1980s to 1990s Japanese anime and hentai that have been cut or banned in Australia.
Urotsukidôji: Legend of the Overfiend
aka Legend of the Overfiend
Directed by Hideki Takayama / 1989 / Japan / IMDb
The Manga Manga Manga film festival was scheduled for 25 March 1994 at the Valhalla Cinema in Melbourne and Sydney.
Six premieres were programmed. THE PROFESSIONAL: GOLGO 13 (1983), VENUS WARS (1989), FIST OF THE NORTHSTAR (1986), WICKED CITY (1987), ROUJIN Z (1991) and UROTSUKIDÔJI: LEGEND OF THE OVERFIEND.
The aim was to promote the launch of Siren Entertainment’s Manga Video label.
On the opening day, newspaper advertisements advised that both UROTSUKIDÔJI: LEGEND OF THE OVERFIEND and VENUS WARS (1989) ‘…have been unavoidably delayed’. By 26 March, only the former title remained ‘… unavoidably delayed’.
On 30 March, a 101-minute 35mm UROTSUKIDÔJI: LEGEND OF THE OVERFIEND was listed as Refused Registration. The Censorship Board noted it was due to ‘…sequences of violent sexual aggression’ and they believed their decision reflected’…community standards in relation to concern about exploitative cinematic representations of sexual violence’.
Valhalla Holdings, the applicant, removed it from the festival.
Failed appeal
A few months later, the Film and Literature Board of Review upheld the ban.
July 21, 1994
Applicant: Valhalla (Holdings) Pty LtdDecision Reviewed:
Refuse to Register by the Film Censorship Board pursuant to Regulation 13( I )(a) of the ‘Customs (Cinematograph Films) Regulations’.Decision:
The Board of Review confirmed the decision of the Censorship Board to Refuse to Register the film LEGEND OF THE OVERFIEND under ‘Customs (Cinematograph Films) Regulation’ 13( I )(a).2. Legislative Provisions
2.1 ‘Customs (Cinematograph Films) Regulations’ 13( I )(a) and 398( I )(a).
2.2 Relevant State and Territory laws applicable to the classification of films.
3. Procedure
3.1 Four members of the Review Board heard oral submissions made by Mr Chris Kiely on behalf of the applicant Valhalla (Holdings) Pty Ltd and subsequently viewed LEGEND OF THE OVERFIEND with Mr Kiely.
4. Evidence
4.1 In reaching its decision the Board of Review had regard to the following:
(a) the applicant’s Application for Review
(b) the film LEGEND OF THE OVERFIEND
(c) the submission made by and on behalf of the applicant
(d) the relevant provisions in ‘Customs (Cinematograph Films) Regulations’ 13( I )(a) and 398( I).
(e) State and Territory classification laws applying to films for public exhibition, as in the Western Australia ‘Censorship of Films Act 1947’ (as amended)
(f) the current ‘Guidelines for the Classification of Films and Videotapes’ issued by the Office of Film and Literature Classification. and endorsed by Censorship Ministers.5. Findings on Material Questions of Fact
5.1 The plot of this animated film is about the domination of the lives of teenagers at a Japanese high school by demons in the guise of students. The demons wreak havoc at the school and in the community through murder, rape and mayhem. The style of animation is quite realistic when dealing with the “natural” world.
5.2 A dominant theme is that of the subjection of females through sexual assault and verbal abuse. The film contains at least three detailed and prolonged scenes of violent and relished rape, accompanied by strong verbal abuse. The victims’ distress is emphasised. These scenes include the rape of a female student by a female teacher (reel 1 at 7 mins), the rape of a nurse by a reanimated corpse (reel 1 at 25 mins) and non-consenting abusive sex (reel 2 at 43 mins).
5.3 The film has a high level of crude and assaultive language, and the camera frequently and gratuitously focuses on each of the female character’s genital and breast areas.
5.4 The film’s emphasis on violent sexual abuse was not, in the opinion of the Review Board, diminished by its animated style. The film ‘s techniques gave an implicit invitation to the viewer to focus upon and to enjoy the detailed and gratuitous rape scenes.
6. Reasons for the Decision
6.1 The Review Board based its decision principally on the scenes described in 5.2, and their nature as described in 5.4.
6.2 These depictions of sexual violence, in the Review Board’s opinion, constituted unduly detailed and relished acts of extreme violence, and unjustifiable depictions of sexual violence against non-consenting persons, and are therefore “indecent” within the meaning of subregulation 13( I )(a) of the ‘Customs (Cinematograph Films) Regulations’.
6.3 The representative of the applicant argued that the film, being animated and thereby exaggerated, and dealing with fantastic situations, was therefore less impactful. He argued that this was the first time that an animated film had been refused registration. He alleged that the video version was on sale in Sydney. He acknowledged that the film embodied ideas and a culture that were alien and unacceptable in Australia, but argued that adults should be able to view this Japanese film from an artistic viewpoint within the constraints of the R classification.
6.4 These arguments were rejected by the Review Board for the reasons cited in 5.2 and 5.4.
6.5 The Board of Review concluded that there was not adequate contextual justification for the material, and that therefore the film constituted indecent material under ‘Customs (Cinematograph Films) Regulations’ 13( I )(a).
6.6 Under ‘Customs (Cinematograph Films) Regulation’ 13( I )(a), the Review Board confirms the decision of the Censorship Board to Refuse to Register LEGEND OF THE OVERFIEND.
7. Summary
– Film and Literature Board of Review report
The Review Board’s decision is to confirm, pursuant to ‘Customs (Cinematograph Films) Regulation’ 39B( I )(a). the decision of the Censorship Board to Refuse to Register LEGEND OF THE OVERFIEND pursuant to ‘Customs (Cinematograph Films) Regulation’ 13( I )(a). This decision was taken after full consideration of the applicant’s submissions and after assessing the film against relevant legislative criteria and those contained in the current film classification guidelines endorsed by the Censorship Ministers and cited in State and Territory legislation.
Chris Kiely’s assertion that it was the first animated film to be Refused Registration is accurate. However, several short adult cartoons had already been banned or censored since the introduction of the R rating in November 1971.
His claim that the film was available for sale on video in Sydney is also correct. Imports of the Hong Kong LaserDisc from Universe Laser & Video Co. had been readily available for rental since its release in 1990.
Censored R-rating
In September 1994, Valhalla Holdings had a modified 104-minute videotape rated R (Medium level violence, Sex scenes). It is unclear why it ran three minutes longer than the previous version.
It premiered the following month, promoted as ‘Twice Banned. Finally Unleashed’.
Siren Entertainment went on to release it on their Manga Video label. The 102:54 running time was identical to the 1992 UK Manga Video that had lost 02:12 at the hands of the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC). Although not confirmed, it indicates Valhalla Holdings used the BBFC 18-rated version.
Movie-Censorship compares the British VHS and uncut Anime 18 DVD.
The cover of Manga Video’s New Zealand release refers to the Australian ban.
Censored DVD double-bill
In 2001, Madman Entertainment and AV Channel issued a ‘Special Edition DVD’ of UROTSUKIDÔJI: LEGEND OF THE OVERFIEND and UROTSUKIDÔJI II: LEGEND OF THE DEMON WOMB (1991).
The first film ran 102:54, the same as the Manga Video VHS.
Madman combined the consumer advice of both to arrive at ‘High level violence; Sex scenes’.
OVA vs Movie
Three episodes of the Original Video Animation (OVA), BIRTH OF THE OVERFIEND (1987), CURSE OF THE OVERFIEND (1988) and FINAL INFERNO (1989), were combined to make the movie UROTSUKIDÔJI: LEGEND OF THE OVERFIEND.
Movie-Censorship identifies the 30-minutes plus of sex, violence and plot that were lost.
The OVA has never been submitted for an Australian classification.
Urotsukidôji II: Legend of the Demon Womb
aka Legend of the Demon Womb
Directed by Hideki Takayama / 1991 / Japan / IMDb
In 1995, the Censorship Board banned an 87-minute VHS of UROTSUKIDÔJI II: LEGEND OF THE DEMON WOMB. It was then censored down to 84-minutes, only to be refused again.
These two submissions from Siren Entertainment are now missing from the National Classification Database.
A second modified VHS, now running 82:26 (PAL), received an R (High level violence, Medium level sex scene) in May 1996.
Siren’s Manga Video release followed in July.
Double DVD censorship
A ‘Special Edition DVD’ combined UROTSUKIDÔJI II: LEGEND OF THE DEMON WOMB with UROTSUKIDÔJI: LEGEND OF THE OVERFIEND (1989). Madman Entertainment and AV Channel issued the disc in 2001.
The sequel ran 83:33 (PAL), 01:06 longer than the Manga Video VHS, because it was UK BBFC-approved version.
Movie-Censorship details the cuts.
Madman used the highest warnings from both films to arrive at a consumer advice of ‘High level violence; Sex scenes’.
Censored OVA vs Movie
A PRAYER FOR THE RESURRECTION OF THE LORD OF CHAOS (1990) and BATTLE AT SHINJUKU SKYSCRAPERS (1991), episodes four and five of the Original Video Animation (OVA), were combined to make UROTSUKIDÔJI II: LEGEND OF THE DEMON WOMB.
The movie is more complete than the OVAs and includes sex scenes that are not blurred.
Urotsukidôji III: Return of the Overfiend
Directed by Hideki Takayama / 1992 / Japan / IMDb
Kiseki released the four-part OVA of UROTSUKIDÔJI III: RETURN OF THE OVERFIEND individually and on one tape.
Three episodes are confirmed to have been pre-cut before submission.
OVA 1 & 2 – R-rated
In September 1994, a 48:34 VHS of EPISODE 1 – BIRTH OF THE TRUE OVERFIEND received an R (High level sex scenes).
At the same time, EPISODE 2 – THE MYSTERY OF CAESAR’S PALACE had an identical rating. The VHS ran 51:13.
BPS Video Service was the applicant in both cases.
In April 1994, Kiseki received 18 certificates from the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) for pre-cut versions of EPISODE 1 and 2. The running times were identical to the Australian VHS.
OVA 3 & 4 – No rating record
Despite having R (High level sex scenes) on their covers, the final two parts of the OVA are missing from the National Classification Database.
The running time of EPISODE 3 – THE COLLAPSE OF CAESAR’S PALACE is unknown.
In the UK, Kiseki had to censor a 48:25 version down to 41:59 to get it past the BBFC in December 1994. It may be the same cut they released in Australia.
EPISODE 4 – PASSAGE IN THE UNKNOWN runs approximately 42-minutes.
Kiseki censored their UK VHS from 49:45 to 41:31 for a BBFC 18 in May 1995. Again, the Australian release is likely the same.
Single VHS
Kiseki combined all episodes into a subtitled ‘Special Edition’ VHS.
It features the same R (High level sexual content) on its cover.
Adventure Kid: Episode 1
aka Adventure Duo: Episode 1
aka Adventure Kid: Supernatural Beast Battlefront
Directed by Hideki Takayama / 1993 / Japan / IMDb
In 1994, the Censorship Board banned a 29-minute videotape of ADVENTURE KID: EPISODE 1.
BPS Video Services was the applicant. Kiseki later issued a 28:01 VHS labelled as R (High level sex scenes).
Both decisions are missing from the National Classification Database.
BBFC version?
In the UK, Kiseki had to remove 01:08 from a pre-cut video for a BBFC 18.
Movie-Censorship documents actual cuts of 5:49. Kiseki’s Australian VHS may have used this BBFC-approved version.
The BBFC also insisted on a title change from ADVENTURE KID to ADVENTURE DUO. The Australian cover has the original, while the on-screen introduction uses the retitle.
Missing OVAs
Kiseki had to censor the remaining episodes to get them past the BBFC. Cuts of 07:20 were made to EPISODE 2: PURGATORY PLEASURES, while EPISODE 3: THE MIRACLE LOVE POTION lost 09:28.
The Australian VHS cover promised it as ‘Tape one of a three-tape set’. However, they are absent from the National Classification Database and do not appear released. If they were, expect BBFC-approved versions.
Tricky Kiseki
Kiseki also issued Hiromitsu Ôta’s THE GIGOLO (1993) with an R (High level sex scenes) on its cover. The National Classification Database has no entry for this title.
Satoshi Urushihara’s PLASTIC LITTLE (1994) received a PG (Medium level violence, Low level coarse language) in December 1995. One VHS release has it PG-rated on the cover, but R-rated on the tape. The cover of a second VHS labels it as R (Occasional nudity). Previews for ADVENTURE KID: EPISODE 1 and THE GIGOLO (1993) appear before the main feature. Neither is PG level.
Around the same time, the Kiseki Cult range issued several Russ Meyer titles on VHS. None were classified, but carried identical R (High level sex scenes) on their covers.
Ninja Scroll
Directed by Yoshiaki Kawajiri / 1993 / Japan / IMDb
In March 1995, an uncut 91-minute videotape of NINJA SCROLL was assigned an MA (Medium level violence) by the Film Censorship Board.
Siren Entertainment, the applicant, released the VHS under their Manga Video label.
TV premiere controversy
NINJA SCROLL aired on SBS at 9.30 pm on 12 February 1996.
Following the broadcast, complaints were sent to Gary Humphries (Liberal), the ACT Attorney-General. He contacted Daryl Williams (Liberal), the Federal Attorney-General, requesting a Classification Review Board meeting. Williams was legally obligated to act upon receiving such a written request.
Revised rating
The Classification Review Board convened in July 1996 and raised the MA15 (Medium level violence) to R (High level violence; Medium level sex scenes).
Siren Entertainment may have reissued the VHS with the new classification.
July 11 & 12, 1996
APPLICANT
Hon. Daryl Williams QC MR Federal Attorney-General at the request of the Attorney-General of the Classification Act. Mr Gary Humphries MLA.BUSINESS
To review a decision of the former Film Censorship Board to classify the videotape NINJA SCROLL ‘MA15+ under the Classification Act Classification of Publications Ordinance 1983 (as amended), with the consumer advice ‘Medium Level Violence’.DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION
1. Decision
The Classification Review Board decided that NINJA SCROLL should be appropriately be classified R18+ with the consumer advice ‘High Level Violence. Medium Level Sex Scenes’.
2. Legislative Provisions
The Classification Act, sections 9, 11, 42-44, the National Classification Code and the current Guidelines For the Classification of Films and Video Tapes.
3. Procedure
3.1 The Classification Review Board, at the request of the Federal Attorney-General, reviewed the classification of the videotape NINJA SCROLL at its meeting of 11/12 July 1996.
The original applicant for the classification, Siren Entertainment, was advised of the date of the review, as required by the Classification Act.
3.2 As this request was lodged in 1996, it was considered under the Classification Act, which came into force on 1 January, 1996.
3.3 Four members of the Review Board viewed the videotape tape NINJA SCROLL.
4. Evidence
In reaching its decision the Review Board had regard to the following:
(a) correspondence to the Federal Attorney-General from the Attorney- General of the Classification Act requesting a review of the classification decision for NINJA SCROLL;
(b) the videotape NINJA SCROLL;
(c) the decision and reasons for decision recorded by the Film Censorship Board in February 1995;
(d) the relevant provisions contained in the Classification Act;
(e) the principles, and classification descriptions for films contained in the National Classification Code in the schedule to the Classification Act; and
(f) the current Guidelines for the Classification of Films and Video Tapes, and particularly those for violence in R.
5. Findings on material questions of fact
The content
5.1 Female Ninja, Kagero, and masterless warrior Jubei are caught up in a web of intrigue, monsters and poison in this Japanese ‘Manga’ movie.
5.2 The Review Board considered the scene of ‘coercive violence’ (at 11 minutes) cited by the former Film Censorship Board as causing the videotape to be classified MA15+. Kagero has her top opened by the monster, her breasts licked, her legs spread apart and licked up and down. In response to her cries of terror he says ‘I wouldn’t mind raping a dead girl’.
5.3 The Review Board also found a scene at 13 and 62 minutes respectively to constitute depictions of sexual violence, viz.
13 minutes: Kagero is the observer of a scene of non-consenting sex, with cries from the female.
62 minutes: The monster has captured and suspended Kagero with ropes, with hands tied behind her back and one leg raised sideways. The monster licks his long talon-like finger (with the aim of infecting her with his poison) and approaches with the strongly implied intention of digital rape and genital mutilation.
5.4 The Review Board also found a high and impactful level of violence, with a strong element of relished cruelty throughout the videotape. The genre us used to display violence acts in a graphic manner. The tone of the violence which pervades the videotape was found to amplify and intensify the incidents of sexual violence.
As such, the videotape was found to have a level of violence, including sexual violence, which could not be accommodated in the MA15+ category.
6. Reasons for the Decision
6.1 The Review Board based its decision to classify the videotape NINJA SCROLL ‘R18+’ in the content, tone and scenes described in 5.2-5.4 above.
6.2 The Review Board concluded that the videotape contained a continuous level of relished violence, which increased the impact of the depictions of sexual violence, and as such was likely to be harmful to those under 18 years.
6.3 The Review Board concluded that the film was unsuitable for a minor to see, within the meaning of Paragraph 3 of the Table under the heading ‘Films’ in the National Classification Code.
6.4 The Review Board’s direction that the consumer advice be ‘High Level Violence: Medium Level Sex Scenes’ is made having regard to its findings in paragraph 5.2-5.4 above.
7. Summary
The Review Board’s decision is to set aside the decision of the Film Censorship Board to classify the videotape NINJA SCROLL MA15+, and to classify the videotape ‘R18+’ with the consumer advice ‘High Level Violence: Medium Level Sex Scenes’.
The decision was taken after full consideration of the applicant’s submission and after assessing the film as a whole against the relevant legislative criteria and those contained in the current Guidelines for the Classification of Films and Video Tapes.
– Classification Review Board report
Censored TV
On 9 May 1998, over two years since its uncut premiere, SBS repeated NINJA SCROLL.
Following the increase from MA to R, cuts were now necessary.
SBS edited the scene of Tessai licking Kagero’s legs and assigned it MA (Violence, Sex references).
BBFC import DVD
Madman Entertainment issued a cut British version on R4 DVD in October 2000. Movie-Censorship details the missing 00:55. It eliminated footage that the Classification Review Board had cited as a reason for the MA to R increase.
Madman explained the error after receiving complaints from consumers.
2001
– Why does your NINJA SCROLL DVD have missing footage?
Our NINJA SCROLL DVD release was actually authored by Manga in the UK and not by Madman Interactive. Unbeknownst to us, they needed to edit out a few seconds of footage involving throwing stars, nunchaku and some sexual violence. Unfortunately we were not informed of this and the title was released with these small cuts. Anyone who is holding off on buying this otherwise excellent DVD can rest assured that if we do eventually release a fully uncut edition, they will be able to “trade up” at a low cost.
– madman.com.au
Uncut DVD & Blu-ray
Madman Entertainment rectified their error in November 2003 by releasing a 10th Anniversary Edition DVD, which they promoted as ‘Uncut.’
A DVD reissue and Blu-ray followed in November 2014.
Violence Jack
aka Evil Town – Violence Jack (Classification Board title)
aka Violence Jack: Evil Town (1988)
aka Violence Jack: Hell’s Wind (1990)
aka Violence Jack: Slumking (1986)
Directed by Ichirô Itano / 1986-1990 / Japan / IMDb
EVIL TOWN (1988), the second of a three-part OVA, was banned on 15 July 1997. The video ran 55 minutes.
Episodes one and three both received an R (Medium level violence). SLUMKING (1986) on 1 July and HELL’S WIND (1990) on 3 July.
The series release was aborted following the refusal of episode two. PolyGram Video, the applicant, had intended to issue the complete OVA on their Manga Video label.
Pre-cut imported versions
In June 1996, Manga Entertainment had removed 03:55 from EVIL TOWN before submitting it to the BBFC. It required a further 0:30 of cuts for an 18 classification. The final 55:27 running time indicates the 55-minute Australian submission was already pre-cut. Movie-Censorship details the missing footage.
In the UK, SLUMKING (1986) lost 00:25 for a final running time of 36:51. The Australian submission rounded it to 37-minutes. Movie-Censorship details the missing footage.
A combination of pre-cuts and BBFC trims resulted in the removal of 06:43 from HELL’S WIND (1990). The final 48:00 running time is close to the rounded 48-minute Australian submission. Movie-Censorship again details the missing footage.
It appears certain, in the case of EVIL TOWN and HELL’S WIND, and likely, in the case of SLUMKING, that PolyGram Video submitted censored BBFC versions to the Classification Board.
In January 1998, New Zealand’s Office of Film and Literature Classification awarded the series an R18. The running times again indicate all three were BBFC approved. Manga Entertainment, the distributor, promoted the VHS as banned in Australia.
Fake ratings
In the early 2000s, unauthorised releases of the Manga Video series began to appear on sell-through VHS in Australia. All had fake R (High level violence) ratings on their covers.
The 55:15 running time of EVIL TOWN indicates a copy of the UK release. Presumably, SLUMKING and HELL’S WIND were similarly sourced.
Kite
Directed by Yasuomi Umetsu / 1998 / Japan / IMDb
In August 2005, a DVD of KITE received an R18+ (High level animated violence).
Madman Entertainment, the applicant, released it the following month.
James C. reports
One year before classification, Madman revealed the AnimeWorks version would be coming to DVD. They posted the following on madboards.madman.com.au [dead link].
12 July 2004
‘We will be releasing an edited version of both movies [including MEZZO FORTE] as they would be Refused Classification if they were to be submitted uncut…we are releasing this version www.animecritic.com/kite/anr-kite.html [dead link]. All you’re missing are sex scenes.’
They responded with this when questioned on the possibility of a future uncut release.
14 July 2004
‘As I’ve said it probably would not get past the OFLC so why take the risk?’
What version did Australia get?
James C. reports
As of 2005, three versions of KITE have been released in the USA. A comparison can be found at animeprime.com/reports/kite.shtml [dead link]. After reading their reports, I can only conclude that Madman issued a fourth cut on DVD in Australia made up of the heavily censored International Version/Director’s Cut from AnimeWorks combined with a few extended scenes from the Kitty Media uncut/original version.
The animeprime.com report lists six cut scenes from AnimeWorks. They include further details but are essentially as follows. I have quoted from their report but updated the times to indicate where these should appear in the Madman DVD.
Scene No. 1 at 05:37 – AnimeWorks [Madman] version
The sex scene between Sawa and Akai is missing. In this version, after Sawa turns down Akai’s request for sex, it cuts immediately to Kanie and Oburi on the bench.
Scene No.2 at 16:00 – AnimeWorks vs. Madman version
Many edits to remove any nudity involving Sawa and any sexual contact between her and Akai. The Madman version initially cuts the scene the same as AnimeWorks but then goes on to include footage from the uncut version. Some of it was not even shown in the less-cut Kitty Media release. The extra scenes are as follows.
15:57 -A naked Sawa against the wall.
15:59 – Pan up young naked Sawa’s body.
16:09 – Naked Sawa in bed.
16:11 – Akai touches breast.
16:20 – Naked Sawa in bed, bouncing from unseen Akai.
Scene No. 3 at 26:30 – AnimeWorks [Madman] version
As Sawa falls from the destroyed bathroom, she passes a man and woman having sex on a desk. This scene is completely missing.
Scene No. 4 at 29:30 – AnimeWorks [Madman] version
Kanie has sex with a bound and gagged woman. He draws his gun when Akai walks in but continues having sex when he realizes who it is. This scene is completely missing.
Scene 5 at 32:30 – AnimeWorks [Madman] version
The scene removes shots showing a woman giving Akai a blowjob while Kanie talks on the phone.
Scene No. 6 at 39:50 – AnimeWorks vs. Madman version
Akai forces Sawa to have sex, during which she has flashbacks to being raped.
The scene is completely missing in the AnimeWorks version, apart from the end dialogue between Sawa and Akai. The shot of them naked in bed is replaced with close-ups of their faces.
Madman’s version again differs slightly from AnimeWorks and contains footage from the uncut version. The extra scenes are as follows.
39:57 – Older naked Sawa in bed with a cop as they talk. Sawa is facing away from him.
40:30 – Akai rubs older Sawa’s thigh.
40:48 – One close-up of older Sawa’s face.
40:50 – One close-up of Akai’s face followed by a shadow of Sawa getting up.