the violent scenes, he said.

The film had themes of forgiveness, peacemaking and redemption and should be seen by a wide audience, he said. The violence was "medium level" and the film did not need to be restricted.

"It's a film that's got major appeal for this [under-16] age group. We don't believe the film has gratuitous violence at all - it's put in its certain historical context.

"You see a spear being thrown but you don't see blood spurting from wounds."

Chief censor Bill Hastings said that, in Australia, the longer version of the film had been classified MA 15+ (restricted to people 15 and over unless accompanied by an adult), and the edited version was rated M.

He was reluctant to comment in detail on the case before the board of review issued its decision, but agreed it was unusual for the society to argue for a film's rating to be lowered rather than raised.

 

***

 

Aboriginal R18+ and X18+ Restrictions

The dying days of the Howard Government saw them launch an emergency response to the report into sexual abuse in Northern Territory Aboriginal Communities. Following their election defeat, the former Foreign Minister Alexander Downer came clean with the true reasons for the policy.

"... when we intervened in the Northern Territory in the Indigenous communities there again, the actual initiative was very popular with the public but it didn't shift the opinion polls."
ABC Insiders Program 
25/11/2007

 

Porn Ban Fact Sheet: September 2007

Here is the fact sheet released for the 'Emergency Response'.

 

Northern Territory Emergency Response
Fact Sheet Pornography Bans and Penalties 

As part of its Emergency Response to the situation in Northern Territory Indigenous communities, the Government is implementing measures to reduce the prevalence of pornography in communities. 

Changes to the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 create new offences for possessing pornography within areas covered by the emergency response, or prescribed areas, and for supplying pornography into those areas. 

Bans on pornography began on 14 September 2007. 

Pornography banned in prescribed areas 

 

Level 1 Prohibited material: 

• Category 1 Restricted and Category 2 Restricted publications, 
• unclassified publications that would be likely to be classified Category 1 Restricted or Category 2 Restricted, 
• X18+ films, 
• unclassified films that would be likely to be classified X18+, and 
• prohibited advertisements. 

 

Level 2 Prohibited material: 

• Refused classification (RC) films, computer games or publications, and 
• unclassified films, computer games or publications that would be likely to be classified RC. 

Level 1 prohibited material may contain content of a sexualised nature, for example, X18+ films contain real depictions of actual sexual intercourse between consenting adults. 

Level 2 prohibited material may depict, express or otherwise deal with matters of sex, cruelty, violence or revolting or abhorrent phenomena in a way that offends against the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults to the extent it should not be classified. The sale, display or exhibition of RC material is illegal across Australia. 

Prescribed areas 

The bans apply to prescribed areas which include Aboriginal land under the Land Rights Act, community living areas, and areas, including those known to be town camps, that the Minister declares to be prescribed areas. Maps and lists of prescribed areas can be found at www.facsia.gov.au/nter/legis_areas.htm 

Offences 

• It is an offence to possess, control, supply or transport banned material in a prescribed area. This ban applies no matter where the material is being supplied from. 
• A heavier penalty applies to possession of Level 2 prohibited material 
• People who supply 5 or more items of banned material could face a $22,000 fine or 2 years imprisonment. 

‘Supply’ is defined to capture material provided to a person in a prescribed area, regardless of whether there is a commercial aspect to the transaction.

Police Powers 

Under the new laws, police may seize and destroy material found within a prescribed area, where a police officer suspects on reasonable grounds that it is prohibited material. Police powers to enter and search premises are provided for under the Crimes Act 1914, that is, they may do so with a warrant or with consent. Seized material may be returned to its owner if the responsible police officer, or a magistrate, is satisfied on reasonable grounds that it is not prohibited material. 

If the material is not returned, it may be forfeited to the Commonwealth for destruction or disposal. Commencement 

The changes to the Classification Act, and the new offences, commenced on September 14 2007. September 2007

 

Porn Ban Inquiry Report: May 2008

In March  an inquiry was launched into the provisions of the  'Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs and Other Legislation Amendment (Emergency Response Consolidation) Bill 2008'.

Amongst the issues that the inquiry were to looks at was the parts of the bill that:

requires pay television licensees not to provide television channels that contain a large amount of R 18+ programming into certain prescribed areas; 

permits prohibited pornographic material to be transported through a prescribed area to a place outside the prescribed area

The final report has now been released and can be accessed here.

 

 

The minority report by the Greens and Democrats emphasises education, and is by far the most sensible solution. The fact is that World Movies shows very little R18+ content, and sex films on the Adults channels are heavily censored R18+ versions. Besides this there is a perfectly good parental lock out system that can be set up to require a PIN to access any channel you wish to block.

Minority report from the Australian Greens and the Australian Democrats
Regulating Pay TV services for R18+ programs 

The Australian Greens and Australian Democrats have some reservations about the likely impact and cost effectiveness of the proposed amendments regulating pay TV narrow casts of R18+ materials. We note on the basis of the evidence provided to the committee that this issue is not as clear cut as the banning of X rated magazines, videos and DVDs from prescribed communities. Banning of R18+ programming being narrow-cast into prescribed communities is technically difficult and expensive and likely to result in many legitimate subscribers outside prohibited areas also being denied access to this programming to exclude the estimated 50 households in prescribed communities that may be viewing R18+ programs.

Of the three different television services of concern listed in the committee report, World Movies and Box Office Movies have low levels of R18+ programming of which a subset are so rated because of sexual content, and would be unlikely to be affected by the 35% rule, meaning that some sexually explicit and violent materials inappropriate for viewing by children would still be potentially accessible. The Box Office Adults Only service would be subject to blanket prohibition.

This raises a question of whether this is the best approach when it is expensive and technically difficult, but still fails to prevent access and exposure to some unsuitable and inappropriate programming. A more effective approach may be a combination of better education about the illegality and undesirable consequences of exposing children to harmful material, together with appropriate instruction on how to use the available PIN protection and parental lockout system to restrict access to unsuitable programming.

 

 

Malcolm Colless has written two articles for The Australian covering the debate and warning of a Rudd Government nanny state.

Don't throw out TV with the porn The Australian 13.05.08

For a start, while the issue is all about pornography, there is no clear definition of what is meant by this. In referring to R18+ programs, the legislation sweeps up World Movies (some of which are shown free on SBS) and the adults-only service that is banned from carrying X-rated programming and which requires a complex PIN system for access on a per-movie basis. This is not the hardcore pornography that can be readily bought at Fyshwick in the nation's capital and shown on any DVD player. At the worst it is soft porn.

The problems involved in implementing any community-based decision on allowing this programming into a community were highlighted by William Tilmouth, the chief executive of the Tangentyere Council.

"We find that it is very hard to comment on World Movies and that sort of stuff because of our close proximity to the urban setting. To be able to edit those shows out would affect the entire town of Alice Springs," he told the Senate committee.

And the totally impractical side of this debate doesn't stop there because, as Austar pointed out to the inquiry, shutting down a pay-TV service to the whole of the NT is probably the only way to deal with objections to World Movies on a film-by-film basis.

The issue is made more complicated because the feelgood move to selectively deny pay-TV services to indigenous communities may trigger a claim of racial discrimination. It would be ironic should this occur, because it seems that, based on Tilmouth's evidence, only a handful of people in his council area, for example, are pay-TV subscribers. Anecdotal evidence seems to suggest that most of the 300 or so subscribers who take the adults-only package in the NT are employed in the mining and defence areas.

While education and parental supervision would seem to be the most logical ways to address this issue, the question that arises is what encouraged Macklin to toss this dead cat on the table. Did it, as another minister in a former Labor government, Gareth Evans, said after sending RAAF planes to spy on Tasmanian tree huggers, just sound like a good idea at the time?

But the issue goes deeper than that, because this inquiry is one of many into a plethora of nanny state proposals going through the parliamentary process.

Its report, due in the budget session that begins today, will give some guide to the degree of interventionism the new Government believes it should have in our day-to-day life.

 

Conroy must get in tune before changing channels. The Australian 22.05.08

Meanwhile, the sensitive subject of government intervention into indigenous communities in the Northern Territory has thrown up a sideline issue that will test Conroy's communications policy skills.

This relates to the degree to which the adults-only and world movies pay-TV services contribute to an unacceptable pornographic influence on children in these communities, even though they are already subject to stringent PIN barriers and are not X-rated.

Government legislation would impose a costly and complicated form of censorship on subscription services in the NT without any clear evidence of community benefit.

Liberal senators have condemned concerns from the subscription TV industry about such measures as being self-serving. But a minority report from the Greens and the Australian Democrats following an inquiry into this legislation supports an education campaign as a more effective way of dealing with this issue.

While the broad thrust of this bill, which amends the Howard government's emergency response legislation, falls under Indigenous Affairs Minister Jenny Macklin's mantle, the broadcasting aspects are a matter for Conroy's supervision.

He should think carefully about what is involved here and take wise counsel before signing off on something that could open a Pandora's box of nanny state interventionism.

 

***

 

Eros Magazine Vol.9 No.2.

The latest issue of Eros Magazine, Vol.9 No.2 is out now. Subscription information, and a selection of some of the articles can be found here. 

All the usual features are present, including Fiona Patten and Robbie Swann articles on the X18+ censorship laws.

We have a continuing problem with the Eros position on R18+ games which demonstrates that they are being highly selective in their fight against censorship.

The following quote from Eros CEO Fiona Patten will have most readers of this site shaking their heads. In her new article on the Eros website she...

"....congratulated the South Australian Attorney General over his stance on not allowing violent R rated computer games"

Please guys, we generally love your work, but this hurts!

 

***

 

Exclusive Brethren fight Lithgow Adult Store

Also of interest form Eros is the ongoing coverage of the Flirt Adult Store in Lithgow NSW. As mentioned previously on this site, the Exclusive Brethren, an organisation of which our own Prime Minister considers...

".... an extremist cult and sect"

..are fighting against the opening of the store. This is all part of a push by Religious Right groups to oppose the opening of Adult Stores around the country.

 

Lithgow Council in Sex Shop Scandal 
Written by EROS Friday, 16 May 2008 
EROS Media Release 18.5.07

Members of the Exclusive Brethren, a religious sect recently accused of secretly involving itself in national and state politics, are now trying to influence local governments. In an unprecedented move, sect members have offered to fund Lithgow Council’s legal costs in dealing with an application for a local adult shop.

The Flirt Adult store recently won it’s appeal in the Land and Environment Court against Council’s refusal to grant it a Development Application to set up in the main street of town. At its May7th Policy Meeting, Council announced that it was considering appealing the Land and Environment Court decision to the Supreme Court – in itself, an unprecedented action for a Council to take. An offer was then made by a local businessman, known to be one of the Exclusive Brethren, to fund a barrister to help Council put the appeal together. Council responded to this by saying, “Council Officers have undertaken an investigation and there would not appear to be any impediment to Council receiving a donation”.

Eros Association CEO, Fiona Patten, said that Council had severely undermined its independence in planning matters by stating that they would accept the money and that many people would consider this as tantamount to a form of bribery. “Everyone knows that it is the Exclusive Brethren who are behind this offer and that it is a religious sect trying to buy influence and favor for its moral agenda”, she said. “Unless Council has some world shattering information about the adult shop that no one else knows, they should not be appealing a Land and Environment case on what is essentially moral grounds”.

Ms Patten said that Council’s reasons for appealing the decision were not based on a desire for good planning outcomes but rather on the moral agendas of a few councillors. “As an example, they claim that the adult shop must have a disabled toilet but then say that the shop has to be above or below street level”, she said. “ How do they think people in wheelchairs are going to get up and down the stairs to even use the toilet? This is not rational planning policy”.

Exclusive Brethren members were involved in recent election campaigns in Tasmania against the Greens where they towed severed pigs heads behind cars with anti Green statements. In the 2004 Federal election the Exclusive Brethren supported the National Party candidate and Baptist church minister, Robert Griffith, in his campaign for the seat of Calare. Griffith emailed supporters declaring that: “The Plymouth Brethren have been convicted by God to get more involved on the political front. The Brethren do not want to be public and too up front about this, so keep it to yourselves, but praise God from whom such miracles flow!”

Ms Patten said that the people of Lithgow would be far more tolerant of a modern, couples-oriented, adult shop than of a meeting place for members of the Exclusive Brethren.

She said that the NSW Department of Local Government had asked its Investigations and Review Branch to look into the matter and she hoped that this issue of local government funding sources from religious and morals groups would be looked at more strenuously. In particular she hoped the Investigations Branch would look at any involvement with local councils around Australia and the Exclusive Brethren’s national accounting and business equipment company, National Office Assist.

 

***

 

Belladonna, Adelaide SEXPO, and the X18+ laws

Belladonna is back in the country, this time appearing at the Adelaide Sexpo. She is no stranger to Australian censorship laws, with many of her films being banned by the Classification Board, or heavily cut by Calvista to achieve X18+ ratings. Case in point is BELLADONNA'S BUTTHOLE WHORES which was hit with an RC rating in March, before last month being cut back to receive an X18+ (Explicit Sex) rating.

As is customary with the Sexpo events, Eros is using the publicity to educate the public regarding our backward censorship laws.

Sexpo Exposes Flaws in State Censorship Laws 
Written by Fiona Patten Thursday, 22 May 2008 

Today’s opening of the largest sexuality expo in the country takes place without the industry’s benchmark product , the X18+ film, being either sold or displayed.

Eros Association CEO, Fiona Patten, said that the situation highlighted two important social and economic issues for the people of South Australia.

“The fact that X18+ films, which have been screened and approved by Commonwealth censors for all Australians, are not allowed to be sold at an age restricted Sexpo in Adelaide, is illogical and a deprivation of the personal and civil liberties of the people of South Australia”, she said. “It is not illegal for people to purchase these films and it is not illegal for them to possess them and to view them – only for someone to sell them.” Ms Patten said that police officers, magistrates and a fair share of South Australian politicians, legally purchased X18+ films for their own personal use. “Dislocated and illogical laws like this only fuel black markets and I call on the Premier to either regulate the sale along with purchase and possession or ban all three dealings in X18+ films”, she said.

She maintained that the state’s fractured censorship laws had directly led to the situation where sexually explicit material was rife in Aboriginal communities. “The Mullighan Report recommended that strategies be investigated ‘to restrict access to pornographic material, by children in particular’. Eros supports this recommendation but the fact that current SA laws ban X rated films from being at an age restricted Sexpo is half the problem”, she said. “The sale of adult film material in the R18+ and X18+ categories needs to be regulated properly through licensed and age-restricted premises and only then will governments be able to control the flow of this material”.

She said that as with the Northern Territory, the legitimate and responsible sellers of X18+films knew exactly how and what was being sold into Aboriginal communities but the authorities failed to consult with the industry and often ignored the information it tried to give. In the NT the industry had written letters to state and federal politicians for four years in an attempt to have organised crime gangs selling pornography into aboriginal communities, closed down. The information was never acted on until the Little Children Report came out.

She congratulated the South Australian Attorney General over his stance on not allowing violent R rated computer games.

 

***

 

Censorship of Senators Internet Access

Back in April CRIKEY reported that since March 28th, at the request of Steve Fileding, filtering had been applied to Senators internet access. This is no doubt that this is what the rest of the country can expect once Conroy's censorship regime is installed. The leader of the Democrats, Lyn Allison has now questioned how the filters came to be installed in the first place.

Lyn Allson
We know that Senator Fielding was the one that raised this with the committee. We know that he, the moral protector of all of us in this place, went to them. I do not need that moral protection. I have been in the parliament for 12 years. We are elected to make laws and decisions for this country that affect the lives of humans in this country, but apparently we are not entitled to make decisions for ourselves about what we can and cannot see on the web. We are being treated like children. We are adults, we are fully human, and it is not up to somebody else to say this is or is not appropriate. 

Update 24th May 2008
Refused-Classification.com 

 

 

Australian Censorship News 
11th May 2008

 

AUSTRALIAN ROSIE FINNISH EROTICA #2 Censored in Australia

More hardcore censorship with the cutting of THE AUSTRALIAN ROSIE FINNISH EROTICA #2 to achieve an X18+ (Explicit Sex) rating. FZ (NSW) Pty Ltd originally had the DVD banned in March 2008.

This now joins AUSTRALIAN ROSIE FINNISH EROTICA #1, and AUSTRALIAN ROSIE: SWEDISH EROTICA #1 which were both banned in 2007, but were similarly censored for an X18+ (Explicit Sex) rating.

 

******

 

New Ratings: MAGNUM FORCE- THE GODFATHER- RESERVOIR DOGS-CLERKS

The DVD revolution of the past ten years has seen many old titles back for  re-classification. MAGNUM FORCE, THE GODFATHER, RESERVOIR DOGS, and CLERKS have always been rated R18+. How would they get on in 2008? Have 'community standards' changed? Read on....

 

***

 

MAGNUM FORCE Still R18+

You have to admire a film that thirty-five years still has what it takes to be rated R18+.  MAGNUM FORCE, the second Dirty Harry movie was originally awarded an R-rating in December 1973. In October 2001 it was confirmed as R18+, but with added consumer advice of 'Medium Level Violence'. Last week  saw it again awarded an R18+, but now with the consumer advice changed to just 'Violence'.

 

***

 

New Ratings for THE GODFATHER Trilogy

One of the original early 70's R18+ films has finally seen its rating dropped to MA15+. THE GODFATHER was awarded a rating in June 1972, eight months after the introduction of the R-rating, and has held on to this until as recently as August 2001. Finally it has been dropped to MA15+ (Strong violence, Coarse language) following the submission of the restored version by Paramount Home Entertainment. Also re-rated were part two and three.

Here is a run down of each part, covering their changing fortunes with the censors. Note that consumer advice was not introduced until May 1989, and the MA15+ until 1994.

THE GODFATHER
06/72 R18+
09/97 R18+ (Medium level violence)
08/01 R18+ (Medium level violence) *
05/08 MA15+ (Strong violence, Coarse language)

*Submitted as part of THE GODFATHER TRILOGY, however the original film would have been the reason for the R18+,

THE GODFATHER PART II: 
M-rated for it's original theatrical release
09/97 M (Medium level violence, Low level coarse language)
05/08 M (Violence, themes & coarse language)

THE GODFATHER PART III: 
01/91 M (Occasional violence, Coarse language)
08/91 M (Medium level violence, Coarse language)
09/97 M (Medium level violence, Medium level coarse language) 
05/08 M (Infrequent violence, themes & coarse language)

 

***

 

RESERVOIR DOGS: Changing Consumer Advice

The 15th Anniversary Edition DVD of RESERVOIR DOGS is out now, so it would seem to be a good time to look at the changing consumer advice that has accompanied the R18+ rating. In fifteen years we have came full circle from 'High level violence, Coarse language' to 'Medium level violence, Medium level coarse language', and back to 'High level violence, Coarse language'.

02/93 R18+ (High level violence, Coarse language)
10/93 R18+ (High level violence, Coarse language)
02/97 R18+ (Medium level violence, Medium level coarse language)
06/03 R18+ (Medium level violence, Medium level coarse language)
02/08 R18+ (High level violence, Coarse language)

 

***

CLERKS: Finally MA15+ after thirteen years!

Back in 1995 the theatrical release of CLERKS was hit with an R18+ rating. Newvision Film Distributors unsuccessfully appealed to the Review Board and the film was released in cinemas with an R18+. Thirteen years later, and finally the desired MA15+ has been awarded. Here is a run down of the classifications the film has received in that time.

01/95: R18+ (Medium level coarse language)
02/95: R18+ (Medium level coarse language) Review Board Appeal
02/05: R18+ (Medium level coarse language)
05/08: MA15+ (Strong coarse language and sexual references, Strong sexualised nudity)

The February 1995 appeal to the Review Board gave the reasons for the R18+ as:

Such language included countless uses of "fuck" (and its variations), and very frequent use of 'ass hole', 'shit'. Examples of sexually explicit language included a number of references to "my girlfriend sucked thirty six dicks" and "suck my cock", "fucking a dead man", "snowballing ... a blow job thing ".

Near the end of the film, the girlfriend of the store clerk emerges from the toilet to describe in glowing terms the sex that she had in the toilet, with a person she thought was her boyfriend. In fact, the person had gone to the toilet hours earlier with a porno magazine and died there. The boyfriend is upset that his girlfriend "is catatonic after fuckin' a dead guy".

 

The last time CLERKS was rated R18+ was February 2005. Don't you love changing community standards? Three years later (and with Gordon Ramsey saying cunt on C9) CLERKS finally gets the MA15+ that it deserved back in 1995.

Here is the original unsuccessful Review Board report for the film from February 1995.

Title: Clerks 
Applicant: Newvision Films 
Decision reviewed: Classify R by the Film Censorship Board 
Decision: The Board of Review decided to confirm the decision of the Film Censorship Board to classify Clerks as R, with the consumer advice "Medium level coarse language". 

2. Legislative provisions 

2.1 Relevant State and Territory laws applicable to the classification of films.

3. Procedure 

3.1 Four members of the Review Board viewed the film Clerks on February 3 1995. 

4. Evidence 

4.1 In reaching its decision, the Board of Review had regard to the following: 

(a) the applicant's Application for Review 

(b) the film Clerks 

(c) the relevant provisions contained in State and Territory classification laws applying to films for public exhibition, as in the Western Australia Censorship of Films Act 1947 (as amended) 

(d) the current "Guidelines for the Classification of Films and Videotapes" issued by the Office of Film and Literature Classification, and endorsed by Censorship Ministers. 

5. Findings on material questions of fact 

5.1 The Plot Clerks is an American film which chronicles, in a humorous way, the trials, boredom, love life, conflicts, bizarre happenings and tribulations of a day in the life of two male friends who work as assistants in a neighbourhood convenience store and a video shop. 

5.2 The Board of Review considered the elements cited by the Censorship Board as, in its opinion, taking the film out of the MA category and into the R classification. These included a very high level of coarse language, frequently sexually explicit, and occasionally used in an assaultive fashion. 

Such language included countless uses of "fuck" (and its variations), and very frequent use of 'ass hole', 'shit'. Examples of sexually explicit language included a number of references to "my girlfriend sucked thirty six dicks" and "suck my cock", "fucking a dead man", "snowballing ... a blow job thing ".

Near the end of the film, the girlfriend of the store clerk emerges from the toilet to describe in glowing terms the sex that she had in the toilet, with a person she thought was her boyfriend. In fact, the person had gone to the toilet hours earlier with a porno magazine and died there. The boyfriend is upset that his girlfriend "is catatonic after fuckin' a dead guy".

5.3 The tone of the film was humorous and the language largely in context. The Guidelines for the MA 15+ classification, in relation to language, however, have no provision for contextual justification of crude language which is excessive, unduly assaultive, or sexually explicit. 

5.4 The applicant put the view that the film was designed to provoke amusement, and represents characters whose lifestyles include the use of "a myriad of references to sex ...". It argued that young people today talk in more sexually explicit terms ... which if, and when heard, cause offence to parents..."; and that the Board should consider whether those of sixteen or seventeen could not comfortably cope with the material. 

5.5 The majority of the Board, however, found the sexually explicit language, the high frequency of crude language, and the assaultive nature of some language, likely to be harmful to some under the age of 18 years, and sufficiently offensive to some sections of the adult population, to require a strong warning to be given via the application of the Restricted (R 18+) classification. 

6. Reasons for the Decision 

6.1 The Review Board based its decision to confirm the Censorship Board's decision to assign an R classification to Clerks principally on the elements 5.2.

6.2 The Review Board had regard to the Guidelines for MA 15+ films, which provide that "crude language may be used, but not when it is excessive, unduly assaultive, or sexually explicit". In the opinion of the majority of the Board, the language used in the film was excessive, frequently assaultive, and often sexually explicit (as per examples listed in 5.2 above). The language was in context with the style and tone of the film, but the Guidelines for MA IS + do not provide for contextual justification. The Board also held that the sexually explicit nature of some of the language and concepts, such as the girlfriend having sex with a dead man, to be potentially harmful to some under 18 years. The Board therefore found that the film did not meet the Guidelines for MA 15+, and was more appropriately classified R. Further the application of the R classification is required to flag material "possibly offensive to some sections of the adult community". In the view of the Board, the use of the R classification, to warn adults of a high incidence of crude and sexually explicit language, is justified in this case. 

6.3 The Review Board therefore concluded that the film Clerks should be placed in the For Restricted Exhibition category, with the consumer advice "Medium level coarse language". 

7. Summary The Review Board's majority decision is to confirm the decision of the Film Censorship Board to assign an R For Restricted Exhibition classification to the film Clerks, and with the consumer advice "Medium level coarse language". 

This decision was taken after full consideration of the applicant's submission, and after assessing the film as a whole against relevant legislative criteria and those contained in the current film classification guidelines endorsed by the Censorship Ministers. 3 February 1995.

 

 

******

 

 

Advertising Standards Bureau: Dec '07-Feb '08 Complaints

Posters for THE HEARTBREAK KID, EAST WEST 101, and Sexpo, and a print ad for Krystal Adult World are just some of the complaints heard by the Advertising Standards Bureau from December 2007 to February 2008. Go to their website (adstandards.com.au) to see full reports for many others. Take some time to read them as some of the complaints are so funny and pathetic that it is no wonder that the vast majority get thrown out.  Thanks to that wonderful thing called the internet many of these advertisements can still be viewed on sites such as You Tube.

 

***

 

THE HEARTBREAK KID: Poster Complaint

1. Complaint reference number 397/07 
2. Advertiser Paramount Pictures (Heartbreak Kid) 
3. Product Entertainment 
4. Type of advertisement Outdoor 
5. Nature of complaint Discrimination or vilification Gender - section 2.1 
6. Date of determination Tuesday, 11 December 2007 
7. DETERMINATION Dismissed

DESCRIPTION OF THE ADVERTISEMENT 

This advertisement for the movie The Heartbreak Kid features actor Ben Stiller huddled in a chair swathed in a white bathrobe, and staring fixedly at the camera. Just in front and to his side is a woman. The advertisement shows only the rear view of the woman wearing a leopard-skin bikini, bridal veil, high-heeled shoes and a garter around her thigh. Text reads "He waited all his life to get married. Too bad he didn't wait another week." 

THE COMPLAINT 

A sample of comments which the complainant/s made regarding this advertisement included the following: 

The advertisement is in bad taste and was embarassing for the females on our school bus as we pulled up behind it on a school excursion. It portrayed young women as sex objects. The movie itself is rated R and I believe the advertising reflected its sexual nature. 

It is totally inappropriate for this type of imagery to be shown, especially on the back of a bus where it CANNOT BE AVOIDED. Whether that bus is driving past a school zone, shopping centre or our own home, we do not need or want to see a semi naked woman whether she be standing over a seemingly weak, cowering man or not. This advertisement and it's placement on the back of a bus give us no choice but to see it. Perhaps it is about time your pathetically low (may I say in the gutter) standards are raised to a level where most DECENT, MORAL people would not be offended. 

You could even try to raise them to a standard where NO ONE will be offended. This is an offensive ad in two ways. Firstly, it uses gratuitous nudity and an ugly, demeaning picture of a woman to sell the movie - which is about a man who marries a woman, then decides he doesn't like her. (Ha Ha) Secondly, by associating a popular star with this image it is making it more OK to see women as pieces of faceless flesh. Young men like Adam Sandler. They think he is cool. As a society are trying to teach young men to treat women with respect. 

THE ADVERTISER’S RESPONSE 

Comments which the advertiser made in response to the complaint/s regarding this advertisement included the following: 

This advertising campaign commenced on Monday 29 October and will cease on Sunday 25 November. 

The man is cowering in a chair with a shell-shocked expression on his face. He is not looking at the young woman at all. 

We do not consider the advertisement to be discriminatory or demeaning. The female is clothed,  albeit in a bikini, and by her demeanour is clearly the stronger character of the two people in the image. The "tongue in cheek" comedic nature of the film's content is fairly obvious by the copyline: "He waited all his life to get married. Too bad he didn't wait another week." 

We are of the opinion that we cannot stop advertising films on the grounds that certain sections of the public may deem certain aspects of the advertising to be offensive. Buspak had no problem with The Heartbreak Kid artwork when it was shown to their production team, prior to its installation on the buses. The OFLC did not perceive the feature film as being offensive or demeaning to women. They granted the film an MA rating in Australia...(the film did however receive an R rating in the USA). 

THE DETERMINATION 

The Advertising Standards Board (“Board”) considered whether this advertisement breaches Section 2 of the Advertiser Code of Ethics (the “Code”). 

The Board noted the complainants' concern that the image of the rear view of the woman's lower half is demeaning to women and inappropriate in terms of nudity or sexual suggestion. 

The Board noted that the advertisement depicts people at a beach, that the woman is wearing a bikini, and there is no nudity. The Board noted that the movie is classified MA15+ and considered that the advertisement did not depict material that was of an MA15+ classification. The Board considered that the advertisement was not overtly sexually suggestive and that it was not inappropriate for a bus advertisement. The Board determined that the advertisement did not breach section 2.3 of the Code. 

The Board considered that the image of only the lower half of the woman was not demeaning to women nor encouraging of inappropriate or disrespectful behaviour towards women. The Board considered that the image of the woman was not inconsistent with the apparent plot of the movie, was not discriminatory to or vilifying of women and did not breach section 2.1 of the Code. 

Finding that the advertisement did not breach the Code on other grounds, the Board dismissed the complaint.

 

***

 

EAST WEST 101: Poster Complaint

1. Complaint reference number 447/07 
2. Advertiser SBS Corporation (East West 101) 
3. Product Media 
4. Type of advertisement Outdoor 
5. Nature of complaint Violence Other – section 2.2 
6. Date of determination Wednesday, 16 January 2008 
7. DETERMINATION Dismissed 

 DESCRIPTION OF THE ADVERTISEMENT 

These outdoor advertisements feature actors from the TV series East West 101 holding handguns as though ready to fire. The images are life-size and are placed in various outdoor executions. The images include a blue banner with the text "Two Aussie cops. Two Aussie cultures. East West 101. Thursdays 8.30pm on SBS." 

THE COMPLAINT 

A sample of comments which the complainant/s made regarding this advertisement included the following: 

I’ve worked in Advertising and Design for 20 or more years and have never complained about an ad before. I thought maybe I’m getting old, maybe it’s the fact I have a 3 year old and a new born. Maybe it’s a sense of despair that Howard’s gun buy-back and the Port Arthur massacre was totally in vain. Then in my home suburb of Balgowlah, there goes another life size person in a bus stop holding a gun. I thought I was over reacting. And then a leading headline today. Another person with a gun kills 8 in a shopping mall somewhere. I can turn a program off if I don’t like it. I can’t do the same for such a graphic ad on the street. Since then, there is another report today, Monday 10.12.07 with 4 more slain by guns. I object to this desensitising in our streets. The show advertised is probably televised past an appropriate hour for child viewing. But these ads give them no choice. I don't object to the show, or the actors. It's just this unthinking use of guns as props in suburban or even urban streets. We now have guns appearing in night clubs and even drive by shootings and armed holdups in Sydney. This kind of advertising normalises them and I believe that's not the something which helps. 

THE ADVERTISER’S RESPONSE 

Comments which the advertiser made in response to the complaint/s regarding this advertisement included the following: 

SBS is established under the Special Broadcasting Service Act 1991. The principal function of SBS is to provide multilingual and multicultural radio and television services that inform, educate and entertain all Australians, and, in doing so, reflect Australia’s multicultural society. 

The complaint concerns cut out still-image billboards used to promote EastWest101, a six-part police drama set in Sydney screening on SBS over December- January 2007/08. The advertisements ran in bus shelters as part of a short campaign from 2 December 2007 for one week and the posters were distributed for a two week period, from the week commencing 2 December and the week commencing 16th December. The advertisements have been placed on outdoor advertising billboards and public buildings and tie into on-air and online promotions for the program. The advertisements pictured on the main characters of EastWest101, two policemen played by Don Hany and William McInnes. 

The campaign is intended to be high impact, and will be maintained for two weeks only. The images represent action shots of police work as reflected in the drama, and a sense of the conflict between the central characters. 

SBS considers that only clauses 2.2 and 2.6 of the Code are potentially relevant to its consideration of the complaint. 

Clause 2.2: violence Clause 2.2 of the Code states: "Advertisements shall not present or portray violence unless it is justifiable in the context of the product or service advertised." The images used in the advertisement do not, and are not intended to, glorify the use of guns or violence in the community. The program promoted is based on the work of a real police squad located in Lakemba, and the billboards are drawn from action shots of the characters at work in the context of the drama. 

SBS acknowledges that violence is part of everyday life which must be dealt with responsibly. SBS recognises that for some people, particularly children, the portrayal of physical and psychological violence has a unique potential to distress and disturb. Accordingly, it is SBS policy not to present violence gratuitously. 

EastWest101 deals with a range of conflicts in society, in a powerfully dramatic treatment of social issues in some parts of Australia. The central character Zane Malik is an Arab-Australian police officer often caught between law enforcement and his community. Other subplots in the program deal with drug cultures and racially motivated violence. In the context of this program, violence is an essential element to the exploration of these social issues, as it tends to be a key element of police work. 

The advertisements do not in themselves represent violence.

 Clause 2.6: Health and safety 
Clause 2.6 of the Code states: 
Advertisements shall not depict material contrary to prevailing community standards on health and safety. 

SBS, does not intend, through these advertisements, to promote or glorify the illicit use of firearms in the community. EastWest101 is a police drama. 

As Australian police use guns, they are represented in the images as visual shorthand for the program genre. The advertisements show police officers with guns drawn to represent some of the dramatic tension represented in the program. The guns are not being mishandled or used except by the characters authorised to use them, police officers. Guns are often used in promotions for police drama. 

The program EastWest101 deals with some of the tragic consequences of guns in the community, and the first episode includes a highly empathetic treatment of the human cost of mishandled firearms in volatile situations.

For the reasons given above SBS does not consider that the advertisements breach the Code. The advertisements do not present violence and do not depict material contrary to prevailing community standards on health and safety. 

THE DETERMINATION 

The Advertising Standards Board (“Board”) considered whether this advertisement breaches Section 2 of the Advertiser Code of Ethics (the “Code”). 

The Board noted the complainant's concern about the advertisements which feature life size images of men with guns. 

The Board noted Section 2.2 of the Code which states that 'advertisements shall not present or portray violence unless it is justifiable in the context of the product or service advertised.' 

The Board noted that the image of a man holding a gun is an image that is suggestive of violence but that the still image is of itself not an image of strong violence. The Board considered that the advertisement did clearly indicate that it was an advertisement for a police drama. In the context of this product, the Board considered that the depiction of a man pointing a gun was justifiable. The Board determined that the advertisement did not breach Section 2.2 of the Code. 

Finding that the advertisement did not breach the Code on other grounds, the Board dismissed the complaint.

 

***

 

Krystal Adult World: Print Ad Complaint

 1. Complaint reference number 430/07 
2. Advertiser Krystal Adult World (Stiletto) 
3. Product Other 
4. Type of advertisement Print 
5. Nature of complaint Portrayal of sex/sexuality/nudity – section 2.3 
6. Date of determination Wednesday, 16 January 2008 
7. DETERMINATION Dismissed 

DESCRIPTION OF THE ADVERTISEMENT

This print advertisement features a drawing of a woman in a pink dress, holding a black stiletto shoe at eye level. 

THE COMPLAINT 

A sample of comments which the complainant/s made regarding this advertisement included the following: 

The advertisement is for adult products and may seem inocuous but when viewed upside down it shows a woman fondling her vagina. 

THE ADVERTISER’S RESPONSE 

Comments which the advertiser made in response to the complaint/s regarding this advertisement included the following: 

I'm so glad this was brought to my attention as I wasn't aware of the add being offensive in its proper context. If you turn any photo sideways, reverse etc you may interpret whatever you wish to see in a photo. 

I have discovered 7 advertisements in the Womens Weekly and other publications including The National Geographic, where photos could be interpreted in a sexual manner. 

I have informed the Echo that this add will NEVER be used again in their newspaper. I feel your issue is NOT with me but with the editor, as he should screen these for censorship. 

 THE DETERMINATION 

The Advertising Standards Board (“Board”) considered whether this advertisement breaches Section 2 of the Advertiser Code of Ethics (the “Code”). 

The Board noted the complainant's concern that the advertisement, when seen upside down, is sexually suggestive and inappropriate. 

The Board viewed the advertisement and considered that, when viewed in its intended form ie: the correct way up, the advertisement was not inappropriate. 

The Board considered that when the advertisement was inverted although it was suggestive of a partially naked woman and her genitals, the advertisement is clearly not an image of that. 

The Board noted that the advertiser will not use that advertisement again.The Board considered that the advertisement did not breach Section 2.3 of the Code. 

Finding that the advertisement did not breach the Code on other grounds, the Board dismissed the complaint.

 

***

 

Sexpo Poster Complaint

1. Complaint reference number 420/07 
2. Advertiser Sexpo Pty Ltd 
3. Product Other 
4. Type of advertisement Outdoor 
5. Nature of complaint Portrayal of sex/sexuality/nudity – section 2.3 
6. Date of determination Tuesday, 11 December 2007 
7. DETERMINATION Dismissed

DESCRIPTION OF THE ADVERTISEMENT 

This outdoor advertisement for Sexpo features two females photographed from the shoulders upwards and announced as "The Evil Empire presents Belladonna and her girlfriend Bobbi Starr." The advertisement also features photos of exhibits available including a promotion "Ride the Gerbil at Sexpo" with a picture of a miniature train and the front carriage carrying an image of a furry animal called a gerbil. 

THE COMPLAINT 

A sample of comments which the complainant/s made regarding this advertisement included the following:

 I'm not sure if the act of achieving sexual gratification by inserting a live gerbil in the rectum until it dies is an urban myth or not. Either way the connotation these adds suggest is not only disgusting but cruel upsetting.

THE ADVERTISER’S RESPONSE 

Comments which the advertiser made in response to the complaint/s regarding this advertisement included the following: 

We would like to point out that the image in question was on 6 Billboards over a period of three weeks and one complaint (based on that person’s own personal interpretation) does not represent the views of the community. We are unaware of any “urban myth” as described by the complainant. 

You might liken this to the “Batman” ride at Dreamworld – just because they have named it Batman, does not mean that any bats have ben harmed or altered to be part bat part man! 

The advertisements in question are in no way designed to be offensive, nor do they refer to bestiality, or cruelty to animals in anyway. The “cruel and disgusting” connotation is the complainants’ alone, for which we take no responsibility. 

THE DETERMINATION 

The Advertising Standards Board (“Board”) considered whether this advertisement breaches Section 2 of the Advertiser Code of Ethics (the “Code”). 

The Board noted the outdoor advertisement and considered whether it breached Section 2.3 of the Code dealing with sex, sexuality and nudity. 

The Board noted that the advertisement contained an image of a woman from the shoulders up and that  this was an image that was not inappropriate or overtly sexual. The Board also considered the references to the exhibits and features of the Sexpo exhibition. The Board considered that none of these references were explicitly sexual and the Board considered that the references were generally not explicit or inappropriate. 

The Board considered also that the language used in the advertisement was not inappropriate – containing references to the exhibits at the Expo, but doing so in a manner that did not feature obscene or strong language. 

The Board considered the reference to the Gerbil Sex train ride. The Board noted that there may be sexual connnotations taken from this reference by some people, but considered that the advertisement itself, by simply mentioning the name of the ride and a picture of a show ride carriage with a gerbil head, did not breach any of the provisions of the Code. 

Finding that the advertisement did not breach the Code on other grounds, the Board dismissed the complaint.

Update 11th May 2008
Refused-Classification.com 

 

 

Australian Censorship News 
4th May 2008

 

PUSSY SWEAT: Banned in Australia

The 2003 all-girl hardcore feature PUSSY SWEAT has just been banned by the Classification Board. The review over at Adult DVD Talk provides no real clues as to what the problems could have been.

 

******

 

Sydney Adult Stores Raided

Robbie Swann from the Eros Association has written the following opinion piece on last weeks police raids in Western Sydney. The last high-profile busts were early last year when stores in Kings Cross were emptied of stock. As usual, the situation will soon be back to normal, and trade will resume. In the article Robbie claims the raids took place following pressure from the Classification Board’s Community Liaison Officer, Ron Robertson.

 

Police Raids Adult Shops 
Written by Robbie Swan 
Thursday, 01 May 2008 

NSW police have raided a number of adult shops in Blacktown and St Marys over the last week, ostensibly looking for X18+ videos and DVDs. It is illegal to sell films that have been classified X18+ by the Federal government, in NSW. Most people do not know that non-violent, sexually explicit films showing consenting adults, are illegal to sell in NSW or any of the Australian states for that matter.

It is estimated that up to 50 police officers spent at least 10 hours each performing these raids and that at least another 200 police hours will be spent on classifying and processing the thousands of DVDs that were seized. Approximately 30 robberies and a dozen assaults would have taken place in the Blacktown and St Mary’s precincts during the time that these raids were enacted. A poll of public opinion concerning where the police should be placing their attention in these matters, would overwhelmingly come down on the side of the robberies and assaults. Anyone who has ever been burgled or subjected to an assault will know of the frustration in having to wait sometimes hours for a police officer to attend.

Mostly this is not the fault of the police. It’s the fault of the state government who would rather that they spend unnecessary amounts of time policing morality - like censorship breaches. What makes this situation worse is that many of the police raids are carried out at the request of the federal government’s Censorship Board. The very same organisation that classifies X18+ films as OK for adults at a federal level.

The Board’s Community Liaison Officer, Ron Robertson, is supposed to go around and visit retailers and inform them if they are selling material outside of the law. Instead, he now takes it upon himself to encourage state police to waste their time busting adult retailers for selling x18+ films that his own Board has classified! If this sounds like bureaucracy gone mad, you’re right. The NSW Attorney General should get out and about and talk to a few of the 30% of the state’s adults who regularly buy and watch X18+ films. And the Federal censorship Minister, (former NSW Attorney General) Bob Debus, needs to have a serious talk to all state Attorneys about the massive waste of police resources in each state on policing the sale of adult films.

 

******

 

GIRLS GONE WILD DVD's Censored in Australia

The GIRLS GONE WILD series is aimed squarely at the R18+ market for soft-core sex, as such, the Australian distributor, Zeal Entertainment, is always aiming for an R18+ rating. Most of the time they are successful, though on several occasions they have been hit with X18+ ratings. This was the case with two more titles which in April were rated X18+ by the Classification Board. GIRLS GONE WILD: GIRLS ON GIRLS and GIRLS GONE WILD: GIRLS POWER CRAZY have now both been censored by the distributor for R18+ ratings and will be released soon. 

They join GIRLS GONE WILD: MARDI GRAS INVASION and GIRLS GONE WILD: SPRING BREAK SEX RIOT which are already out in censored R18+ versions. Not that you would know this from the covers though. They both claim to be UNCENSORED! This is blatant false advertising, they are cut. Ask for your money back guys! 

Two more titles to look out for are GIRLS GONE WILD: SEXIEST MOMENTS EVER and GIRLS GONE WILD: CELEBRITY LOOK-A-LIKES. Both were also hit with X18+ ratings in April, but are yet to be passed in censored versions.

 

******

 

Umbrella's IN THE REALM OF THE SENSES is cut

The review of Umbrella's IN THE REALM OF THE SENSES over at Michael D's has identified it as being sourced from a censored British print. The 2001 Madman DVD release contains the scene that has been optically reframed in the UK print. 

Other DVD's where censored UK prints have been used include Madman's ROMANCE and Paramount's THE EXTERMINATOR. In the latter case (like the GIRLS GONE WILD discs) it promised

"Finally witness the Director's cut, featuring never before seen footage from one of the most cold blooded tales of revenge ever to hit the screen"

Not true, we've always had the uncut version of this and ROMANCE until these censored versions found there way onto the market.

 

Update 4th May 2008
Refused-Classification.com 

 

Updates: April 2008