G.A International had a 91m VHS of THE AFTERMATH Refused Classification in August
1985. The reasons given for the ban was 'excessive violence', which were
A censored 81m VHS was passed with an R-rating in September 1985.
The rating was given for 'violence' which was described as:
A release on the G.A International label does not seem to have eventuated as the Australian tape was released by Platinum Video with an actual runtime of 88:45.
Thanks to Matt for this review.
The uncut US tape runs 94:40 (NTSC). Converted to PAL this should give a running time of 90:53. This means the Platinum Video tape is missing around two minutes of footage. I noticed four scenes that were definitely censored.
8m approx: Cutter's Men are shown shooting the male prisoners. One of them is shot with a shotgun causing his head to explode. The actual explosion has been removed and we only see the aftermath.
40m approx: Cutter forces himself onto a female prisoner. The scene is uncut in the Platinum Video version until the girl picks up a bottle and Cutter looks up suspiciously. It censors the scene where she smashes the bottle into his neck and runs from the room. Cutter picks up his gun and shoots but misses as she escapes. This is an odd scene to remove as surely it shows the girl getting her revenge.
57m approx: This is the largest cut and lasts around one minute. Cutter and his men have discovered a group of survivors. They shoot the two children (off-screen), kill the man, and pull the woman from the ute. They tear her top off and attempt to pull down her underwear as she struggles. Cutter looks on and laughs. This entire scene is missing from the Platinum Video version and was probably removed because it was easier to take out the whole thing rather than attempt to censor it. It adds nothing to the actual film apart from showing what bad-asses Cutter and his men are.
86m approx: Newman and Getman are shown struggling on the ground. Newman says "Smile for me now Getman". The Platinum version then removes the following. Newman says "This is for Helen" as the knife is shown pushing into Getman. "This is for Matthews" the knife pushes in more. Finally he says "This is for Sarah" as he pushes the knife in, twists it, and pulls it out. The Platinum Video version then continues with him saying "This is for Laura" as he stabs Getman in the head.
For the record the credits should begin with "The Nautilus Film Company Presents". However in the Platinum Video version you can hear the opening music playing, but the screen shows a video generated card saying "Screen World Video Productions".
In September 1976, a 1974.96-meter (71:59) print of ALICE IN WONDERLAND was censored by 18.4-meters (00:40) for an R-rating. The cuts were made to remove 'indecency'.
20th Century Fox was the applicant.
In April 1979, a 74m videotape was refused because of 'indecency'. Videobrain was the applicant.
Further bans followed in November 1981 for both Meridien Electronics and
Video Classics. The 76m tapes ran into problems because of sex, which was
found to be:
In August 1982, Video Classics had a 75m tape censored for an R-rating.
The sex was now described as being:
Video Classics released the tape on their Media Home Entertainment label.
Blake Films had a 2084:00-meter (75:58) 'soft version' passed with an R-rating in June 1983.
This was followed in April 1984 by Video Classics, who had a 76m tape passed with an R-rating.
Both of these final two submissions were awarded R-ratings for the same reason as the one in August 1982.
Daybill image courtesy of moviemem.com
In February 1975, a 2468.00-meter (90:12) print of ALL ABOUT SEX OF ALL NATIONS was banned because of 'indecency'. The applicant was A. De Zauerain.
In May 1977, a censored 2086.60-meter (76:16) version was also banned. Again, the reason was 'indecency'.
A second cut print was finally passed with an R-rating in October 1977. It ran only 1837.80-meters (67:10), but still lost a further 11.5-meters (00:25) because of 'indecency'. This print, missing over 23 minutes of footage, was released theatrically by Seven Keys Films.
Image courtesy of moviemem.com
Peacock Films had a 73m VHS of THE AMAZING SHOCKING ASIA Refused Classification in May 1998.
In July 1982, a 2207.00-meter (80:27) print of AMOROUS SISTERS (submitted
as JULCHEN UND JETTCHEN) was banned because of sex, which was described as
Under the title AMOROUS SISTERS, a censored 2084.68-meter (75:59) version
was passed with an R-rating in February 1983. The sex was now found to be:
Filmways Australasia released it theatrically.
Image courtesy of moviemem.com
In April 1976, a 2468.70-meter (89:59) print of AND NOW PREPARE YOUR GRAVE was censored by 21.60-meters (00:47) for an R-rating. The cuts were made to remove 'excessive violence'.
Roadshow Film Distributors was the applicant.
Thanks to Simon for this information.
It is odd that an old Spaghetti Western would still need to be censored in 1976. I tracked down the German DVD released on the EMS label as DJANGO UND DIE BANDE DER GEHENKTEN. It runs 88:32, and has an English audio option.
I believe the Censorship Board would have removed the 47 seconds from the scene that begins at approximately 44:15. It shows a helpless Django being brutally beaten by Lucas’s men. Cuts to this scene would have dramatically reduced its impact.
In July 1977, a 2852.78-meter (103:59) print of ANDY WARHOL’S BAD was censored by 13.90-meters (00:30) for an R-rating. The cuts were made to remove 'indecent violence'.
Greater Union Organisation Film Distributors was the applicant.
Thanks to Simon for this information.
It is likely that the entire 30s of 'indecent violence' was removed from just one infamous scene in ANDY WARHOL’S BAD. At 79:45, a mother picks up her screaming baby and throws him from a high-rise window. The camera follows the falling body, and shows a woman being covered with blood as the body hits the ground. The bloody corpse is shown on the pavement, as a dog sniffs the blood. The entire sequence would not be out of place in a Troma movie.
There are other scenes of violence, such as, 24m when a man is crushed under a car and his finger is cut off, at 72m, when a dog is stabbed, and at 94m when L.T. shakes an autistic child, and throws him against the wall.
Very brief shots of hardcore pictures are shown at 49m when L.T. and the girl are shown reading a pornographic magazine. The uncut version that I viewed ran 105:27 (NTSC) while the original Australian submission ran only 103:59, which may suggest some pre-cutting.
Chinatown Cinema had a 92m 35mm print of ANGEL banned in 1988. An appeal to the Review Board produced this response.
REVIEW BOARD REPORT
21 July 1988
Angel was refused registration by the Film Censorship Board on the grounds of' 'detailed and gratuitous depictions of violence'. The Angels of the title are members of an undercover task force engaged by the police to smash an international drug ring. The film was made in Hong Kong, and its dialogue is sub-titled in English.
The Film Board of Review considered the film at length, and perhaps with greater earnestness than its cinematic qualities would merit. Angel belongs to a well-established genre - the kung fu movie, in which violence of a certain frenetic kind is presented in a quasi-comic style. The fist-fights and kung fu battles in which both male and female combatants are engaged for much of the film are orchestrated with considerable skill and ballistic energy; but since it is rare for the participants to sustain any discernible injury it is difficult to take the 'violence' seriously. The same can be said of the gunfights. Bullets fly in such profusion that the scenes are more reminiscent of a Mack Sennett comedy than a thriller. As a serious drama, Angel is absurd and entirely lacking in credibility, but in the opinion of the Board of Review should be judged for what it is - an entertainment of a special kind with few presentations to realism or serious content.
For these reasons the Board was of the view that the film should not be refused registration. Members were mindful of the guidelines proscribing 'unduly detailed and/or relished acts of extreme violence or cruelty', and undoubtedly there are brief scenes in the film which could be held to infringe these guidelines. But because of their comparative brevity and stylised character- and tone of slightly self-mocking parody in which they are presented- the Board of Review considered their overall effect was not sufficiently disturbing to warrant refusal to register. If Angel were a more convincing and realistic film the violence might be more offensive. In the opinion of the Board of Review it is more likely to affront the intelligence and test the patience of audiences than offend their sensibilities.
The Board of Review accordingly directs the Censorship Board to register Angel with a 'For Restricted Exhibition' classification.
Now passed uncut with an R-rating, it went onto a Chinese language cinema run.
In 1989 a dubbed 88:26 tape of this was released by RCA/Columbia/Hoyts Video under the title IRON ANGELS. It had been passed with an R-rating in April 1989.
Valhalla Films submitted an 1812.72 meter (66:15) print of ANGEL MINE in February 1980, and were awarded an R-rating rating following the deletion of 12.1 meters (00:26) of footage.
In August 1982, a 64m tape described as an 'optically modified version' was awarded an R-rating. This was listed as having two applicants, Videoscope Australia, and Valken Pty Ltd. It needs to be confirmed if Videoscope ever released this tape on their label.
The following explanation of the cuts is from Cinema Papers magazine.
Angel Mine a New Zealand short, was Rated "R" after the deletion of a sequence. Blyth claims however that the cut was made without his approval. This raises the difficult issue of whether a distributor should be allowed to make cuts in a film to satisfy the censorship rulings of individual countries. In many distribution contracts these rights are clearly spelt out; in others not at all.
Angel Mine was shortened by the deletion of one scene where a blue movie is seen flickering on a screen in the background.
We believe the censored scene takes place between 26-27m. The couple are in a cinema watching a film of them having sex. The man is shown on top of the woman, and we can see his testicles as they have sex. No penetration is shown. The scene cuts back and forward between the sex scene on screen, and the couple watching the film. It cuts back to the sex scene eight times which matches up nearly exactly with the 00:26 deleted in February 1980.
We contacted David Blyth through his website and asked if he had any further information regarding the Australian release of ANGEL MINE. David's second feature, DEATH WARMED UP, also ran into problems with the Australian censors.
ANGEL MINE was about a young couple who relate to each other through media such as radio, TV commercials , films etc
I believe like you, the cut scene from ANGEL MINE is the young couple watching themselves on the big screen making love quite vigorously. The scene is not hardcore merely real. The soundtrack is a thumping African beat (gumboot stomping music) which I thought gave it a satirical edge.
I believe that Australia may have had a more conservative censorship system than New Zealand at the time, but it is certainly very interesting that both films were censored for Australian consumption.
Do I sniff some cultural discrimination against Australia's country cousins New Zealand?
Because we were never consulted, we only discovered this situation after the event, so it was too late to do much,
As for the possible VHS release in OZ of ANGEL MINE, I know nothing about that. Both films are represented by the New Zealand Film Commission. ANGEL MINE was released on VHS in NZ initially in 1978, it's possible it was reissued in 1982 in NZ as part of a VHS Kiwi Classic Film Series.
Both films have now finally been released on DVD this year. Both films have been released uncut as originally made by me.
The NZ company selling the DVDs of ANGEL MINE and DEATH WARMED UP is www.screenline.co.nz
THE AWAKENING OF ANNIE was released on VHS in the early 80s on the King of Video label. This very rare tape must have been heavily censored as it only ran 64:37. Thanks to Stephen F for the cover and time.
During the early to mid 80s Platinum Pictures released it on VHS on their Eros label as ANNIE: THE VIRGIN OF ST TROPEZ. At the time distributors were not compelled to have video tapes classified. This changed in February 1984 when it became law for all video tapes to be rated. The censors began the slow task of reviewing all the titles that had been released up until that time. They finally got to the ANNIE: THE VIRGIN OF ST TROPEZ in September 1985. The 90m Eros VHS was Refused Classification due to 'gratuitous sexual violence'. Despite the ban, the film remained on the shelves of many video stores.
They finally got to the King of Video version of THE AWAKENING OF ANNIE in December 1984. 14th Mandolin (the company behind King of Video) had a 63m videotape Refused Classification, again due to 'explicit and gratuitous sexual violence'.
It was finally passed with an R18+ (High Level Sex Scenes, Sexual Violence, Nudity) rating in March 2005. Force Entertainment released it to DVD (As THE AWAKENING OF ANNIE) the following month. This was part of an eight disc box set titled THE FRENCH EROTIC COLLECTION. It was re-released in April 2008 with new packaging.
Thanks to Matt for this review of the film.
Despite the box listing it as THE AWAKENING OF ANNIE, the actual on-screen title is ANNIE THE VIRGIN OF ST TROPEZ. The print looks uncut, with a running time of 89:58, nine seconds of which is the Cinema Arts titles card. This would seem to indicate that the Eros/Platinum VHS banned in 1985 was also uncut as the censors list it as running 90m. The 'gratuitous sexual violence' that the censors state as the reason for the ban would be from these three scenes.
39m: Mark attempts to force himself on Annie. He gets as far as pulling her bikini top off and trying to kiss her. This is followed by a seemingly never ending chase along the beach. This is probably the tamest of the three sequences.
51m-56m: A flashback shows Annie delivering a dress to the home of an extremely ugly South African guy. He forces her at knife point to strip, and then attempts to rape her. This is quite an unsettling sequence, mainly because the guy is so convincing. He looks like he has had major surgery for burns, and has huge lips which he licks as he looks at the naked Annie. This scene would definitely been the main reason that the film was banned.
73m: When they fly into the Amazon, Annie and the other passengers are held up by a group of armed men. The other girl on the plane is held down by two men and they pull her top off. This is a brief sequence, but understanding how the censors reacted back in 1985, then this could have contributed to the ban.
These three sequences would not even get close to making up the approximately 25m that are missing from the King of Video tape that you list. This must have also been missing the long sex scenes that are littered through the film. These are quite graphic, but still your typical 70's soft-core variety.
The film itself is incredibly dull, despite the climax having Annie wandering through the Amazon, battling alligators, and dodging death.