Sadistic Whore

Dir ? / 19?? / Japan

Yu Enterprises had a 1630.00mtr (59m 35s) print Refused Registration in November 1986. The reason give was 'Gratuitous Sexual Violence'. A censored version was prepared and this was passed with an R-rating in February 1987. The reason given was:
Sex
Frequency: Frequent
Explicitness/Intensity: Medium
Purpose: Gratuitous

The running time was 1316.64mtr (48m 07s), meaning around eleven and a half minutes was censored in order for it to be passed.

The film was passed again in March 1987 with the same rating, and reasons. 

At the exactly the same time, Yu Enterprises had similar problems with another Japanese film, titled MADAM X. This too was banned and eventually censored. Both would have no doubt screened at Raymond Yu's Chinese Language Australia Cinema in Sydney.

Savage Man, Savage Beast

Dir Antonio Climati & Mario Morra / 1975 / Italy

This was the first in Climati and Morra's so-called Savage trilogy. It was followed by THIS VIOLENT WORLD (available on Palace Video), which is sometimes known as SAVAGE MAN, SAVAGE BEAST 2. In 1983 SWEET AND SAVAGE (available censored on the Premiere Video label) concluded the series. Finally, in 1984 Mario Morra went out on his own and directed SAVAGE ZONE which was banned by the OFLC.

In 1976, Roadshow attempted to give the first part a cinema release, 94 and 91min (f) prints were both refused. In March and April 1976 appeals were lodged with the Board of Review, however both results were to uphold the decision of the Film Censorship Board. 

Palace Explosive finally brought this to video in 1986. This censored R18+ rated print runs 88min 39sec and is missing the following.

THE STAG HUNT

Before - The hunter shoots the stag. Distant view of the stag bucking. Profile of the hunters face.

CENSORED AT 3min 30sec (26sec missing) - Slow-motion close-up of the stag bucking, before it falls to the ground. Close up of the stags face.

After - Shot of the hunters face looking down at the stag, before he takes out his knife.

THE FOX HUNT

Before - Hunt saboteur  speaking "I mean, do they call that fair play?"

CENSORED AT 22min 16sec (5sec missing) - Shot of the hounds tearing the dead fox to pieces.

After - Narrator  "These unusual characters...."

DEATH OF PIT DERNITSCH

The footage takes place in a national park, and seems to be genuine. The victim leaves his car to film a lion feeding, before being attacked by a second lion. The animals then proceed to eat his body whilst being filmed by other tourists.

Before - Narrator ".......it contained the last scene filmed by Pit Dernitsch"

CENSORED AT 37min 04sec (17sec missing) - Shots of the lions eating Pit Dernitsch's body, now just a mass of meat. His leg can be seen next to a lions head. This shot is featured on the cover of the Palace Video release.

After - Shots of the lions scattering once the Ranger arrives.

Thanks to HellToPay27 for sending in details of some extra cuts to this scene.

HellToPay27
September 2007
I have corrections for the cuts made to the death of Pit Dernitz by lions.

You list the cuts being 17 seconds in length. However, that is only the first part. There is one more cut made:

Before: A man in a white shirt is waving to try to scare away the lions (narration: "The animals were driven off only after the arrival of a game warden").

CUT: The lions eating Pit for 18 seconds. A man with a beard and glasses waves frantically at the cameraman. There's also a quick shot of Pit's daughter looking dismayed that's inserted between the shots of the lions eating (all of this is cut out).

After: The lioness picks up the video camera with her mouth.

The narration at this point ("The lioness sees the victim's movie camera...") was inserted in a different place on the Palace Video VHS/Grindhouse Experience DVD, because the narration started during the footage that was cut out. They moved the narration to when the lioness is picking up the camera (in the uncut version, the narration begins about four seconds before the lioness picks up the camera while the animals are eating Pit). It then shows the short footage that Mr. Dernitz last shot.

The second cut:

Before: Pit's footage of the lioness ends with the camera falling to the ground.

CUT: More shots of the lions eating Pit, but this time the footage is a bit more graphic. He's been torn in two at this point. The game warden's vehicle arrives and scares the animals away (about 15 seconds).

After: The lions scatter.

I recently obtained the Grindhouse Experience DVD that was just released in here in the states. After comparing the cuts to the Palace Video tape, it's obvious that the distributor's used that tape as the master source for the DVD.

The parts that were cut out are available on the internet, ripped from an uncut Japanese DVD.

THE MERCENARY ATTACK

Mercenaries are hired by a construction company to remove natives from an area of jungle. The hunt, torture, and murder of the inhabitants is recorded on film.

Before - Narrator "The executioner had made an agreement with the photographer to have himself filmed at the moment of killing."

CENSORED AT 75min 14sec (24sec missing) - In the Australian tape the explanation of the footage scrolls on the screen against a black background. In other versions it scrolls over footage of the mercenaries walking around and the Indio laying on the ground. There is nothing shown that would need censoring, so I would guess that Palace were supplied with this print. 

After - Narrator "These men who hunt the Indio's......" 

Before - The Indio is held to the ground, and his legs spread apart. A man with a knife grabs his penis.

CENSORED AT 77min 29sec (77sec missing) - The Indio is tortured and killed. He is scalped and his head is shown being placed in a bag.

After - Shot of a sea eagle catching a fish.

The above scene is definitely difficult to watch, but is actually fake.

"Give-away pointers are a fleeing Indian being shot from behind and actually falling backwards, defying the effects of inertia and bullet velocity impact. During the castration scene the victim has his legs held wide apart, giving easy access to his genitals. The knife rubs against his scrotum but doesn't incise the flesh. The scene cuts to his face for a reaction shot, then back to his voided groin area where we see his legs firmly clamped together, obviously concealing his genitals between them. Fake blood gives the illusion of total castration."

The above quote is taken from KILLING FOR CULTURE, this outstanding book looks at all aspects of death on film. It is highly recommended if you wish to learn more about many titles that have been Censored/Banned in Australia. 

The Mondo/Death Documentary has been a constant target of the censors over the years. The following titles are covered elsewhere on this site.

Savage Zone, The

Dir Mario Morra / 1984 / Italy

This was another mondo movie that landed Palace in hot water with the censors. Refused because of gratuitous sexual violence in 1986 at 95mins, it was cut the following year to 93mins (v) & passed with an R. There is a second record of this being cut again a few months later to 91mins (v) & rated R again. Whatever the story behind this was doesn't really matter, as Palace never did get around to releasing it.

Schoolgirl Hitchhikers

Dir Jean Rollin / 1973 / France

A 2112.00mtr (77m 12s) print was submitted to the Censorship Board in March 1977. It was passed with an R rating only after 51.8mtr (114s) of footage was removed. The cuts were made to eliminate 'Indecency and excessive violence'. This print went on to have a theatrical release.

The early 80's saw a VHS issued on the K&C Video label. It is hard to judge if this version is censored. The print is is quite poor condition, and runs 73m 31s (PAL). The whipping of Jackie at the 34min point seems the obvious target for censorship, however it does not seem cut.

The Schoolgirls' Report

Dir Ernst Hofbauer / 1970 / West Germany

A print running 8083ft (90m 03s) was originally banned in April 1972. An appeal to the Review Board in May 1972 confirmed the ' Refusal of the Film Censorship Board to Register'.

A censored version of the first film in the SCHOOLGIRL REPORT series was passed R18+ in June 1973. It went on to have a theatrical release.

In January 1979 it was Refused Registration following a re-importation, and re-submission to the censors. The reason given for banning the 2431.90mtr (88m 53s) print that it was 'Undesirable public interest'.

Here is how Cinema Papers magazine reported it at the time.

Cinema Papers
May-June 1979
CENSORSHIP

During the past few months, several industry observers have commented on the increasing repressiveness of Australia's film censorship laws. Some writers have suggested that the level of film censorship has equalled the severity of the pre-"R" Certificate days, while others have pointed out the parallels between the changes in film censorship and the new, draconian literary censorship laws in Victoria, where the sale of magazines such as PLAYBOY is occasionally restricted.

Despite the many ominous signs, however, the film industry, the national press, and the public have remained apathetic, no !doubt believing things to be better than they are painted.

Fortunately, the January 1979 censorship list has provided concrete proof' of the accuracy of these reports: among the four films listed under "Films Refused Registration" are Schoolgirls' Report and Schoolgirls' Report - Why Parents Lose Their Sleep, two films which have been in release for five years. Despite the 'fact that these two "R"-rated films have raise neither public outrage nor the level of immorality in the community, the Chief Censor, Mr Richard Prowse, has decided the time is now ripe to ban them. And to achieve this, he has called on the little-used Section 13 (d) of the Censorship Act. This section allows for the rejection of any film which, in the opinion of the Censor, "depicts matter which is undesirable in the public Interest".

In an article on film censorship in Australia (Cinema Papers, No. 11, PPs 206-208), the then Deputy-Chief Censor, Janet Strickland, said that the censorship board used Section 13 (d) to reject films concerning "drug abuse, hijacking, etc". One example is the banning of Hijacked, which the Censor felt too graphically demonstrated how a plane could be hijacked in mid-air.

The two Schoolgirls' Report films, however, are clearly of a different type. When contacted and asked why section 13 (d) was invoked in these cases, Prowse said that the films were felt to contravene the child pornography laws in several states. These laws prevent the use of children under the age of 16 in depictions of a sexually implicit or e pornographic nature. (the banning of Pretty Baby in Queensland is a case in point). What makes the application of these laws difficult is that in almost all cases the Censor is unaware of the real ages of the children used. For example, a film may claim to be about permissive 13 year-olds but actually use actors over 16 years of age. In the case of Schoolgirls' Report and Schoolgirls' Report - Why Parents Lose Their Sleep, the Censor considered the actors (or some of the actors) be under-aged - no doubt without consulting the German makers of the film. .

Another issue raised by these rejections is the question whether the Commonwealth Censor can ban a film already in release. According to the Commonwealth Censorship Act it cannot, but a loophole does exist because several of the states allow for such a turn about decision in their own censorship laws (New South Wales is one such state.) In the case of Schoolgirls' Report and Schoolgirls' Report - Why Parents Lose Their Sleep, however Prowse was not required to invoke these laws because the film had been re-imported and therefore required re-classification.

Coupled with the Censorship Board's changing attitudes to censorship has been a noticeable decline in communication between the Board and film distributors, particularly those handling sex films. At present, a distributor cuts any controversial film according to what he believes are the standards of the time. This "reconstructed" version is then sent to the Censorship Board, which may or may not pass It. If the film is rejected, it is then sent back to the distributor for further cuts. As a rule, however, the Board does not give any indication of what further cuts are required, and the distributor Is left in the dark As a result, reconstruction becomes an expensive game of chance.

***

This was due to screen at the 8th Melbourne Underground Film Festival in 2007.

Melbourne Underground Film Festival 8
Program Notes
Schulmädchen-Report: Was Eltern nicht für möglich halten

Dir: Ernst Hofbauer The classic salacious sex report pseudo doco from swinging 1970’s Germany makes an appearance at MUFF 8. Translated as Schoolgirl Report: What parents don’t think is possible was a huge hit in the Fatherland back in the day. Featuring eighteen and nineteen year old German Uni honeys with long hair getting it on intermixed with interviews with real Uni students. Lots of fun and part of the classic German trait to disguise erotica as scientific research.! 
7pm Thurs 27 Sept 2007
REVOLVER 229 Chapel Street Prahran, Melbourne

It was scrapped after the OFLC's Amy Wooding refused to grant it, and six other features film festival exemptions. This is not the first time that MUFF has ran into problems with the censors. In 2004 the OFLC demanded that The Toolbox Murders (1978),  Wife to be Sacrificed,  and Za Ginipiggu 1 and 2 be pulled from the festival.

The Melbourne Underground Film Festival issued the following press release on September 20th 2007.

MUFF 8 films banned! 
September 20th 2007

The Following films have been banned from the OFLC: 

70k 
Schulmädchen-Report: Was Eltern nicht für möglich halten (aka The Schoolgirl Report) 
Sex Wish 
The Farmer's Daughter 
Ashley & Kisha: Finding the Right Fit 
Whore 
60 Second Relief 

We will replacing them with other films from the MUFF program. 

This Sunday 70k will be replaced with a second screening of Streetsweeper… a good MUFF Neu that we can play. Whore and 60 Second Relief are withdrawn and nothing will fill their place. The Other films will be replaced. More details on Monday. 

Will the media even cover this? Do people care about censorship in this country?

Letter to OFLC 

Here is a copy of a letter sent to our OFLC contact Amy Wooding. Any response we will share with our MUFF audience: 

Hi Amy, I thought I'd write to you about this year's decision. 

So the films I cannot play at MUFF 8 are the following: 

70k, Schulmädchen-Report: Was Eltern nicht für möglich halten (aka The Schoolgirl Report), Sex Wish, The Farmer's Daughter, Ashley & Kisha: Finding the Right Fit, Whore and 60 Second Relief 

Is this correct? 

I will comply and withdraw them from screenings and replace them with films you have granted permission for me to play (like Moonlight and Magic, Left Ear, etc). 

A few small questions, you might be able to answer or maybe the OFLC director can answer them (If you have his email I'll cc this to him): 

Why is pornography of the most gross and offensive nature (like shitting and pissing films) available for sale in most Adult bookshops in Victoria? 

Also: Are not X rated films only supposed to be available in Canberra but for sale in 90% of Adult shops in Vic and NSW and in other states? 

Why is MUFF referred to the justice department for wishing to screen a couple of classy or forgotten pieces of erotica with artistic merit to an audience over 18 (who are keen to see them) and nothing done about the illegal X rated sale of videos and DVD's in sex shops that is rampant? 

Is there not a hint of corruption or hypocrisy and definitely absurdity here?

Why are X rated films banned at all! It begs the question given the ready availability of it in on the Internet? Available on any PC, anywhere. 

A MUFF screening is a minor problem compared to the flaunting of your rules every day of every year by the Adult Sex Industry. 

Why are films like Shortbus and 9 Songs passed though they clearly contravene some of your guidelines? 

Why is MIFF allowed to play a film like Exterminating Angles in a section that focussed on perversity and erotica though that too contravenes your guideline? And we cannot do it? We will comply with your absurd ruling out of fear of prosecution to our small festival but register our complaint also that this is neither fair or just. We believe strongly it represents a violation of the basic human rights of Australian citizens to freedom of speech, assembly and expression. 

Enabling a festival like MUFF or MIFF to play whatever they choose from the classy end of the sex industry will lift both festivals standing in the International community and not reveal a backward 1950's attitude to sex and censorship in Australia. Your own guidelines date from over 50 years ago. Surely a review is in order? 

I am cc-ing this email to the MIFF Festival Director Richard Moore for his interest. His comments and feelings on the matter I would be interested to hear. 

Any answers to these questions or our complaint will be greatly appreciated from the OFLC. 

This letter is not written in disrespect but in a wish for better clarification of the important issues it contains. 

Best Regards Richard Wolstencroft

PS. Why is 70k banned it has no sex or violence at all does it?

MUFF opens tonight at Toff in Town come down and support a festival that believes in fighting censorship!

***

Part 2: The Schoolgirls' Report - Why Parents Lose Their Sleep was banned in 1979 (see below)
Part 3: SCHOOLGIRLS GROWING UP - R18+ August 1974

The Schoolgirls' Report - Why Parents Lose Their Sleep

Dir Ernst Hofbauer / 1971 / West Germany

The second film in the SCHOOLGIRL REPORT series was passed R18+ in September 1973. It went on to have a theatrical release.

In January 1979 it was Refused Registration following a re-importation, and re-submission to the censors. The reason given for banning was that it was 'Undesirable public interest'.

Here is how Cinema Papers magazine reported it at the time.

Cinema Papers
May-June 1979
CENSORSHIP

During the past few months, several industry observers have commented on the increasing repressiveness of Australia's film censorship laws. Some writers have suggested that the level of film censorship has equalled the severity of the pre-"R" Certificate days, while others have pointed out the parallels between the changes in film censorship and the new, draconian literary censorship laws in Victoria, where the sale of magazines such as PLAYBOY is occasionally restricted.

Despite the many ominous signs, however, the film industry, the national press, and the public have remained apathetic, no !doubt believing things to be better than they are painted.

Fortunately, the January 1979 censorship list has provided concrete proof' of the accuracy of these reports: among the four films listed under "Films Refused Registration" are Schoolgirls' Report and Schoolgirls' Report - Why Parents Lose Their Sleep, two films which have been in release for five years. Despite the 'fact that these two "R"-rated films have raise neither public outrage nor the level of immorality in the community, the Chief Censor, Mr Richard Prowse, has decided the time is now ripe to ban them. And to achieve this, he has called on the little-used Section 13 (d) of the Censorship Act. This section allows for the rejection of any film which, in the opinion of the Censor, "depicts matter which is undesirable in the public interest".

In an article on film censorship in Australia (Cinema Papers, No. 11, PPs 206-208), the then Deputy-Chief Censor, Janet Strickland, said that the censorship board used Section 13 (d) to reject films concerning "drug abuse, hijacking, etc". One example is the banning of Hijacked, which the Censor felt too graphically demonstrated how a plane could be hijacked in mid-air.

The two Schoolgirls' Report films, however, are clearly of a different type. When contacted and asked why section 13 (d) was invoked in these cases, Prowse said that the films were felt to contravene the child pornography laws in several states. These laws prevent the use of children under the age of 16 in depictions of a sexually implicit or e pornographic nature. (The banning of Pretty Baby in Queensland is a case in point.) - What makes the application of these laws difficult is that in almost all cases the Censor is unaware of the real ages of the children used. For example, a film may claim to be about permissive 13 year-olds but actually use actors over 16 years of age. In the case of Schoolgirls' Report and Schoolgirls' Report - Why Parents Lose Their Sleep, the Censor considered the actors (or some of the actors) be under-aged - no doubt without consulting the German makers of the film. .

Another issue raised by these rejections is the question whether the Commonwealth Censor can ban a film already in release. According to the Commonwealth Censorship Act it cannot, but a loophole does exist because several of the states allow for such a turn about decision in their own censorship laws (New South Wales is one such state.) In the case of Schoolgirls' Report and Schoolgirls' Report - Why Parents Lose Their Sleep, however Prowse was not required to invoke these laws because the film had been re-imported and therefore required re-classification.

Coupled with the Censorship Board's changing attitudes to censorship has been a noticeable decline in communication between the Board and film distributors, particularly those handling sex films. At present, a distributor cuts any controversial film according to what he believes are the standards of the time. This "reconstructed" version is then sent to the Censorship Board, which may or may not pass It. If the film is rejected, it is then sent back to the distributor for further cuts. As a rule, however, the Board does not give any indication of what further cuts are required, and the distributor Is left in the dark As a result, reconstruction becomes an expensive game of chance.

Scrapbook

Dir Eric Stanze / 2000 / USA

There is one confirmed customs confiscation of this title.

In 2004 it played at the Melbourne Underground Film Festival.

DVD Comparisons

Scream Greats Volume 1-Tom Savini

Dir Damon Santostefano / 1985 / USA

What is of interest is that it contains scenes from films that had either been cut or banned in Australia. It looks like the censors went easy on it due to it being a documentary.

DAY OF THE DEAD
Banned by the censors in February 1986. It did not get an uncut R rating until November 1988. The most violent clips from the movie are presented here in all their uncut detail.

Friday the 13th Part 4-The Final Chapter
The censors had insisted on the removal of Jason's death scene when this film was submitted in July 1985. However, just one year later they allowed it to be shown in full here at 13min 38sec. 

MANIAC
Banned in May 1981, before being heavily cut in April 1982. Here, several of the scenes missing from the censored Video Classics release are shown.

14min 25sec - The scalping of the hooker, this is followed by the death scene of the boy on the beach.

16min 01sec - The stabbing of the nurse.

49min 08sec - The shotgun head explosion.

51min 20sec - Frank's death scene

ROSEMARY'S KILLER (aka THE PROWLER)
The uncut version was banned in 1982, and again in August 1985. Here Tom Savini shows how three effects scenes were achieved. These were all censored in the Video Classics VHS. 

8min 09sec - A shot of the killer moving the knife around in Sherry's neck.

8min 20sec - The knife going into Miss Allison's neck.

8min 28sec - Tom Savini is shown plunging the knife into the top of Carl's head, and the blade exiting his throat.

Now, if the censors really expect us to buy the idea that watching screen violence is indeed bad for us, then surely watching a scene in the context of a film is preferable to an hour long documentary of violent clips. I mean, in their report they describe the explicitness/intensity of the violence in the film as 'Medium Level'. If ever a feature deserved a 'High Level' violence warning then this is it. 

Search, The

Dir Juan Carlos Desanzo / 1985 / Argentina

RCA/Columbia Pictures/Hoyts Video had an 85min print of this rape/revenge banned in 1988. Reasons for the ban were given as 'Gratuitous Sexual Violence'.

Searching for Love

Dir Yeung Chun Bong / 1987 / Hong Kong

In 1986 Yu Enterprises cut this from 90 to 88mins (f) for showings in Chinese language cinemas.

Seduction of Amy

Dir Jean Rollin / 1975 / France

14th Mandolin first presented a 48min (f and v) print to the OFLC in 1985 and were granted an R rating. This version was pre-cut by the distributor to remove all the hardcore footage and can be found on the Pink Video-Essex Video label running a pathetic 46m 01s. Before the feature begins the following warning is given.

Due to Government Censorship the movie you are about to see has been severely edited.
Because of the shorter running time, this cassette contains a double feature.
To register a complaint please write to your local or Federal Member of Parliament or write direct to the Censorship Office.
7th Floor,
222 Pitt St,
Sydney
NSW 2000

The tape is not a total loss though, as the double-feature is a crazy cut down German sex comedy called Sex Play. As is the case with many of the R rated Pink Video titles, X-rated ones were put out as well. This was probably what they were trying to do in 1986 when the censors banned the 67min print.

Seductress, The

Dir Lui Kei / 1987 / Hong Kong

In 1987, Golden Reel Films had to cut this from 93 to 90min (f) before an R rated cinema release could proceed.

Sensitive New-Age Killer 

Dir Mark Savage / 2000 / Australia

In 2000 Hitman Productions had this passed uncut at 88min (f). The following year it was cut to 87min (f) for the much more commercial MA15+ rating.

The MA15+ version is out on DVD from 20th Century Fox, and runs 83min 42sec.

Thanks to the Director, Mark Savage for providing the following information about the problems with the OFLC

The R handed down to SNAK originally came with 3 pages (!) of problematic areas. I simply cut one scene and that changed the rating. After the lead throws a grenade at the guy he is shooting it out with in the train carriage, he leaps from the train as the carriage (and the guy in it, supposedly) explodes. We then cut to the lead (Paul) running back to his car and being joined by his double-crossing partner. In the R version, Paul goes back into the train to assess the damage and finds the guy he was shooting it out with still alive with half his face blown off. The guy is quivering like a petrified leaf. Paul sits down opposite him and asks him quite seriously how it feels to be dying. The guy, seeing that Paul is still holding his gun, reaches out for the gun and directs it to his own heart. He then implores Paul to kill him. Paul hesitates, then he kills him. This scene showed a curious, empathetic side to Paul. Clearly the OFLC didn't agree. It's a shame we had to cut this. The scene occurred at 21:41.

The full version can be found on the 2006 U.S. DVD from Subversive Cinema titled Savage Sinema From Down Under. It collects this and other titles from Mark Savage.

Sex and Zen 2

Dir Man Kei Chin / 1996 / Hong Kong

The OFLC awarded this an R18+ (High Level Sex Scenes, Medium Level Violence) rating in November 1996. Yu Enterprises Film Distributors went on to release this 88min (f) version to Chinese Language cinemas.

However as the OFLC state in their Annual Report at the time, it was a close call that saw the film passed.

Sex and Zen 2, a Chinese-language, historical sex farce from Hong Kong was debated on the R/RC border, and given an R classification by majority decision. The majority noted that 'the sex is linked through the narrative to implications of sexual violence, or sexualised violence (in some scenes)' ... but that these scenes 'were not gratuitous and had justification within the narrative ... lacked detail, occurred within an overall stylised and unrealistic treatment and were not offensive to the extent that they exceeded the R guidelines.' The minority view was that 'the treatment of the scenes described was exploitative and constituted gratuitous sexual violence to the extent that the film should be classified RC.'  

Soon after Siren released a subtitled print to VHS on their Chinatown label. As far as I know this version is uncut.

In 2004 Force Video released the film to DVD in a horrible English dubbed version which runs 85min 57sec.

DVD Comparisons

Sex Is….  

Dir Marc Huestis / 1993 / USA

"Sex Is..., a lifestyle documentary about homosexuality, was refused registration, despite its bona fide intent and safe sex message, as it included frequent and explicit depictions of sexual activities which constitute indecency under the Customs (Cinematographic Films) Regulations"  

OFLC & Film and Literature Board of Review-Report on Activities 1993-94 

Available on DVD in the US on the Water Bearer label.

Sex Wish 

Dir Zebedy Colt - Victor Milt / 1976 / USA

In April 1978 this was banned by the censorship board in a print that ran 2107.90mtr (77m 03s). A 1994.60mtr (72m 54s) reconstructed version was again refused in January 1979. Both times the reason given was 'Indecency'. This is a hardcore sex film so it is almost definite that the first submission was already censored to remove the more explicit sex scenes. Hardcore was not legalised in Australia until 1984, though a film such as SEX WISH would still remain banned due to the mixture of sex and violence.

This was due to be shown at the 8th Melbourne Underground Film Festival in 2007.

Melbourne Underground Film Festival 8
Program Notes
Zebedy Colt Double feature: Sex Wish and The Farmer’s Daughter 

Two short features (absolute 70s erotica classics) from Zebedy Colt aka Edward Earle Marsh. Sex Wish features a cool electronic soundtrack as Zebedy plays a rapist who breaks into women’s homes with a bag of unusual tricks. Zebedy’s performance is truly bizarre… Then comes The Farmer’s Daughter - clocking in at one hour in length, it’s sort of an erotic version of Last House on the Left. Look out for cheap and nasty sex scenes about home invasion, incest and violation. There’s also an early appearance from comedian and political commentator Spalding Gray getting up to no good… This is true Psychopathology, raw 70s style! 
9pm Sat 29 Sept 
LOOP

It was scrapped after the OFLC's Amy Wooding refused to grant it, and six other features film festival exemptions. This is not the first time that MUFF has ran into problems with the censors. In 2004 the OFLC demanded that The Toolbox Murders (1978),  Wife to be Sacrificed,  and Za Ginipiggu 1 and 2 be pulled from the festival.

The Melbourne Underground Film Festival issued the following press release on September 20th 2007.

MUFF 8 films banned! 
September 20th 2007

The Following films have been banned from the OFLC: 

70k 
Schulmädchen-Report: Was Eltern nicht für möglich halten (aka The Schoolgirl Report) 
Sex Wish 
The Farmer's Daughter 
Ashley & Kisha: Finding the Right Fit 
Whore 
60 Second Relief 

We will replacing them with other films from the MUFF program. 

This Sunday 70k will be replaced with a second screening of Streetsweeper… a good MUFF Neu that we can play. Whore and 60 Second Relief are withdrawn and nothing will fill their place. The Other films will be replaced. More details on Monday. 

Will the media even cover this? Do people care about censorship in this country?

Letter to OFLC 

Here is a copy of a letter sent to our OFLC contact Amy Wooding. Any response we will share with our MUFF audience: 

Hi Amy, I thought I'd write to you about this year's decision. 

So the films I cannot play at MUFF 8 are the following: 

70k, Schulmädchen-Report: Was Eltern nicht für möglich halten (aka The Schoolgirl Report), Sex Wish, The Farmer's Daughter, Ashley & Kisha: Finding the Right Fit, Whore and 60 Second Relief 

Is this correct? 

I will comply and withdraw them from screenings and replace them with films you have granted permission for me to play (like Moonlight and Magic, Left Ear, etc). 

A few small questions, you might be able to answer or maybe the OFLC director can answer them (If you have his email I'll cc this to him): 

Why is pornography of the most gross and offensive nature (like shitting and pissing films) available for sale in most Adult bookshops in Victoria? 

Also: Are not X rated films only supposed to be available in Canberra but for sale in 90% of Adult shops in Vic and NSW and in other states? 

Why is MUFF referred to the justice department for wishing to screen a couple of classy or forgotten pieces of erotica with artistic merit to an audience over 18 (who are keen to see them) and nothing done about the illegal X rated sale of videos and DVD's in sex shops that is rampant? 

Is there not a hint of corruption or hypocrisy and definitely absurdity here?

Why are X rated films banned at all! It begs the question given the ready availability of it in on the Internet? Available on any PC, anywhere. 

A MUFF screening is a minor problem compared to the flaunting of your rules every day of every year by the Adult Sex Industry. 

Why are films like Shortbus and 9 Songs passed though they clearly contravene some of your guidelines? 

Why is MIFF allowed to play a film like Exterminating Angles in a section that focussed on perversity and erotica though that too contravenes your guideline? And we cannot do it? We will comply with your absurd ruling out of fear of prosecution to our small festival but register our complaint also that this is neither fair or just. We believe strongly it represents a violation of the basic human rights of Australian citizens to freedom of speech, assembly and expression. 

Enabling a festival like MUFF or MIFF to play whatever they choose from the classy end of the sex industry will lift both festivals standing in the International community and not reveal a backward 1950's attitude to sex and censorship in Australia. Your own guidelines date from over 50 years ago. Surely a review is in order? 

I am cc-ing this email to the MIFF Festival Director Richard Moore for his interest. His comments and feelings on the matter I would be interested to hear. 

Any answers to these questions or our complaint will be greatly appreciated from the OFLC. 

This letter is not written in disrespect but in a wish for better clarification of the important issues it contains. 

Best Regards Richard Wolstencroft

PS. Why is 70k banned it has no sex or violence at all does it?

MUFF opens tonight at Toff in Town come down and support a festival that believes in fighting censorship!

Sinful Dwarf, The

Dir Vidal Raski / 1973 / Denmark

A 2530mtr (92m 28s) was Refused Registration in July 1974 for reasons of 'Indecency'. It was passed with an R-rating in November 1974 following the removal of 255mtr (9m 17.73s) of footage.

Thanks to Matt G for this review of the film.

Where to start with this one! It's easy to see why the Aussie version ended up with over 9mins of footage missing. This is a sleazy little film, but also very entertaining in a way that only 70's cinema can be. The version that I viewed ran 92:15, and looks uncut. There are numerous shots of gratuitous nudity, and general sleaze throughout the film. The basic plot concerns a mother and her dwarf son who keep girls drugged and captive in their attic where they prostitute them out. Some of the more problematic scenes that would have been prime candidates for the censors scissors include:

24min - naked girl is injected by the dwarf.
34-40min - client visits girls and has sex
50-51:30min - Mrs Lash injects a naked girl
55-55:30min - the dwarf whips a naked girl
70-71min - the dwarf chains up the girlfriend of the writer
76-79min - client visits girls and has sex
83min - the dwarf puts his walking cane up one of the girls

A combination of these scenes would have definitely made up the bulk of the missing 9mins.

Sinner's Blood

Dir Neil Douglas / 1969 / USA

In 1984, Filmways had a 76min (v) cut version of this passed with an R. The following year Ubat Video had this refused (for excessive violence) at 80mins, and Video Excellence at 81mins in 1990. 

Slaughtered Vomit Dolls

Dir Lucifer Valentine / 2006 / Canada-USA

One report of customs confiscating this DVD in 2006.

The reason given was:

"Material of this nature is deemed to fall within the scope of Regulation 4-A(1-A)(a) of the Customs (Prohibited Imports) Regulations 1956 ....."

 "This DVD portrays scenes of 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 imported"

DVD Comparison

Slaves to Passion

Prod Shiyuuta Biwajima and Chikara Niki / 2001 / Japan 

Siren Visual Entertainment had this hentai DVD banned on January 24th 2008. A censored version was passed R18+ (High level animated sex scenes) on February 14th 2008.

Sleepwalkers  

Dir Mick Garris / 1992 / USA

"With Sleepwalkers conceptual elements emphasising a close mother-son relationship were removed."

OFLC and Film Literature Board of Review-Report on Activities 1991-92

Thanks to Barnaby for sending in the following details of a second cut in the M rated version.

An uncut 'R' rated video release on First Release followed.  Columbia-Tristar have also released the uncut print on DVD.

DVD Comparisons

Snake in the Monkey's Shadow  

Dir Sum Cheung / 1979 / Hong Kong

JS & WC International Film Co submitted this title for classification in July 1980. It was passed with an M rating after 91.1mtr (3min 19sec) was removed from a 2386mtr (87min 12sec) print. The reason given for the deletions was 'animal cruelty'.

The film reportedly contains a scene where the hero trains by watching a monkey fight a cobra to the death.

The censored film went on to play Chinese Language cinemas.

The US DVD from Xenon Studios is reportedly missing the monkey vs. cobra scene. The 2004 Ventura disc that doubles the film with HORROR HOLIDAY is supposedly uncut.

Snuff

Dir Michael & Roberta Findlay / 1976 / USA

Syme Home Video had an 80min (v) videotape Refused Registration in May 1983. The reason for the decision was:

Violence
Frequency: Infrequent
Explicitness/Intensity: High
Purpose: Gratuitous

The final five minutes of added footage where the girl is killed on the bed would undoubtedly be the reason for the ban.

There is a reported customs confiscation of a tape from 2000.

The film remained unreleased in Australia until August 2005 when it was finally passed R18+ (High Level Violence). The following month, Stomp Visual issued it on DVD.

The Stomp Visual release runs 79min 49sec (NTSC), and seems to be a direct import of the US Blue Underground DVD. In true exploitation style the packaging is made to look like a brown paper bag. No releasing company is listed, and the film has no chapter stops. This type of marketing could only go so far in Australia where a government agency (OFLC) must also have their approval sticker on all releases. 

Interestingly, Stomp have also added a sticker to the cover that plays up the fact that the film was once banned in the UK. Wouldn't a much more exploitable angle been the fact that it was once banned in Australia? The sticker is of the Union Jack flag, over which the following is written.

An originally banned video nasty.
Video Nasty was a term coined in the United Kingdom in the 1980's that applied to a number of films distributed on video that were held by some to be unfit for domestic viewing.

They have also added this sticker to FIGHT FOR YOUR LIFE (never previously released here), and CONTAMINATION (previously R18+, now MA15+). These are also imports of Blue Underground DVD's.

DVD Comparisons

Southern Comforts  

Dir Bethel G. Buckalew / 1971 / USA

Regent Trading were refused a rating for this back in 1975. The film finally saw an R rated cinema release in 1979 when 14th Mandolin reduced the runtime from 80 to 75min (f). It had more problems in 1981 when K&C Video had an 80min (v) banned due to infrequent, but gratuitous highly explicit sex. Advertisements for King of Video that appeared in early 80's video trade magazines listed this as one of their titles. It needs to be conformed if this was indeed released by them.

In November 2002 Image/Something Weird released this on DVD doubled with (the also banned) TOBACCO ROODY.

SS Camp 5 Women's Hell

Dir Sergio Garrone / 1976 / Italy

Another Italian Nazi Exploitation piece that was refused a rating. Showcase had this banned at 92mins in August 1985, no cut release followed. Reasons for the ban were given as excessive violence and gratuitous sexual violence. This was filmed back to back with the also banned SS Experiment Love Camp.

DVD Comparisons

SS Girls

Dir Bruno Mattei / 1977 / Italy

The missing footage discussed for this film is not the work of the OFLC!

Passed with an R in 1982, and confirmed again in 1984. Released on tape in Australia on the Media label, through Video Classics, this tape runs 78min 21sec, and is the same as the old pre-cert UK tape. Both these releases are missing over 15 minutes of footage.

DVD Comparisons

S.S. Experiment Love Camp

Dir Sergio Garrone / 1976 / Italy

Another British video nasty suffered the same fate here. Roadshow had a 94 min print refused for cinema release in 1977, whilst in October 1985 Hoyts had a 90min turned down. Reasons for the ban were given as gratuitous sexual violence. There has been no cut video release.

DVD Comparisons

Stone Cold

Dir Craig R Baxley / 1991 / USA

"With the unedited version of Stone Cold, in which a rogue cop is sent under cover to investigate and entrap a biker gang, the Board considered the film's overall tone together with the cumulative impact of frequent violence and sometimes assaultive use of "fuck" language, and its derivatives, made restricted classification appropriate. On viewing the reconstructed version, however. the Board remained of the view that it would be difficult to modify the film's pervasive violent tone and concluded:

"despite cuts made to some areas of violence, the film still warranted a Restricted Classification for the ongoing, unrelenting volume of violence combined with frequent assaultive coarse language and an anti-social and violent tone....while individual depictions in isolation may well warrant a lesser classification, the film as a package of both visuals and concepts, and particularly the emphasis on violence and its glamorous use both by police and criminals, make this a package best restricted to an adult audience."  

OFLC and Film and Literature Board of Review-Report on Activities 1991-92

So, I guess the full version was given an 'R' rated cinema run. The video was passed with an 'R' at 88mins (v) the following year, and is on the Video Box Office label.

One final entry for this, in 1995, Australis Media had an edited print running 91mins (v) rated 'M'. 

DVD Comparisons

Streetfighter, The  

aka Japanese Street Fighter

Dir Shigerhiro Ozawa / 1974 / Japan

It was not until 1997 that this saw a video release in Australia. The M rated Roadshow tape runs 72min 13sec, and is the same as the American R rated print, which removes around 15minutes of mayhem.

Avenue One have issued this on DVD in Australia. If one was to judge this release by the cover art (same as the Roadshow tape), and rating (M15+), then you would believe that it is the same heavily censored print. However, this version turns out to be fully uncut! The running time is 90min 38sec (NTSC), converted to PAL that is 87min 46sec. This would seem to show that around 15min 30sec is missing from the Roadshow tape!

In August 2005 Payless Entertainment submitted the film as part of a DVD titled MARTIAL ARTS DISC 5. Three other films were on the disc. These were RETURN OF THE STREET FIGHTER,  FIGHTING MAD, and RETURN OF THE KUNG-FU DRAGON. The whole package was rated R18+ (High Level Violence). It needs to be confirmed which version of STREET FIGHTER this contains.

DVD Comparisons

Street Karate Self Defence Module 2

Dir Richard Woolcock / 1998 / Australia

This martial arts instructional video was Refused Classification in April 1999. It was passed in August 1999 after the applicant Richard Woolcock removed the offending material. The M15+ rating was gained after cutting the running time from 45 to 40min (v).

The Classification Guidelines state that any film that is found to "promote, incite or instruct in matters of crime or violence", will be rated RC. It is most likely that this was the reason for the ban.

The video provides instruction in the following techniques.

- Warm ups and stretching
- Fighting stance
- Basic kicks & hand strike techniques
- Fight or Flight
- Angles of attack and defence
- Self defence against strikes, kicks, headbutts & elbows
- Self defence against single hand grabs.

Stryker

Dir Cirio H. Santiago / 1983 / Philippines

In 1985 Seven Keys had an 85min (f) print refused. The same year Thorn Emi cut this (because of excessive violence and gratuitous sexual violence) from 82 to 81min (v) for an R rating. The actual run time is 81min 06sec and is definitely cut during the two scenes.

14min 50sec - Kardis shooting the prisoner in the head.

21min approx-The rape of Delha. In the Australian tape her top is torn off, followed by one of the guards saying "Let's take her down. The rest of the scene is missing.

Screen shots from both of these scenes can be found here. The shot of the hand being cut off is in the Australian tape.

Thanks to Heath G for confirming that these are the only cuts in the Thorn EMI release. His comparison with the uncut US tape shows that the two other scenes that look censored, the killing of the fat prison guard (24min), and the grenade thrown into tank (45min), are just the result of inept editing.

In the UK a video release by Cannon was pre-cut from 81min 55sec to 80min 43sec for an 18 certificate.

Subconscious Cruelty

Dir Karim Hussain / 1999 / Canada

There is one reported customs confiscation of this from 2005. The Double Disc German Sazuma release  was taken because it:

"........portrays scenes of cannibalism, cruelty and urinating on humans in such a way that they offend against the standards or morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults to the extent that they should not be imported"

"material of this nature is deemed to fall within the scope of Regulation 4A(1A)(a) of the Customs (Prohibited Imports) Regulations 1956 and therefore subject to the seizure provisions of Section 203 of the Customs Act 1901"

DVD Comparisons

Sudden Death

Dir Sig Shore / 1985 / USA

In 1986 applicant Reid and Puskar cut this three times from 91 to 90 to 88min. It was not until it was cut again to 86min that an R rating was awarded. The same year, Hoyts Distribution was also awarded an R for an 86min (v) print.

The actual run time of the tape released by RCA-Columbia/Hoyts Video is 82min 32sec and looks to be cut as follows.

7min approx-The initial rape of Valerie is totally missing. We see her being picked up in a taxi, then in the next shot she is dropped off.

27min approx-Cuts made to Valerie's beating by the rapist, and her then shooting him.

34min approx-The scene with the rapists in the back of the van has been cut.

44min-Possible cut to the shooting of the black taxi driver.

77min approx-Possible cut to the shooting of one of the rapists.

Sweet and Savage

Dir Antonio Climati & Mario Morra / 1983 / Italy

This title sure has had a confused history with the censors. First presented by Roadshow in 1984 and running 93mins (f), it was passed with an R18+. However the same year Palace were refused (for excessive violence) a rating at 81mins. Two years later, Blake films had this rated three times, 77 and 83 mins for an M, and 87mins (v) for an R. 

Whatever the story was, it has only ever been released once on tape, in 1987 on  Roadshow's Premiere label. The cover of the tape exploits the films reputation.

TO OUR AUSTRALASIAN VIDEO VIEWERS

RE: "SWEET AND SAVAGE"

Dear Viewer
For the past two years "SWEET AND SAVAGE" has been banned from public audiences because of the graphic cruelty and violence that the film depicts.

The Commonwealth Censor has only recently decided to release "SWEET AND SAVAGE" for viewing by "ADULT AUDIENCES ONLY."

We wish to warn our valued customers that this film could prove to be disturbing to some and should not be viewed by the feint hearted.

"SWEET AND SAVAGE" footage contains genuine acts of torture, cruelty and murder. It is for this reason that Premiere have deliberated for months over the actual release of "SWEET AND SAVAGE."

We at Premiere believe that life is full of sweet and savage experiences and that mankind should be the judge of this film.

Premiere hereby releases "SWEET AND SAVAGE" to the adult public audience with a sincere warning regarding its contents.

Yours faithfully,

DAVID GLASS
NATIONAL MANAGER

This kind of hype that any distributor indulges in on releasing a controversial title. What they fail to let the viewers know is that the Commonwealth Censor only passed the film after it was censored. This cut tape clocks in at 87min 35sec.

Continue...

   http://www.refused-classification.com

refusedclassification@gmail.com