American adult movies from 1970 that have been cut or banned in Australia.
The X-rating, for hardcore sex, was introduced in February 1984.
Raquel’s Motel
Produced by Fantasia Films / 1970 / USA / IMDb
In August 1979, a 1608.70-meter (58:38) print of RAQUEL’S MOTEL was banned because of ‘indecency’.
A 1416.96-meter (51:39) ‘reconstructed version’ was passed with an R-rating in October 1979.
In both cases, 14th Mandolin was the applicant.
It was released on their King of Video label.
Review
Mike reports
Something Weird Video (us) – VHS – 56:47
This seems to be more or less the full softcore version and is likely the one submitted in Australia. There is anecdotal evidence that a six minute longer hardcore version existed at some point.
Raquel (Uschi Digard) uses her inheritance to buy a sleazy motel ‘where guests never stay the whole night’. She spies on them having sex and eventually joins in.
The reason for the initial ban and the R-rated version losing seven minutes is likely related to the dialogue rather than the action. Each sex scene is accompanied by a voice-over by one of the participants describing one of their earlier sexual encounters.
John (Ron Darby) is one half of a married couple who are staying at the hotel. He seduces and has softcore intercourse with the maid while relating a story about his younger self spying on his teenage sisters having sex. He enjoyed watching and was invited to join in. This is the first problematic story. It’s told in six segments as the scene is intercut with another one showing Raquel.
A subsequent sex scene has the maid tell her story about the time when she was a teenager and was raped at knifepoint by a biker gang. We’re told she ended up enjoying it. This story is related extremely graphically.
In each case, nothing they describe in their stories is actually shown. If both of these scenes had been cut completely it would have meant removing 15 minutes of footage. But if only the parts of the scenes featuring the dialogue were cut this could be reduced to 6-7 minutes. Presumably that’s what 14th Mandolin did in the R-rated ‘reconstructed version’.
Separate Vacations
Directed by Unknown / 1970 / USA / IMDb
The National Classification Database provides no information other than the title. We presume the IMDb link refers to the same film.
In November 1981, a 416.86-meter (37:59) 16mm ‘pre-censor cut version’ of SEPARATE VACATIONS was censored by a further 1.00-meter (00:05) before being awarded an R-rating.
The cuts were made to reduce the sex from being:
Frequency: Infrequent
Explicitness/Intensity: High
Purpose: Gratuitous
…to Frequency: Frequent
Explicitness/Intensity: Medium
Purpose: Gratuitous
14th Mandolin was the applicant. It was reportedly released on their King of Video label.
Review
Mike reports
Something Weird Video (us) – DVD – 53:04
The plot concerns a husband and wife (Kathy Hilton) whose marriage is under strain. They decide they will try to patch things up by spending some time apart and going on separate holidays. Both take the opportunity, when they’re sure that the other has left, of staying at home and having casual sex with as many people as possible until their spouse returns.
SEPARATE VACATIONS is an extremely low budget film even by the standards of adult cinema of the early hardcore era. In many cases when the actors fluffed their lines, were not able to ad lib, or didn’t act in the way they were directed, the end result stayed in the final print. One example of this is in the opening scene in which the wife and her husband have unsimulated sex for several minutes before she becomes rather angry and decides that they would benefit from going on different holidays by themselves. The sex seemed a perfectly happy experience for both of them so her reaction was rather peculiar.
It’s clear that 14th Mandolin cut the hardcore before submitting SEPARATE VACATIONS to the Film Censorship Board. There is also a small amount of softcore sex which occurs in a scene when the husband is unable to perform. However, it is quite tame and shouldn’t have troubled the Board.
A more likely source of the 00:05 of cuts is a scene when the husband, thinking his wife has gone off on holiday, invites Cindy (Suzanne Fields) around to the house and they have sex by the swimming pool. After a few minutes of apparently perfectly consensual sex which they were both enjoying, she pulls away with a disgusted expression on her face and tells him that she is leaving. He responds that he “thought she wanted it”. This abrupt and unexpected end to the scene might have been edited to remove the suggestion of a lack of consent.
Sexual Freedom in Denmark
Directed by John Lamb / 1970 / USA / IMDb
In June 1974, a 2166.00-meter (78:57) print of SEXUAL FREEDOM IN DENMARK was passed with an R-rating.
Columbia Pictures was the applicant.
The Censorship Board awarded the classification with the following condition attached.
June 1974
– Film Censorship Board report
Film passed subject to the special condition that all advertising carries the words ‘This is a Sex Education Film’.
SEXUAL FREEDOM IN DENMARK is an interesting example of Australian classification standards. The Censorship Board were prepared to allow scenes of actual hardcore penetration, as long as they were in the context of a sex education film.
In October 1973, Torgny Wickman’s LANGUAGE OF LOVE (1969) had passed through uncut with a similar warning attached.
Banned in Queensland
On 6 June 1977, the R-rated version of SEXUAL FREEDOM IN DENMARK was prohibited by the Queensland Films Board of Review.
The distributor was Columbia Pictures.
A genuine white-coater
Matt reports.
After Hours Cinema (us) – DVD – 75:44
SEXUAL FREEDOM IN DENMARK plays like three films in one. The first 45-minutes covers the lifting of censorship restrictions in Denmark in the late 1960s and compares it with the current state of play in America. We get interviews with porn actors and a look inside a Danish adult store. This leads to an interview with a woman who talks about the sex education book used in Danish schools.
At the 45-minute mark, we go to a full-on sex education film. This has nothing to do with the first part of the film. It is shot seriously and I am sure it was genuinely educational to a large number of people. It covers contraception, birth of a baby footage, STDs and finally sexual positions in which a couple are shown having hardcore sex in a variety of ways. A second couple is also shown having sex, only this time the woman is pregnant.
SEXUAL FREEDOM IN DENMARK is an interesting curiosity from the time where filmmakers tried any way they could to get hardcore onto the screens. It is interesting to see that the Australian censor would pass it a full ten years before the X-rating was introduced. I would have preferred more of the earlier censorship and sexual liberation footage and less of the sex education.
Further reading
For more censored John Lamb (AKA M.C. Von Hellen), see the database entry for SEXUAL LIBERTY NOW (1971).
Sexual Practices in Sweden
Directed by Karl Hansen / 1970 / USA / IMDb
In May 1977, a 2085.00-meter (76:00) print of SEXUAL PRACTICES IN SWEDEN was censored by 66.50-meters (02:25) for an R-rating. The cuts were made to remove ‘indecency’.
Seven Keys were the applicant.
Banned in Queensland
On 30 June 1978, the censored R-rated version of SEXUAL PRACTICES IN SWEDEN was prohibited by the Queensland Films Board of Review.
The distributor was Seven Keys Films.
Splendor in the Sack
Directed by Unknown / 1970 / USA / IMDb
In January 1982, a 592.00-meter (53:57) 16mm print of SPLENDOR IN THE SACK was banned because of sex. It was said to be:
Frequency: Frequent
Explicitness/Intensity: High
Purpose: Gratuitous
14th Mandolin was the applicant.
Review
Mike reports
After Hours Cinema (us) – DVD – 51:28
This is a strictly softcore sex farce about a husband (Pete Dawson) and wife (Jan Davis) who are keen to seduce their maid. There’s very little plot and the sex is basically wall to wall, although not especially graphic with only a few close-ups.
The main reason for the ban is almost certainly the last ten minutes of the film when a threesome between husband, wife and maid turns into a rough sex scene and then an unambiguous rape of the maid, who is crying and screaming. This happens completely unexpectedly and isn’t required by the plot.
Previously available truncated versions (e.g. Something Weird Video) obscured the reason for ‘splendor’ featuring in the title. The more or less complete After Hours Cinema version shows an additional scene in which the wife and the maid dress in fancy clothes and wear expensive-looking necklaces and bracelets while having sex.
Sweets for the Suite
Producer Cine-Cal Productions / 1970 / USA / IMDb
In December 1981, a 678.00-meter (61:47) 16mm print of SWEETS FOR THE SUITE was banned because of sex, which was said to be:
Frequency: Infrequent
Explicitness/Intensity: High
Purpose: Gratuitous
14th Mandolin was the applicant.
Review
Mike reports
Alternative Cinema (us) – 2008 DVD – 60.41 -Modified soundtrack
Bill (William Howard) fires his secretary when he finds her having sex at her typewriter and advertises for a new one. He has sex with all the applicants. Eventually his wife drops in at the office and catches him with his trousers down. There’s no plot resolution as such, and it’s likely that filming stopped because they had an hour of footage.
The sex is fairly graphic as softcore goes, with occasional use of sex toys. There is a 5-6 minute scene which the Censorship Board would certainly have taken exception to in which an applicant tries to resist the boss’s sexual advances and he persists despite her protests.
The surprise is not that this film was banned, but that the Board described the sex as ‘infrequent’. The sexual content is pretty much constant, and even when the boss is waiting for the next candidate he passes the time by looking at a porn magazine and pleasuring himself. There’s not even a break from the sex when he takes his lunch break as two female applicants arrive and have sex in the waiting room until he returns.
6-9 the Daily Double
Produced by Leonard Kirtman / 1970 / USA / IMDb
In April 1980, a 1589.62-meter (57:56) print of 6-9 DAILY DOUBLE was censored by 10-meters (00:22) for an R-rating.
The cuts were made to remove sex, which was found to be:
Frequency: Infrequent
Explicitness/Intensity: High
Purpose: Gratuitous
The censorship reduced the sex in the R-rated version to:
Frequency: Frequent
Explicitness/Intensity: Medium
Purpose: Gratuitous
14th Mandolin released it theatrically and on tape through their King of Video label.