Barbarian Queen  

Dir Héctor Olivera / 1985 / USA

CBS/Fox Video had a 70m VHS rated R during the two weeks ending on October 4th 1985. It was awarded for violence which was described as:
Frequency: Frequent
Explicitness/Intensity: Medium
Purpose: Gratuitous

This is the version that was released on tape by Medusa-CBS/Fox Video, and has an exact running time of 70m 15s.

In the two weeks ending on October 18th 1985 a 76m VHS was Refused Classification due to 'gratuitous sexual violence'. It is unclear why a censored version was rated before an uncut one.

In the U.S. BARBARIAN QUEEN was released on tape in two versions by Vestron Video. The first was the U.S R-rated print, and the second is fully uncut.

Movie-censorship.com has an excellent comparison between the the two versions and we shall refer to it in our description of the two Australian releases.

First of all we can confirm that the Medusa-CBS/Fox Video VHS  runs 70m 15s and is definitely censored. It looks like it has utilised the fully uncut version as a starting point as it contains scenes that are not found in the U.S R-rated print. This was presumably done to make up the running time and mask the censorship.

The Medusa-CBS/Fox Video VHS is censored as follows:

Pre-credits 

The pre-credits sequence involving a group of soldiers hunting a girl. 15s is missing when they capture her, open her top, touch her breasts, and begin to rape her. This can now be found in the MA15+ DVD.

The girl is cornered

The scene where a group of soldiers corner a girl in the town. 15s is missing when they say "I've got to hand it to those rebels" and "You went first last time, this ones mine" as they rip her top off and pull her to them. Again this is in the MA15+ DVD.

The rape of Amethea

The largest cut is to the infamous torture and rape of Amethea. Ironically considering how censored the VHS is, it does actually contain the 11s at the start of the scene where the torturer is shown touching her breasts with the claw and saying "You must learn not to struggle". Again this scene originates from the uncut version, and is missing from the U.S R-rated print. 

The scene shows the torturer saying "You are making a contribution to science" and then jumping up to her. 

Missing are the shots of him raping her, and her crushing him with her legs. 

The scene continues again in the Medusa-CBS/Fox Video with her saying "Can I", before pushing him into the acid bath.

Part of this scene can now be found in the MA15+ DVD.

On May 12th 2008, Big Sky Video had a DVD rated MA15+ (Strong violence and sexual violence). The DVD was released on the Beyond Home Entertainment label. The actual running time is 70m 26s and it is taken from the censored U.S. R-rated print. As we've explained, it contains most of the footage that caused the film to be banned back in 1985, see the above mentioned movie-censorship.com for a full comparison.

So to conclude the following versions have been released in Australia.

1985: Medusa-CBS/Fox Video VHS - The uncut version censored down to 70m 15s
2008: Beyond Home Entertainment DVD- The censored U.S R-Rated version which runs 70m 26s

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.

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.

Beat Angel Escalayer

Dir Ikka Tsuchishida / 2002 / Japan

This was passed with an R18+ (High level animated sex scenes) rating on July 7th 2008. Siren Visual Entertainment released it on DVD as part of their Hentai Collection in November 2008.

Thanks again to Geoff for this review in which he exposes more censorship.

It looks like Siren have once again submitted censored hentai to the Classification Board in the hope of escaping an RC-rating. Details of the three episodes are as follows.

Episode 1: Runs 28:22 and did not look cut
Episode 3: Runs 28:08 (29:08 including the English credits) and did not look cut.

Episode 2: Runs 27:24 and is definitely censored. The running times that I'm going to quote include that of Episode 1. The scene begins around the 33min point and involves Sayuka being attacked by a huge red octopus. Missing are scenes of him pulling off her bra, wrapping his tentacles around her breasts and squeezing them, and a brief shot of her naked breasts before the camera pans down. 

The tentacle is then shown going into her mouth and then there is a very obvious cut at the 34:50 point. It should continue to a shot of her legs being prised open by the tentacles and exposing her vagina. There then follows a full on tentacle rape which takes place as a group of robot like creatures look on and cheer. Interestingly Siren have put a shot from earlier in the scene featuring a fully clothed Sayuka, they also reinstate several earlier shots  to cover the cuts.

To be honest I really don't know why Siren cut this scene so badly. Maybe they thought the censorship board still had a thing about tentacle rape since the Urotsukidoji-Legend of Overfiend ban back in '94. It's doubly puzzling when you see that they left in the scene that starts around the 49min mark in Episode 2. Here Sayuka is raped (and enjoys it) by a character called FM77, a female looking creature with a huge dick!

It's pointless going by the running times to judge the cuts because as I mentioned Siren have used other footage to mask them. There may be other censorship, but the octopus rape scene was the most obvious. There are no extras at all, and the DVD menu lists only two episodes, but all three play.

Bête, La

aka The Beast 

Dir Walerian Borowczyk / 1975 / France

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!'.

Thanks to James for this review of the DVD.

The Umbrella DVD runs 94m 10s and appears to be the Directors Cut. The 102m 53s version that was submitted to the censors back in 1976 would seem to be the same as the version that was released as the third disc of the Dutch Cult Epics DVD. According to the great

It's like the shorter versions [Directors Cut] is the final version, and the cuts are made to speed-up the rhythm of the film. They have for example shortened the scene where the girl run's away from the Beast with over two minutes. The cuts are more like they have taken away some picture pairs. The girl runs a shorter time, the Beast ejaculates one time less etc.

In the dream sequence the beast chases the girl in three parts.  

Part one runs from 63:30 to 67:40 when the chase begins to when the scene concludes with the girl climbing a tree and the Beast licking her vagina. When she falls from the tree he attempts to rape her.

The second part from 72 to 76min starts with Lucy masturbating with the rose. This scene is quite explicit, with her vagina exposed to the camera. This must have been cut by the censors back in 1976. The dream sequence then continues with the girl being raped by the Beast.

The final part runs from 79:30 to 81:15 and has the girl masturbating the Beast, and licking his penis until he dies of pleasure. This is the scene that you quote Cinema Papers as saying was most heavily cut for an R18+ rating back in 1977. However it only runs under two minutes, confirming that other scenes were also cut.

The four minutes of cuts that the censors made back in October 1977 to secure an R18+ must have been made to these three parts of the dream sequence. There are other sex scenes in the film, but none are as explicit as the chase, rape, and eventual death of the Beast. 

DVD Comparisons

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. 

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.

DVD Comparisons

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.

DVD Comparisons

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 August 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 81m 45s. 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. 

Bondage Mansion

aka Vanilla Series: Bondage Mansion

Prod Shiyuuta Biwajima and Chikara Niki / 2001 / Japan

Siren Visual had this DVD rated R18+ ( High level animated sex scenes and themes) on April 9th 2008. It was released as part of the Siren Hentai Collection in June 2008. On July 23rd 2008 it was announced that Bob Debus, the Minister for Home Affairs, had called for this, and three other hentai DVD's to be looked at by the Classification Review Board. 

Australian Government
Classification Review Board
 23 July 2008 
MEDIA RELEASE 

Review announced for the anime films Classes in Seduction, T & A Teacher, Holy Virgins and Bondage Mansion 

The Classification Review Board has received four applications to review the classification of the anime films Classes in Seduction, T & A Teacher, Holy Virgins and Bondage Mansion. 

Classes in Seduction was classified R 18+ (Restricted) with the consumer advice ‘High level animated sex scenes’ by the Classification Board on 1 May 2007. 

T & A Teacher was classified R 18+ (Restricted) with the consumer advice ‘High level animated sex scenes, Violence’ by the Classification Board on 21 February 2008. 

Holy Virgins was classified R 18+ (Restricted) with the consumer advice ‘High level animated sex scenes’ by the Classification Board on 11 March 2008. 

Bondage Mansion was classified R 18+ (Restricted) with the consumer advice ‘High level animated sex scenes and themes’ by the Classification Board on 9 April 2008. 

The reviews are in response to applications from the Minister for Home Affairs. Under the Commonwealth Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995, the Minister for Home Affairs may make an application for a review at any time. 

The Classification Review Board will meet on Wednesday 30 July 2008 to consider the applications. 

The Classification Review Board has invited the Australian Family Association and the NSW Council for Civil Liberties to apply for standing as interested parties at the reviews. 

The Classification Review Board’s decisions and reasons for its decisions will appear on the Classification website once the reviews have been finalised.

The Classification Review Board is an independent merits review body. Meeting in camera, it makes a fresh classification decision upon receipt of an application for review. The Classification Review Board decision takes the place of the original decision made by the Classification Board.

***

The Review Board met on July 30th to consider the ratings of four titles, with no result being issued on that day. On August 1st the following media release was on the Classification Board's site, though by the end of the day it had disappeared. 

Australian Government
Classification Review Board
30 July 2008 
MEDIA RELEASE 

Four anime films classified upon review A six-member panel of the Classification Review Board convened today to classify four anime films. 

The Classification Review Board in a majority decision determined that the film T & A Teacher is classified R 18+ with the consumer advice, ‘High level animated sex scenes and sexualised violence’. 

The Classification Review Board unanimously determined that the film Classes in Seduction is classified R 18+ with the consumer advice, ‘High level animated sex scenes’. 

The Classification Review Board in a majority decision determined that the film Bondage Mansion is classified RC (Refused Classification). 

The Classification Review Board in a majority decision that the film Holy Virgins is classified RC (Refused Classification). 

In the Classification Review Board’s opinion, T & A Teacher and Classes in Seduction both warrant an R 18+ classification because while the sex scenes have a high level of impact, the Classification Review Board Convenor, Maureen Shelley said “the anime genre and the fact that the characters appear 18 or older means the film can be accommodated in this legally restricted category”. 

With regards to the RC classifications of Holy Virgins and Bondage Mansion, the Convenor said that “Holy Virgins was refused classification because of the sexual depictions of characters who appear to be under 18. Similarly, Bondage Mansion is RC because of a trailer depicting a character, who appears to be under 18, engaged in an explicit sexual act and there is no context for this depiction.” 

Films classified R 18+ are legally restricted to adults. Persons aged under 18 years cannot be admitted to films classified R 18+. Some material classified R 18+ may be offensive to sections of the adult community. Films that are classified RC are immediately banned throughout Australia. They cannot be sold, hired or imported into the country. 

The reviews were in response to four applications from the Minister for Home Affairs to review the R 18+ classifications given to each of the four anime films by the Classification Board. 

In reviewing the classification, the Classification Review Board worked within the framework of the National Classification Scheme, applying the provisions of the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995, the National Classification Code and the Guidelines for the Classification of Films and Computer Games. 

The Classification Review Board is an independent merits review body. Meeting in camera, it makes a fresh classification decision upon receipt of an application for review. This Classification Review Board decision takes the place of the original decision made by the Classification Board. 

The Classification Review Board’s reasons for this decision will appear on the Classification website when finalised.

***

The July 30th Media Release that disappeared on August 1st stated that BONDAGE MANSION had been banned. However on August 13th 2008 the following media release appeared on the censor's website.

Australian Government
Classification Review Board
13 August 2008 
MEDIA RELEASE 

Four anime films classified upon review 

On 13 August 2008, a three-member panel of the Classification Review Board unanimously determined that the film Bondage Mansion is classified R 18+, with the consumer advice, 'High level animated sex scenes and themes.

' In the Classification Review Board’s opinion, Bondage Mansion warrants an R 18+ classification because while the sex scenes have a high level of impact, the Classification Review Board Convenor, Maureen Shelley said “the anime genre and that the characters appear 18 or older means the film can be accommodated in this legally restricted category. However, the connection between sexual activity and the themes remains a concern. Restricting this material to adult audiences will ensure that children under 18 will not legally have access to the material”. 

Films classified R 18+ are legally restricted to adults. Persons aged under 18 years cannot be admitted to films classified R 18+. Some material classified R 18+ may be offensive to sections of the adult community. 

A six-member panel of the Classification Review Board convened on 30 July 2008 to classify three anime films. 

The Classification Review Board in a majority decision determined that the film T & A Teacher is classified R 18+ with the consumer advice, ‘High level animated sex scenes and sexualised violence’. 

The Classification Review Board unanimously determined that the film Classes in Seduction is classified R 18+ with the consumer advice, ‘High level animated sex scenes’. Similarly, the high level animated sex scenes means that this film, while having a high impact, can be accommodated to a restricted category that cannot legally be accessed by people under the age of 18. “The Review Board noted the high level theme of sexual induction of students by teachers,” Ms Shelley said. “Whilst themes with a high impact can be accommodated in the R18+ category, it is important that minors do not have legal access to material that may be disturbing to them. The classification does not indicate approval of the theme but that in an animated feature, adults should have the mature perspective required to evaluate the scenes depicted.” 

The Classification Review Board in a majority decision determined that the film Holy Virgins is classified RC (Refused Classification). 

With regards to the RC classification of Holy Virgins, the Convenor said that “Holy Virgins was refused classification because of the sexual depictions of characters who appear to be under 18.” Films that are classified RC are immediately banned throughout Australia. They cannot be sold, hired or imported into the country. 

The reviews were in response to four applications from the Minister for Home Affairs to review the R 18+ classifications given to each of the four anime films by the Classification Board. 

In reviewing the classification, the Classification Review Board worked within the framework of the National Classification Scheme, applying the provisions of the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995, the National Classification Code and the Guidelines for the Classification of Films and Computer Games. 

The Classification Review Board is an independent merits review body. Meeting in camera, it makes a fresh classification decision upon receipt of an application for review. This Classification Review Board decision takes the place of the original decision made by the Classification Board. 

The Classification Review Board’s reasons for these decisions will appear on the Classification website when finalised. 

***

The full Review Board report explaining the reasons for the R18+ and RC confusion was released soon after.

Australian Government
Classification Review Board

6 August 2008 
23-33 MARY STREET 
SURRY HILLS, NSW 

MEMBERS: Ms Maureen Shelley (Convenor) The Hon Trevor Griffin (Deputy Convenor) Ms Ann Stark 

APPLICANT The Hon Robert Debus, Minister for Home Affairs

INTERESTED PARTIES Australian Family Association (AFA) represented by Ms Angela Conway and Mr Damien Tudehope; and NSW Council for Civil Liberties (NSW CCL) represented by Mr Stephen Blanks and Dr Brent Waters 

BUSINESS To review the Classification Board’s decision to classify the film Bondage Mansion R 18+ with the consumer advice ‘High level animated sex scenes and themes’. 

DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION 

1. Decision 
The Classification Review Board (the Review Board) classified the film R 18+ with the consumer advice ‘High level animated sex scenes and themes’. 

2. Legislative provisions 
The Classification (Publications, Film and Computer Games) Act 1995 (the Act) governs the classification of films and the review of classification decisions. Section 9 provides that films are to be classified in accordance with the National Classification Code (the Code) and the classification guidelines. 

Relevantly, the Code in paragraph 5 of the Table under the heading ‘Films’ provides that: 

Films that: 

(a) depict, express or otherwise deal with matters of sex, drug misuse or addiction, crime, cruelty, violence or revolting or abhorrent phenomena in such a way that they offend against the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults to the extent that they should not be classified; or 

(b) describe or depict in a way that is likely to cause offence to a reasonable adult, a person who is, or appears to be , a child under 18 (whether the person is engaged in sexual activity or not); or 

(c) promote, incite or instruct in matters of crime or violence, are to be classified ‘RC’, and Films (except RC films and X 18+ films) that are unsuitable for a minor to see are to be classified R 18+. 

The Code also sets out various principles to which classification decisions should give effect, as far as possible. 

Section 11 of the Act requires that the matters to be taken into account in making a decision on the classification of a film include: 

(a) the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults; and 

(b) the literary, artistic or educational merit (if any) of the film; and 

(c) the general character of the film, including whether it is of a medical, legal or scientific character; and 

(d) the persons or class of persons to or amongst whom it is published or is intended or likely to be published. 

Three essential principles underlie the use of the Guidelines for the Classification of Films and Computer Games 2005 (the Guidelines), determined under s 12 of the Act: 

· the importance of context 

· the assessment of impact, and 

· the six classifiable elements – themes, violence, sex, language, drug use and nudity. 

3. Procedure 

Prior to the review meeting, the Convenor determined that given the provision of Regulation 21 (2) (d) the application was of sufficient complexity that a decision would be not likely to be completed within 20 business days as more than one application of a similar nature had been received at the one time and that the Convenor had agreed to hear submissions from interested parties namely the NSW CCL and the AFA. 

The Review Board met on 30 July 2008 in response to the receipt of an application from the Minister for Home Affairs on 18 July 2008 to determine its validity. 

The Review Board determined that it had received a valid application from the Minister and noted the Convenor’s decision regarding the complexity of the application and that it would be likely to be processed within 40 business days. 

The Minister had advised in writing on 18 July that he would not be making written or oral submissions on the application for review. The original applicant made an undated written submission received by the Convenor on 25 July 2008 and distributed to the Review Board prior to the review meeting. 

Six members of the Review Board viewed the film prior to the meeting on 30 July 2008. Arrangements were made for the NSW CCL and the AFA to view the film prior to the meeting on 30 July 2008. 

The Review Board heard oral submissions from Dr Brent Waters and Mr Stephen Blanks representing the NSW CCL and from Mr Damien Tudehope and Ms Angela Conway from the AFA. No written submissions were made by the NSW CCL or the AFA. 

It was found that the DVD submitted to the Review Board was not the same as that submitted to the Classification Board in that it contained trailers and extra material. 

Mr Griffin, Ms Stark and Ms Shelley met on 6 August as a three-member panel of the Review Board to consider the matter including viewing Episode I again. The Review Board deterimed that the film is classified R18+ subject to confirmation from the Convenor that Episode II was the same as viewed by the panel prior to 30 July. Following this meeting, the Convenor reviewed Episode II of the film and confirmed it was the same as viewed by all members prior to the 30 July meeting. 

Mr Griffin, Ms Stark and the Convenor held a teleconference on the matter on 13 August 2008 where they discussed the material further and commenced drafting the reasons for decision. 

4. Evidence and other material taken into account 

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

(i) The Minister’s application for review 

(ii) The original applicant’s written submissions 

(iii) The oral submissions from the NSW CCL and the AFA 

(iv) the relevant provisions in the Act, the Code and the Guidelines, and 

(v) the Classification Board’s report 

5. Synopsis 

A young female and male live in the mansion owned by the young man’s father. The father on his death bed extracts a promise from his son that he will contact his cousin and invite him to live at the mansion. The cousin proposes a three month trial where the cousin who sexually satisfies the young female the most will win her, the mansion and the family fortune. The son is at first reluctant to agree but the young female persuades him. The sexual depictions involving bondage become more explicit as time passes. The son dies during one sexual act, the cousin kicks his dead body, the young female is depicted with twin sons one with blond and the other with black hair and the mansion is crumbling. 

6. Findings on material questions of fact 

The Review Board found that the film contains aspects or scenes of importance under various classifiable elements: 

(a) Themes – the theme of coercion in regard to sex is depicted as is bondage fantasies in considerable detail. 

(b) Violence – there are some scenes of violence, apart from the sexualised violence in the film, including shooting of birds with wound and blood detail and the shooting of one of the male characters with blood detail and the kicking of the body of a deceased male character. The impact of these scenes, in the context of a bondage fantasy animated feature, is high. 

(c) Language – there is some use of coarse language in the film. 

(d) Sex – Various scenes of sexual activity are depicted including digital vaginal stimulation, fellatio, cunnilingus, penile rear entry vaginal penetration, penile anal penetration, digital anal penetration, penile frontal vaginal penetration, fetishes and other sexual practices such as the use of hot wax and slings, a “scold’s bridle”, hand restraints, whipping, vaginal penetration using implements including a battery operated dildo and the handle of a sickle, threesomes, and sexual intercourse in the presence of others including male and female servants being ordered to watch sexual activity. 

The depiction of sex scenes with the sickle at 1 and 2 mins of Episode II was noted. The tool has a sharpened edge, glints in the light, is depicted as having a thick, long handle and is used by a slightly menacing character (referred to as the caretaker) to sexually stimulate the lady of the family. The scenes contain some sense of menace although the female is depicted in appearance and through voice over as consenting to the activity from which she appears to derive pleasure. 

The lady is shown as remembering the scene and feeling some remorse. 

(e) Drug Use – there is limited depictions of drug use in the film. The blond “villain” of the piece is depicted as a smoker. 

(f) Nudity – there is full and partial front and rear nudity of male and female characters mostly in sexual settings. One scene depicts the “lady of the family” sitting before a basin with legs spread with partial frontal female nudity of the pubic area. 

7. Reasons for the decision 

The Review Board noted the conflicting submissions of the NSW CCL and the AFA in regard to the classification of the film and took into account the views expressed. 

The submission of the NSW CCL did not provide much assistance to the Review Board given that much of it related to a comparative assessment of films classified 12 years earlier or relied on community standards pertaining to a period during the last century. Mr Blanks remarks in relation to the application of the guidelines were of assistance. 

The Review Board noted the offence taken by the representatives of the AFA regarding the content of the film in relation to the bondage theme, the cumulative impact of the scenes and the sexualised violence depicted, and the sense of menace in the “sickle” scenes. 

The Review Board also noted the Classification Board’s reasons for allowing the film to be accommodated within the R 18+ classification. 

The Review Board determined that the impact of the film, while high, was greatly minimised by the animated character of the film, its likely audience, the genre and the stylisation of the genre that impacts on the visuals, and the very unrealistic plot line. The Review Board concluded that the film would, nonetheless, be very likely to be offensive to some adults. 

The Review Board noted the principles contained in the Code that adults should be able to read, hear and see what they want, that minors should be protected from material likely to harm or disturb them, and the need to take account of community concerns about depictions that condone or incite violence, particularly sexual violence; and the portrayal of persons in a demeaning manner. 

It may be the view of some adults that the characters are portrayed in a demeaning manner however, it was the Review Board’s determination that the portrayal of the male and female characters – while offensive to some – was not demeaning in terms of the definition within the Guidelines. 

In regard to the community’s concern regarding sexual violence, as articulated by the AFA, the Review Board determined that the depictions – while offensive to some – were not such that the film should be refused classification. Should the film have contained the same content and been a live action film, with real people, then such a film may be refused classification. 

However, the animation and the anime genre remarkably diminish both the impact and the realism of the violence, sexualised violence and the sexual activity in the film. The Review Board agreed that there may be animated films with similar content that may be refused classification but it was the unanimous determination of the panel that this was not one of them. 

An R 18+ classification is a legally restrictive classification that should prevent minors from seeing the film, and allow adults who want to see such a film to do so. The DVD cover, while explicit, is of a standard that is generally accepted for R 18+ films and those who did not wish to view such a film would be protected from seeing the depictions contained therein by the visual cues given on the DVD cover. 

8. Summary 

The film is classified R 18+ with the consumer advice high level animated sex scenes and themes.

***

The July 30th media release stated that a six member panel of the Classification Review Board had found that:

"Bondage Mansion is RC because of a trailer depicting a character, who appears to be under 18, engaged in an explicit sexual act and there is no context for this depiction.” 

While the August 13th media release states that a three member panel of the Classification Review Board has found that: 

".....Bondage Mansion is classified R 18+, with the consumer advice, 'High level animated sex scenes and themes.

' In the Classification Review Board’s opinion, Bondage Mansion warrants an R 18+ classification because while the sex scenes have a high level of impact, the Classification Review Board Convenor, Maureen Shelley said “the anime genre and that the characters appear 18 or older means the film can be accommodated in this legally restricted category. However, the connection between sexual activity and the themes remains a concern. Restricting this material to adult audiences will ensure that children under 18 will not legally have access to the material”. 

The August 6th Review Board report gives the reasons for the change in rating as:

"It was found that the DVD submitted to the Review Board was not the same as that submitted to the Classification Board in that it contained trailers and extra material. "

This extra material initially resulted in an RC rating, before the mistake was corrected.

***

Thanks to Geoff W for this detailed review of Siren's BONDAGE MANSION DVD where he shows that it has been censored.

The first episode of BONDAGE MANSION is titled "Plunder or Rape" and runs 30:30. It contains the usual hardcore hentai sex scenes, spiced up with some bondage and S&M. I can confirm that it has been censored, so presumably Siren did some pre-cutting prior to submitting it to the Classification Board. The end credits of play out over still images from the episode you have just viewed. From 27:41 to 27:43 there are some shots that are not in the preceding feature. One feature a girl with her legs open and an iron bowl placed between them. Looking again at the feature I found the cut must have been made at the 06:13 mark. Prior to this Hayoto says to the girl "that was good, but let's try something else". We next see a close up of a metal bowl, followed by the two of them facing one another. The next shot is of the shocked face of the girl, and shots of her hands on the ground. The music then seems to change (indicating a cut) and we next see the girl giving a blow job. Reading some on-line reviews shows that the missing scene involves the girl urinating in the bowl, followed by a golden shower scene. A search of Google Images will no doubt bring up shots of this missing scene.

The second episode doesn't have an English language title and is just listed as BONDAGE MANSION 2. It runs 28:28 and as far as I can see does not contain any obvious cuts.  It twice features a still flashback to the censored scene in the first episode of the girl with her legs open and an iron bowl placed between them. These can be found at 00:27 to 00:28 and 16:36 to 16:38.

The censors listed the reason for banning the DVD as:

".....a trailer depicting a character, who appears to be under 18, engaged in an explicit sexual act and there is no context for this depiction.” 

There are four trailers on the DVD, BONDAGE MANSION, LITTLE MONICA, GIRL NEXT DOOR, and DEBTS OF DESIRE. All have previously been passed with R18+ ratings. 

Geoff is correct to say that the trailers are all for features that have been rated by the Classification Board. These are:

DEBTS OF DESIRE: R18+ (High level animated sex scenes) 04/08
THE STORY OF LITTLE MONICA: R18+ (High Level Animated Sex Scenes) 05/06
GIRL NEXT DOOR: R18+ (High Level Sex Scenes) 12/03 (pre-cut before submission)

The Review Board refers to:

".....a trailer depicting a character, who appears to be under 18, engaged in an explicit sexual act and there is no context for this depiction.” 

All of the above mentioned trailers are on the release version, and would have been included on the DVD rated by the Classification Board. So we can conclude that the Review Board are talking about another trailer removed by Siren prior to submission.

***

Re-released by Siren in August 2009 as part of a box set called THE BONDAGE COLLECTION. It includes SLAVES TO PASSION and MY BROTHERS WIFE. All three are censored.

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

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.

DVD Comparisons

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."

   www.refused-classification.com

| Online Since April 2002