Film
What's on at the cinema plus reviews of the latest movie and DVD releases
Bookmark this page
Censors' sensibilities
Dave Calhoun talks hardcore porn with our country's film censors.
Aug 18 2006
I'm sitting in the Soho Square offices of the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) and talking to two Board members about the dangers of pushing a vegetable up one's backside. It's this precarious act (please, don't try it at home) that artist Matthew Barney embraces in his new short film 'Hoist', in which we see the director feigning sex with a throbbing industrial machine while gripping the outer reaches of a turnip between his butt cheeks. I recall this scene in embarrassment to my interviewees. The censors, however, are non-plussed. They've seen it all before.
'Actually, we thought it might be a sugar beet,' offers a straight-faced Sue Clark, head of publicity at the BBFC, who is talking alongside her colleague and BBFC senior examiner, Craig Lapper.
Turnip or sugar beet? Decide for yourself: 'Hoist' is one of seven 'porno' short films that producers Mel Agace and Neville Wakefield have commissioned from seven artists and filmmakers – including Larry Clark, Gaspar Noé and Sam Taylor-Wood – and packaged together as the portmanteau film, 'Destricted'.
'Destricted' is pitched as a serious investigation into the nature of porn, but like most examples of the genre, it relies on a limited repertoire and so often makes for tedious viewing. In 'Death Valley', Sam Taylor-Wood presents a single camera-shot of a man wanking in the desert. In 'We Fuck Alone', Gaspar Noé presents scenes of a disturbed man violently attacking a sex doll and applies the same woozy camerawork, strobe effects and throbbing soundtrack familiar from 'Irréversible'. More interesting is Larry Clark's 'Impaled' (pictured), a short documentary in which the director of 'Kids' interviews a series of young, male porn hopefuls before pairing one off with an older porn actress and then filming their first sexual encounter – which includes anal sex, enema and all.
Despite the film's ample cum-shots, copious hard-ons and irregular use of a root vegetable, the BBFC has awarded 'Destricted' an '18' certificate – not the usual 'R-18' reserved for hardcore porn. 'We wouldn't describe the film as pornographic,' explains Lapper, one of 29 BBFC examiners who view and rate the full spectrum of films shown in this country, from anodyne cartoons to hardcore fetish porn.
'One of the Board's aims is to take account of the intentions of a filmmaker and the film's likely audience. This wasn't a film intended to arouse sexually. It's possible that some segments may have that effect on some people, but the overall intention of the film was to explore the boundaries between pornography, sex and art.'
Most filmgoers are probably aware that the BBFC, which was founded in 1912 as a self-regulatory body for the industry, is responsible for allotting every film a certificate ranging from 'U' to '18'. It does this on behalf of local councils, which retain the right to alter a rating or to ban a film, as Westminster Council did with 'Crash' in 1997.
Fewer people, though, will know that the BBFC is also responsible for assessing all porn movies scheduled to screen at sex cinemas or to be sold on DVD in licensed sex shops. It's the BBFC that decides whether to give such films an 'R-18' rating, to suggest appropriate cuts or, in some circumstances, to ban a work outright.
'The BBFC knows about pornography in a way that no one else in the UK does,' agrees Clark. 'We talk to the police and customs about porn, but they come to us too because we see more pornography than anyone else.'
The BBFC – unlike its American counterpart, the MPAA (the subject of a damning new documentary, 'This Film Is Not Yet Rated') – enjoys a reputation for taking a sensible and liberal approach to its work. Last year, for example, it gave an '18' to two features containing scenes of real sex. One was Carlos Reygadas' 'Battle in Heaven' (blow-jobs); the other was Michael Winterbottom's 'Nine Songs' (bonking).
'I think the Board puts more emphasis now than it did ten years ago on the rights of adults to make their own decisions,' suggests Lapper when I ask him if the BBFC has become more liberal. 'That's come about partly as a result of what the public has told us and also because of increasing commitments under the law to do with human rights and so forth.'
'In the past, even at the adult level, the board would intervene with material on the basis that it was "disturbing" or "offensive" or "tasteless". We tend not to make those kind of decisions now. It's more about harm and legality. We do take into account public offence, but we have to weigh that up against other considerations. So if something's merely challenging or shocking, and if we're not convinced that there's a harm issue there, we prefer to allow adults to make their own decisions.'
Interestingly, while the BBFC has been moving towards greater liberalism, some odd exceptions have arisen when rating older work. Take a recent DVD collection of episodes of 'The Benny Hill Show', for example; the BBFC found that Hill was making jokes at the expense of rape victims and awarded a '12' rating rather than the previous 'PG'. When episodes of the '70s British sitcom 'Love Thy Neighbour' (comic premise: a black family moves next door) were released on DVD, the BBFC again opted for a hike from 'PG' to '12'.
And what about Matthew Barney's turnip (or sugar beet)? Context, of course, is everything, so would the BBFC have a problem with that same, turnip-embracing scene in a less arty context, in a genuine, 'R-18' film? Would the turnip contravene the BBFC's standards regarding 'harm'? (Harm, in the eyes of the BBFC, refers to scenes that could encourage behaviour that is dangerous. Scenes of rape in porn, for example, are strictly outlawed.)
'No,' says Lapper. 'I don't think we'd have a problem if Matthew Barney wanted to make a porn film involving a turnip.'
Adds Clark: 'And objects are often used in porn. It depends on the size…'
Lapper: 'There are very complicated things we have to look at, often with medical advice, about what damage something might do if it's inserted into the body. It depends on the size of the object, the shape of the object, whether it has a natural stopping-point. These kind of things…'
Turnips? Stopping-points? Inserted objects, large and small? All in a day's work for our nation's number one porn experts: the BBFC.
'Destricted' opens on September 8.
User comments on this story
-
- Tony Comstock said...
-
Comparisions between the BBFC and the MPAA are specious.
MPAA ratings are voluntary. BBFC classifications are manditory, and backed under threat of law.
As such, my films are illegal to sell in the UK because they have not been classified by the BBFC.
The MPAA holds no such power, and my films are widely available in the US from places like Amazon, Barnes & Noble and Blockbuster.
The BBFC is nothing less than censorship. Posted on Sep 29 2007 17:23 - Report as inappropriate
-
- bruce said...
- would've been interesting to hear what the BBFC are going to do about films which may cause religious or ethnic offence. Porn is one thing, but what about films which criticise Islam or Judaism? also, what about new legislation banning bondage videos online; many DVDs are downloadable and the board says it's responsible for their regulation, so how will that work? Posted on Sep 04 2006 17:06
- Report as inappropriate
-
- Bruce said...
- You should've used this opportunity to ask how the BBFC will treat films which may cause offence to religious or ehthnic groups. Porn is all very well but it's far more interesting to hear what they are going to do with films which criticise Islam or Judaism. Also, what's their stand on new legislation banning bondage simulation on the internet? Many DVDs are now downloadable and the BBFC claim to be in charge of regulating DVD content, so what's the score there? Posted on Sep 04 2006 17:01
- Report as inappropriate
-
- TheUnready said...
-
Re: the R18 rating:
"Children certainly won't understand the "something is art or something is porn""
That's why the rating exists - it's a distribution issue. R18 films are only available at licensed sex shops or (pointlessly) non-UK-based internet distributors. The rating provides a simple means of 'ensuring' such titles are simply not encountered by children or the Mary Whitehouse brigade. I currently support the distinction. I review porn professionally, and, I promise you, there is a world of difference between '9 Songs' and 'Big Bang Bimbo Bingo.'
But, of course, it's all online anyway. Posted on Aug 31 2006 15:15 - Report as inappropriate
-
- Matt said...
- The funny thing about Destricted is that as it attempts to blur the line between "art" and "porn" it makes it very clear that there really is only one classification needed, and that is "porn". Posted on Aug 28 2006 23:20
- Report as inappropriate
-
- Alvin said...
- Yup its nice to see that our BBFC is moving with the times, however I have 2 words that totally screw up any arguments.. FILE SHARING also Ive seen more hardcore stuff over a live webcam than i have ever seen in a movie... now what about Tony robinson with a Turnip????? how would that be classified? Posted on Aug 25 2006 03:38
- Report as inappropriate
-
- John Minson said...
-
So Sue Clark thinks that: 'The BBFC knows about pornography in a way that no one else in the UK does.'
Really? Does seeing all the films submitted for classification and talking "to the police and customs about porn" make the BBFC experts on the history of pornographic cinema from the first decades of the 20th century, for example?
To understand 'porn' films it's necessary to comprehend their context: their place in the development of cinema - and, perhaps more pertinently, outside the orthodox history; how they relate to cultural changes and social history; the way that external forces, from technology to the law and economic models have shaped the genre; and the development of porn aesthetics.
The BBFC - not to mention police and customs - have no doubt seen countless porn films. But seeing is not necessarily understanding and those who would censor any aspect of culture would do well to remember that. Posted on Aug 24 2006 22:41 - Report as inappropriate
-
- moquenzo said...
- vegetarians wont like this. its their food! LOL Posted on Aug 24 2006 17:58
- Report as inappropriate
-
- Bucknaked said...
- What about turnips rights? Posted on Aug 22 2006 15:27
- Report as inappropriate
-
- spanking monkey said...
- You mean the total number of times, or just those times he's raped with a turnip? Posted on Aug 22 2006 11:27
- Report as inappropriate
-
- joeking said...
- How many times was Benny Hill raped? Posted on Aug 21 2006 16:33
- Report as inappropriate
-
- Fingers said...
- Why do we still need the R18 classification - we've seen it all in standard 18 now. Who are the BBFC trying to protect with the R18 category? I say ditch R18 category. Posted on Aug 21 2006 13:08
- Report as inappropriate
-
- Fingers said...
- Why does the BBFC still need the R18 classification - we've seen it all at 18, who exactly are they trying to protect with the R18 category and why? - Children certainly won't understand the "something is art or something is porn" reason for censorship. I say, ditch R18 it is redundant 18 is sufficient for all material. Posted on Aug 21 2006 13:03
- Report as inappropriate
-
- wednesday said...
- makes me want a turnip real bad Posted on Aug 21 2006 04:11
- Report as inappropriate
-
- TW said...
- Wow. Can we please import the BBFC to America, and dump the prudish blue-noses of the MPAA? At least the former seems not to make arbitrary decisions and trust grown-ups to make their own choices. Oh that it were so over here... Posted on Aug 21 2006 01:38
- Report as inappropriate
Most popular on this site
Top Stories
The Coens' 'Burn after Reading': review
Pitt and Clooney star in the Coen brothers' latest, 'Burn After Reading', which opened the 2008 Venice film festival
John C Reilly on ‘Step Brothers’
Method man turned slapstick comic John C Reilly talks to Time Out about his new film ‘Step Brothers’
Guy Ritchie on ‘RocknRolla’
Wally Hammond talks to Guy Ritchie about his latest film, ‘RocknRolla’ which sees him safely back in his old manor among the familiar carnival of villains, scams and high-octane spills and thrills
Saul Dibb on ‘The Duchess’
Dave Calhoun discovers from director Saul Dibb that his latest, 'The Duchess’ is far from your typical aristos-in-love movie
Opinion: Can George Lucas still make ‘small’ movies?
With the release of animated spin-off 'Star Wars: The Clone Wars', Tom Huddleston wonders whether George Lucas will ever return to his roots.
What do you think?
Post your comment now