Barbarian Queen
Dir Héctor Olivera / 1985 / USA
Banned in October 1985 for gratuitous sexual violence. A 76min version was cut to 70mins (v) for an R rating.
The Medusa-CBS/Fox video release runs 70min 15sec, and appears to be missing one (or more) rape scenes.
In the 80's Vestron Video released both unrated and R rated tapes in the US. The New Concorde DVD issued in 2001 claims to be the R version, so it is presumably censored.
Beast in Heat
Dir Luigi Batzella / 1977 / Italy
A VHS of this was seized by customs in 1992 and forwarded to the OFLC who rated it RC.
This part of the short-lived Italian Nazi film boom. It
was never picked-up for Australian distribution. This is not surprising as
the OFLC have always treated such films harshly. Others titles covered on
this site include:
 | NAZI LOVE CAMP 27 - Banned! |
| RED NIGHTS OF THE GESTAPO - Banned & Censored! |
| SS CAMP 5 WOMEN'S HELL - Banned! |
| SS EXPERIMENT LOVE CAMP - Banned! |
| SS GIRLS - Rated R18+ |
Beast of Pleasure
Dir Eddy Matalon / 1974 / France
Blake Films cut this from 76 to 69mins (f) for an R18+ in 1981. The censored 69min (68m 33s) release on Roadshow's Vibrant Video label was reviewed in 1984 and confirmed as an R.
Bête, La
aka The Beast
Dir Walerian Borowczyk / 1975 / France
When first submitted to the censors by Cincetta in November 1976, a print running 2815.00mtr (102m 53s) was Refused Registration for reasons of 'Indecency'. An appeal to the Review Board in July 1977 failed and saw them uphold the decision of the Film Censorship Board. A censored version running 2701.70mtr (98m 45s) was eventually passed with an R-rating in October 1977. It was this print, cut by 4m 08s, that went on to have a theatrical release.Here is how Cinema Papers reported the cuts at the time.
"La Bete was originally banned in November 1976. The decision was appealed in July 1977,but the was film again denied registration. At this stage it ran 2815m or 102.61min. The film was then cut by its distributors to 2701.70m (98.48min) and it was finally passed with an R classification without further cuts. To meet 'community standards', 4.2min had to be deleted. These cuts represent most of the sequence where Romilda's (Sirpa Lane) passionate lovemaking exhausts the beast who collapses to the ground and expires. As a result the tale has been robbed of its irony"
It was next before the censors in November 1981 when Star
Video had a 94m videotape Refused Registration. The reason given for the
ban was sex, which were described as:
Frequency: Infrequent
Explicitness/Intensity: High
Purpose: Gratuitous
During the early 80's there was no law that compelled distributors to have video tapes classified. For a period, the Censorship Board simply viewed the tapes and passed them as 'Special Condition', the definition of which was:
That the film/tape will not be exhibited in any State in contravention of that State's law relating to the exhibition of films.
It was under this 'Special Condition' that Publishing and Broadcasting Video had an 89m reconstructed (censored) version passed in September 1983.
The X-rating was introduced in February 1984 and the same
month LA BETE became one of the first titles to be awarded such a rating. The
92m tape submitted by Publishing and Broadcasting Video was awarded the
X-rating for sex which was described as:
Frequency: Frequent
Explicitness/Intensity: High
Purpose: Gratuitous
Note that there was a brief period where the X-rating was considered not just for sex films, but for material that was too extreme for R18+. During this time violence could exist in the X category, and films such as CALIGULA, JUNGLE WARRIORS, PINK FLAMINGOS, LA BETE, and ROSEMARY'S KILLER were awarded this rating. The guidelines were swiftly tightened up to remove violence, though pro-censorship groups will try and tell you otherwise.
Despite Publishing and Broadcasting Video having a 89m 'Special Condition' tape passed in September 1983, and a 92m X-rated tape passed in February 1984, we have yet to see any confirmation that either was actually released. If anyone has any evidence to the contrary then please send in the details.
Most recently an uncut print screened in Australia at the 2002 Melbourne Underground Film Festival.
On April 30th 2007 Umbrella Entertainment had a DVD rated R18+ (High Level Sexual Themes and Sex Scenes). This was released in February 2008. The cover states 'Banned for 30 Years!'.
Beyond, The
Dir Lucio Fulci / 1981 / Italy
Anticipating problems with the Censorship Board, Greater Union Film Distributors pre-cut the film before submission. This 2276.69mtr (83min 13sec) print, described as 'pre-censor cut version', was rated R in May 1982.
In February 1985, Palace were given the same rating for another 83min (v) print. The exact runtime for the Palace Explosive tape is 81min 46sec, around two minutes shorter than uncut prints.A couple of customs confiscation to report for this. In 1992 they forwarded an uncut tape to the OFLC who confirmed it as being Refused Classification. A more recent report comes from 2002/2003 with a copy of the Anchor Bay tin being seized.
Siren Visual Entertainment released an Australian DVD in November 2004. It runs 83min 47sec and is uncut.
The following is a comparison of the cut Palace Explosive tape against the uncut Siren DVD. It is not an exact check, so there may be some more small cuts that have been missed. The time quoted refers to the point in the DVD where footage was censored from the tape release. Note that the Siren DVD begins with a shot of the hotel with over which 'Louisiana 1927' is shown. It is missing a brief 1-2 second shot of the Hotel sign that should come before. This is present in the Palace Tape.
SCHWEICK'S DEATH
Schweick is dragged to the basement. The Palace tape then removes three shots at 4:20, 4:25, and 4:30 of him being whipped with the chain and his bloody wounds. Each time we only see the shots of those doing the whipping. The scene resumes with him being picked up.
The Palace tape shows the first nail being hammered into his wrist. It cuts at 5:06 to remove the sight of blood weeping from the wound. It resumes with a shot of his face before the second nail is hammered in.
JOE'S EYE GOUGE
The Palace tape shows the start of the scene where Joe's eye is gouged out. It cuts at 17:30 to remove the sight of blood coming from his eye socket.
SPIDER ATTACK
This is the longest cut in the Palace tape. Beginning at 49:50 it removes the entire scene of the spiders tearing at the Librarian's lip, nose, eye, and tongue.
MARTHA'S EYE POP
Censored at 57:35, the entire shot of Martha's eye being pushed out by the nail.
EMILY'S THROAT RIP
The dog is shown attacking Emily's throat. It cuts at 63:52 as blood begins to appear. The scene continues with the dog attacking the side of her head, the biting off of her ear and the slow motion blood show all seem to be uncut.
JILL'S EXPLODING HEAD
Censored at 78:40, the entire shot of the top of Jill's head being shot off.
Beyond the Darkness
Dir Joe D'Amato / 1979 / Italy
The OFLC gave this an RC in 1992 after customs forwarded them a seized copy. High level violence and the necrophilia story line would have to be the reason for this decision.
Joe D'Amato's EMANUELLE IN AMERICA and EMANUELLE AND THE LAST CANNIBALS were both heavily cut by the Australian censors. Whilst his CALIGULA - THE UNTOLD STORY was issued in a soft version on video.
Black Alley Cats, The
Dir Henning Schellerup / 1973 / USA
A 2231.04mtr (81m 33s) print was submitted to the Censorship Board in January
1980
by Blake Films. It was awarded an R18+ for sex, which were described as:
Frequency: Frequent
Explicitness/Intensity: Medium
The censors claim it was passed with an R without eliminations.
In 1985 the censors had a change of heart, the same distributor had the 80min version banned for 'Gratuitous Sexual Violence'. It is quite possible that this was being rated for release by Palace Explosive Video, as Blake Films were one of the distributors behind this label.
Thanks to Matt G for this review of the film.
The Something Weird VHS released in the US runs 79:33 which is a couple of minutes shorter than the 81:33 that you quote. Not sure why this is, as there are no obvious cuts, and the sex is quite graphic. I would guess that our censors would have had problems with the opening scene (2-7mins) where the girls are raped by a group of guys. This is the most obvious example of 'gratuitous sexual violence'. Other possibilities include at 31-34min when the Doctor and his wife rape one of the gang, and maybe the scene at 67-68mins where the Doctor has sex with one of the girls when he is supposed to be treating her.
Black Angels, The
Dir Laurence Merrick / 1970 / USA
During the early 80's there was no law that compelled distributors to have video tapes classified. For a period, the Censorship Board simply viewed the tapes and passed them as 'Special Condition', the definition of which was:
That the film/tape will not be exhibited in any State in contravention of that State's law relating to the exhibition of films.
The Prestige Video release of BLACK ANGELS was passed in January 1984 with such a warning.
In February 1984 it became law for all video tapes to be classified. The censors began the slow task of reviewing all the titles that had been released up until that time. They finally got to the BLACK ANGELS in November 1984. The 81min Prestige Video VHS was Refused Classification due to 'explicit and gratuitous sexual violence'. Despite the ban, the film remained on the shelves of many video stores.
The Prestige Video tape runs 81min 45sec. The film is preceded by the US MPAA R rating card.
The offending scene takes place at approximately the 68min mark of the film. A girl is abducted from the street by two men in car. The take her to a warehouse where they chain her up and rip open her top. One of the men holds a knife to her breasts. The scene ends with her screaming, the sound of which continues on over the following scene of a biker couple kissing. It's unclear if this is how the film should be, or if it has been done to mask any cuts.
Bride of Frank
Dir Escalpo Don Blade / 1996 / USA
There is a confirmed customs confiscation from 1998 of this low-budget shot on video feature. This Dutch Media Madness release was taken due to a scene where Frank entices a girl into his truck, bashes her head with a metal bar, then runs her over with the truck.
Customs gave the following reasons for the confiscation.
"....seized under subsection 203b(2) of the customs act 1901 by an authorised person being goods suspected on reasonable grounds to be special forfeited goods"
"Persuant to regulations 4A(1)(1A)(a)of the customs (prohibited imports) regulations the items are prohibited imports and are therefore forfeited under section 229(1)(b)of the customs act 1901"
Released on DVD in the U.S. in 2004 by Sub Rosa.
Brotherhood
Dir Shan Hua / 1976 / Hong Kong
In January 1979 this Shaw Brothers production was Refused Classification for reasons of excessive violence.
I cannot confirm if applicant JS & WC International Film later cut this 100min (f) production for a Chinese Language cinema release.
Brother of Darkness
Dir Billy Tang / 1994 / Hong Kong
Mandarin Films had an 84min (f) print of this refused in 1994. An appeal to the Board of Review produced this response.5 Findings on Material Questions of Fact
5.1 The plot revolves around a controversial murder case in Hong Kong. Tol is accused of murdering his very violent and ill-tempered drug addicted, criminal adopted brother, Wah. On each release from prison over several years, Wah terrorises the family, which includes his elderly mother and father, his wife, brother Tol and his girlfriend Jenny. Tol finally snaps and kills Wah.
5.2 The board of review considered the 'rape' scene in reel 1 at approximately 14-17 minutes cited by the Censorship Board as, in its opinion, taking the film out of the R category. The scene depicts Wah, arriving home after being released from prison, and forcing his wife into the bedroom to have sex with him, with the appalled family in earshot. She protests strongly, but he exerts physical force to achieve penetration. She ultimately appears consenting. The Review Board found that the lengthy scene constituted one of sexual violence. However in the opinion of the Board, the scene was illustrative of the violence component in the sexual relationship between Wah and his wife (a previous encounter also depicted initial protests followed by enjoyment). It was necessary to the narrative in that it contributed to the developing picture of Wah's character, as one who had no regard for the sensibilities of others.
5.3 Other scenes which contributed to the consumer advice line of 'medium level violence', including the burning of Wah's small son with a cigarette butt (which followed the scene described in 5.2) and the prolonged murder of Wah by Tol near the end of the film.
5.4 Other scenes which contributed to the consumer advice lines 'high level sex scenes' and 'nudity' included two scenes of intercourse between Wah and his wife, and several scenes between Tol and Jenny.
6 Reasons for Decision
6.1 The Review Board based its decision not to confirm the Censorship Board's decision to refuse registration on its consideration of the film as a whole, and on the scene cited in 5.2 in particular.
6.2 The Review Board was of the opinion that the scene was one of sexual violence but was acceptable by virtue of it being necessary to the narrative.
6.3 The film included many scenes of sexual activity and one of drug abuse (but in an advocatory manner). These, and the scene referred to in 5.2, in the opinion of the Review Board. placed the film in the For Restricted Exhibition category.
6.4 The Review Board's direction that the Consumer Advice in relation to the film be 'High level sex scenes, medium level violence, nudity' as made having regard to the scenes referred to in 5.2,5.3,5.4 above.
7 Summary
The Review Board's decision is to set aside the decision of the Censorship Board in relation to the film Brother of Darkness, and to grant the permission sought by the applicant. The film is to be classified R with consumer advice High level sex scenes, medium level violence, nudity' . This decision was taken after full consideration of the applicant's submission, and after assessing the film a whole against relevant legislative criteria and those contained in the current film classification guidelines endorsed by the Censorship Ministers 21 July 1994
OFLC and Film & Literature Review Board-The Year in Review 1994-95
With the appeal a success, the film went on to an R rated Chinese Language cinema run. No Australian video release.
Brothers in Arms
Dir George Jay Bloom / 1989 / USA
Roadshow Home Video had this title Refused Classification in 1989. An appeal to the Review Board proved unsuccessful.
Decision: The Board of Review found this film gratuitously violent, and was especially concerned by two scenes of sexual assault. In the view of the Board the violence was not justified by any serious purpose or message (as it was, for example, in The Accused, and appeared to be wholly exploitative in intention. The Board took into account the ready availability of video materials and the difficulty of enforcing 'R' classifications in some cases. The decision to refuse classification was confirmed. 31 March 1989.
OFLC and Films Review Board - Report on Activities 1988-89
A cut version was eventually passed in July 1989 R18+ (Frequent Violence), and was released on Roadshow's Premiere Home Video label. The running time is 91min 11sec. It is hard to know from where the " two scenes of sexual assault", as described by the Review Board, have been removed. Possibilities are:
25min approx - Steve attempts to escape from the mountain men who then try and rape her.
56min approx - Another attempt to rape Steve, this is stopped by Joey.
These are the only two scenes that remain in the film which allude to sexual assault.
Brown Bunny, The
Dir Vincent Gallo / 2003 / USA
In July 2005 Sony Picture Releasing had a 93min (DVD for 35mm) passed with an R18+ (Sexual Activity, High Level Themes) rating. Later, in September 2005, Sony Pictures Home Entertainment had a second DVD passed with the same rating and consumer warning. The DVD was eventually released in December 2005.
In 2006 Dennis Hood from the South Australian Family First party pushed to have the SA Attorney-General Michael Atkinson call for a review of the film. In the past Mr Atkinson has been very accommodating to groups from the Religious Right. He supported the Australian Family Association in 2003 against IRREVERSIBLE, 2004 against ANATOMY OF HELL, and 2005 against MYSTERIOUS SKIN. All three banning attempts failed. Perhaps finally sensing the futility of it all, this time he did not to come to the aid of wowsers.
What Dennis Hood was trying to do with THE BROWN BUNNY was to have the rating increased up to X18+. This would make it illegal to sell or rent from within any of the States. It would have been legal for it to be sold or rented within the ACT and NT, and exported from either Territory back to the States.
This is what happened to Michael Winterbottom's 9 SONGS, when in 2004 the Classification Board gave it an overly restrictive X18+ rating. The distributor appealed, and in 2005 it was dropped down to R18+ for theatrical release. In August 2005, the South Australian Classification Council increased it back up to X18+, effectively banning it for sale/hire within the South Australia.
(ARCHIVED) Sex movie 'should be X-rated'. Adelaide Advertiser 04.05.06
Family First MLC Dennis Hood said the view of fellatio involving a fully erect penis "was pornographic".
"If that's not pornography, then what is? Any depiction of actual sex is clearly X-rated," Mr Hood said.
SA is the only Australian state with the power to ban movies within its borders. However, Mr Hood does not want to go that far.
He called on the Attorney-General Michael Atkinson to order a review of the film's classification status.
Sony Pictures Home Entertainment, Katie Hull, said the movie had "done quite well as a rental title".
"The R-rating is almost mainstream now," Ms Hull said.
"We had no problems with distributing it."
."There is a very good case for reclassification," Mr Hood said.
Young Media Australia president Elizabeth Handsley said R-rated movies should be separated from general-release titles in rental stores.
Mr Atkinson yesterday said it was too late to reclassify The Brown Bunny.
"This film was released in 2003 and was classified by the Classification Board last year and it is now not possible for its classification to be reviewed by the Classification Review Board," Mr Atkinson said.
Bumfights: A Cause for Concern
Prod Indecline Productions / 2002 / USA
One report of a customs confiscating this DVD in 2005.
Burning, The
Dir Tony Maylam / 1981 / USA
Filmways presented a 90min (f) pre-cut version of this in December 1981. It was rated R, with no further cuts. The cut Thorn Emi video release was reviewed in 1984, and confirmed as an R at 89mins (v). The actual run time is 87min 14sec, which compares with 87min 26sec for the uncut British release, also on Thorn Emi. So it looks like our tape is cut, but not by very much.
Bury Me An Angel
Dir Barbara Peters / 1971 / USA
The missing footage discussed for this film is not the work of the OFLC!
House of Dare had this passed with an R in 1974 at 84mins (f). This was then released on tape by VCL, and was reviewed in 1984, and confirmed as an R at 72mins (v). I don't know where this time came from as the VCL tape actually runs 84min 24secs.This tape is cut at 55mins when Dixie dreams about shooting the killer of her brother. A shotgun blast to the face is missing.