American Adult Films of 1972 – Page 1

American adult movies from 1972 that have been cut or banned in Australia.

The X-rating, for hardcore sex, was introduced in February 1984.

Afternoon Tease

Directed by Joseph F. Robertson / 1972 / USA / IMDb

In August 1980, a 1533.84-meter (55:54) print of AFTERNOON TEASE was censored by 26.80-meters (00:58) for an R-rating.

The cuts were made to remove sex, which was said to be:
Frequency: Infrequent
Explicitness/Intensity: High
Purpose: Gratuitous

In the R-rated version, it was found to be:
Frequency: Frequent
Explicitness/Intensity: Medium
Purpose: Gratuitous

14th Mandolin was the applicant.

Behind the Green Door

Directed by Artie Mitchell – Jim Mitchell / 1972 / USA / IMDb

In October 1981, a 64-minute tape of BEHIND THE GREEN DOOR was passed with an R-rating. It was awarded because of sex, which was said to be:
Frequency: Frequent
Explicitness/Intensity: Medium
Purpose: Gratuitous

The print was described as being the ‘modified British version’. Hollywood House Video was the applicant.

BEHIND THE GREEN DOOR is a high profile title, however, this is the only time that it has been classified in Australia.

Code Name: Raw-Hide

Directed by Stephen Lomax – Kendall Stewart / 1972 / USA / IMDb

In July 1978, a 2139.00-meter (77:58) print of CODE NAME: RAW-HIDE was censored by 63.10-meters (02:18) for an R-rating. The cuts were made to remove ‘indecency’.

Code Name: Raw-Hide (1972) - Australian daybill movie poster 1
Daybill via Robert Hoskin

14th Mandolin was the applicant.

Video release

In January 1985, a 73-minute tape was passed with an R-rating. It was awarded for sex, which was described as being:
Frequency: Frequent
Explicitness/Intensity: Medium
Purpose: Gratuitous

Code Name: Raw-Hide (1972) - VHS videotape 1
VHS – King of Video

14th Mandolin released the tape on their King of Video label.


Directed by John Amero – Lem Amero / 1972 / USA / IMDb

In October 1980, a 1478.06-meter (53:52) print of DYNAMITE was censored by 6.20-meter (00:13) for an R-rating.

The cuts were made to remove sex, which was said to be:
Frequency: Infrequent
Explicitness/Intensity: High
Purpose: Gratuitous

In the censored R-rated version it was:
Frequency: Frequent
Explicitness/Intensity: Medium
Purpose: Gratuitous

Dynamite (1972) - VHS videotape 1
VHS – King of Video

14th Mandolin released it theatrically, and on their King of Video label.

Easy Virtue: Dairy of a Teenage Prostitute

Directed by D.L. Monty / 1972 / USA / IMDb

In June 1978, a 2137.50-meter (77:55) print of EASY VIRTUE: DAIRY OF A TEENAGE PROSTITUTE was banned because of ‘indecency’.

Lestrig Trading Co was the applicant.

The Erotic Adventures of Zorro

Directed by Robert Freeman / 1972 / USA / IMDb

In February 1974, a 2883.4 meter (105:06) print of THE EROTIC ADVENTURES OF ZORRO was censored by 206.55 meters (07:31) for an R-rating. The cuts were made to remove ‘indecency’.

The Erotic Adventures of Zorro (1972) - Australian daybill movie poster 1
Daybill via moviemem

Regent Trading Enterprises was the applicant.

The Erotic Adventures of Zorro (1972) - Australian daybill movie poster 2
Daybill via moviemem

Banned in Queensland

On 14 September 1974, the censored R-rated version of THE EROTIC ADVENTURES OF ZORRO became the second film to be prohibited by the Queensland Films Board of Review.

The managing director of Regent Trading, Errol Heath, said [Cinema Papers No. 12] that it was banned after having been screened for six weeks and one day.

Uncut screenings & a revoked rating

Brendan reports.
When I saw THE EROTIC ADVENTURES OF ZORRO I was surprised by the explicitness. After playing six weeks, the Melbourne theatre closed until further notice. I later read in the paper that it had been screening an uncut print of the film.

The censor had removed most of each sex scene for its R-rated release. The theatre shut for a week or more after which the approved version played. The VHS release was of this cut version.

October 12, 1974
The film THE EROTIC ADVENTURES OF ZORRO has been withdrawn from cinemas in Sydney and Canberra after action by the Film Censorship Board.

The Chief Commonwealth Film Censor, Mr R. J. Prowse. said tonight that the board had revoked the film’s certificate of registration after complaints from members of the public.

He said that some months ago a print of the film had been submitted lo the board which had declined to register it unless cuts were made. After cuts a ‘reconstructed version’ had been passed with an ‘R’ rating.

Later the board had learnt that other versions which had not been submitted had been imported and were being shown. The board had then revoked the registration.

A spokesman for Civic Theatres said yesterday that the film had been shown in Canberra for four weeks. THE STING is now being screened instead.

– Film off at ACT cinema
– Canberra Times via Trove

December 4, 1974
Film censorship as controversy is not much of an issue in Australia 1974 with only hard-core offerings like DEVIL IN MISS JONES and DEEP THROAT still on the total banned lists, and standards generally as to soft and medium-core material, provided the right ‘reconstruction’ is agreed on by the importer, becoming more liberal day by day. But every now and then something happens which points out to us rather sharply that the basic machinery of censorship can still be as repressive as ever.

Some eight column inches in the Melbourne Sun of October 12 announced what proved to be an event without precedent for at least the last 20 years. THE EROTIC ADVENTURES OF ZORRO a German-American soft ‘X’ sexploiter produced by nudie operator David Friedman, passed with an ‘R’ and cuts by the Film Censorship Board and in release at the Melbourne Chelsea and Sydney Gala some five weeks, had had its certificate of registration revoked and had been taken off the screen.

Confusion reigned as to what had happened. Somehow or other the second, third and fourth prints of the film imported into Australia by Regent Trading Enterprises head Errol Heath had emerged from the censor’s bond store uncut and the prints that had been screening in Melbourne and Brisbane were completely contrary to the Film Censorship Board’s Certificate’s cutting requirements. This is not the first time this has happened and this writer knows personally of at least one and possibly two other movies released in Melbourne where this has happened, but ZORRO was the first to be caught out. Deputy Chief Censor Mrs Strickland advised that the Board had acted as a result of numerous complaints from the public as to the film’s content, but refused to say whether the number of complaints received were more or less than normal for sexploitation films.

Importer, Errol Heath, who is an old-timer as far as independent distribution goes and has had his run-ins with the Censors back in the bad old days, blames inefficiency within the Attorneys-General’s Department for the brouhaha (and it is well known that the inhabitants of the Imperial Arcade basement are not noted for either their efficiency or their consistency), but other informed sources suggested that this might be the work of the establishment getting back at Heath for his handling of the controversial SEX AIDS & HOW TO USE THEM and for his blasts at the kangaroo-court Queensland Film Board of Review, both publicly at the recent Annual Exhibitor’s Convention and in the pages of the trade paper Australasian Cinema.

This offshoot of Bjelke Petersen’s banana republic is headed by a self-opinionated Brisbane solicitor named [Des] Draydon. It was instrumental in banning ZORRO in Queensland on Friday, September 13. The Queensland Board meets in total secrecy; gives no reasons for its decisions and gazettes its decisions within hours giving distributor and exhibitor little time to attempt alternate programming. The only options open to an aggrieved distributor is an expensive appeal to the Queensland Supreme Court or a mutually agreeable reconstruction (i.e., cutting) of the film which may produce a version quite different to that screenable elsewhere in Australia (How’s that for freedom of trade between the states: Senator Murphy, attention please).

Late on Monday, October 14 the matter appeared to be resolved. The uncut prints of ZORRO had been cut and the Melbourne Chelsea was screening it once more. I have yet to see the cut print, but I saw the uncut print and found it far from being anything in the way of a notable censorship breakthrough. Strange to say on the Friday prior to the announcement of the ZORRO ban I had viewed the Morrissey [FLESH FOR] FRANKENSTEIN which has been passed uncut and which contains some of the most revolting scenes of sadomasochism ever seen on the screen. Does the Board now stoop to intellectual snobbery in that a Morrissey film is somehow immune from the rigours of life that a piece of ‘Z’ grade porn like ZORRO must face. Haven’t Prowse and Co. heard of precedents?

Whether Queensland will now reconsider its ban in the face of the federal cutting remains to be seen. Purists may argue that not many tears should be spilt over the fate of a film like ZORRO, but it is the principle that is important. The total arbitrariness of the Queensland Board is obvious. The Federal Board in its action of pulling off a film at a moment’s notice is just as arbitrary.

Moreover the powers of the Federal Board of Review have not been spotlighted sufficiently of late. This group composed inter alia of public servants, TV commentator and academics hears evidence for a reconsideration of the decision of the Board at first instance; then makes its decision after private discussion. It gives no reasons for its decision, (like most Australian quasi-judicial tribunals, unlike in England where detailed reasons must be given) and its decision (save for the little used appeal to the Attorneys-General) is final. One major area of censorship reform long overdue must be for both the Board and the Board of Review to have to give detailed reasons for their decisions.

Finally Deputy Chief Censor Strickland made the interesting point that had either the exhibitor or distributor in the ZORRO case refused to take off the movie, Commonwealth Customs action for prohibited imports would not lie (despite the delegation of censorial powers by the State’s Attorneys-General to the Commonwealth) but that the individual State Attorneys-General would have to take their own actions under the Summary Offences Act of each state and related legislation.

The time may soon come when a distributor or exhibitor may well feel that a County Court jury would be more qualified to express an opinion on the offensiveness or otherwise of a movie than a gaggle of Machiavellian ciphers trading under infallibility from a Sydney basement.

– Film Censorship can STILL be heavy
– Antony I. Ginnane, Cinema Papers No. 4

Moral police at the drive-in

One of the scare campaigns of the mid-1970s was the screening of R-rated films at drive-in cinemas.

December 1, 1975
The Festival of Light has asked the NSW Premier, Mr Lewis, and the Minister, for Police, Mr Waddy, to ban R-rated movies with explicit sexual content from drive-in theatres.

In particular, the group has complained of current I screenings of THE EROTIC ADVENTURES OF ZORRO, which a spokesman described as ‘one of the most explicit pornographic films in Australia’.

The public-relations officer for the group, Mr Ken Harrison, said that at Caringbah, where he lived, young people and children were able to view this and other explicit films through the wire fence surrounding the drive-in.

His group had received complaints that at a country drive-in theatre, children had watched ZORRO from a hillside, and listened to a taped soundtrack given to them by a spectator who had previously recorded it inside the theatre.

– Call to ban film
– Canberra Times via Trove

January 11, 1977
Since the appointment of John Mostyn to the managing directorship of Hoyts Theatres some 18 months ago, the film industry has been closely observing the attempts by this traditionally conservative chain to jazz up its image.

Others have proved less successful…the so-called ‘family’ drive-in at Bulleen in Melbourne.

The latter experiment was partly set in motion to appease a vocal minority who have been lobbying state governments in Victoria and NSW in an attempt to have R certificate films banned from drive-in theatres. Hoyts spent more than $10,000 promoting the family drive-in concept, playing combination G, NRC and M rated programs. But all to no avail — the public stayed away.

– Hoyts innovates
– Cinema Papers No. 11

January 11, 1977
Problematic Trends – Drive-ins
The greatest single cause of complaints is the showing of ‘R’ certificate films in drive-ins. Only two states have provision within their Acts to move against the showing of ‘R’ films in drive-ins. One of these is South Australia, which amended its legislation in 1973 to give the Minister power to prohibit the showing of certain ‘R’ films in particular drive-ins; the other is Queensland, which is empowered to act against the showing of films under the provisions of the 1974 Films Review Act.

State officials are often asking us if a particular film is unsuitable for showing in a drive-in. It is our contention that no drive-in which can be seen from the road is suitable for an ‘R’ film. It is a case of the drive-ins being unsuitable rather than an ‘R’ certificate film being unsuitable.

– How Australian Film Censorship works
– Janet Strickland, Deputy-Chief Censor
– Cinema Papers No. 11

Video releases

In the early 1980s, K&C Video issued an 89:25 version of THE EROTIC ADVENTURES OF ZORRO on tape.

The Erotic Adventures of Zorro (1972) - VHS videotape 1
VHS – K&C Video
The Erotic Adventures of Zorro (1972) - VHS videotape 2
VHS – K&C Video

It was issued again in the late 1980s on the Xtasy label.

Uncut DVD releases

THE EROTIC ADVENTURES OF ZORRO was finally passed uncut (102:31) in November 2004 with an R (Sexual violence, High level sex scenes) rating.

The Erotic Adventures of Zorro (1972) - DVD cover 1
DVD – Siren

It was released on DVD in February 2005 by Siren Visual Entertainment.

The only extra was a nearly 7-minute trailer, which contains more graphic sex than the film itself. This reportedly also appeared on an unknown early 1980s K&C Video release.

The Healers

Directed by Eduardo Cemano / 1972 / USA / IMDb

In May 1978, a 2066.20-meter (75:19) print of THE HEALERS was banned because of indecency.

A censored 1562.10-meter (56:56) version was passed with an R-rating in August 1978.

There is little information about the applicant, K&S Wilcsek. The Commonwealth of Australia Gazette lists the company as being wound up voluntarily on 7 June 1984.

Borderline hardcore

Simon reports.
After Hours Cinema (us) – DVD – 77:33 (NTSC)
The sex in THE HEALERS is not fully hardcore, no erections, cum shots or penetration, but it does push the boundaries. Surprisingly, for a movie of this type, there is a (simulated) gay sex scene. However, it is hard to understand why it lost 18-minutes to the censor, as the film is played for laughs and the sex is shown to be fun.

The After Hours Cinema DVD titled EDUARDO CEMANO’S SEXUAL HEALING TRILOGY also includes FONGALULI (1973) and MADAME ZENOBIA (1973).

Further reading

For more censored Eduardo Cemano, see the database entry for FONGALULI (1973).