The hardcore. softcore and exploitation movies of Lee Frost that have been cut or banned in Australia. He directed some of these under the names F.C. Perl, Carl Borch or R.L. Frost.
See also, THE SCAVENGERS (1970) in the Film Censorship Database No. 2.
Hot Spur
Directed by Lee Frost / 1968 / USA / IMDb
94:05
In March 1974, a 2581.35-meter (94:05) print of HOT SPUR was banned because of ‘indecency and indecent violence’.
Regent Trading Enterprises was the applicant.
New distributor & new cuts
In August 1976, Briad Film Production submitted a 2475.10-meter (90:13) version. It was again banned, only this time for ‘indecency’ only.
They finally received an R-rating in November 1976 for a heavily cut 2224.30-meter (81.04) version.
Banned in Queensland
On 13 July 1977, the censored R-rated version of HOT SPUR was prohibited by the Queensland Films Board of Review.
The distributors were Cine Centre Films, Cine World Film Distributors and Mutual Films.
13-minutes of cuts
Simon reports.
Something Weird Video (us) – VHS – 89:39
No noticeable cuts, even though it is 04:26 shorter than the March 1974 submission.
Some or all of these scenes would have been censored for the 1976 R-rating.
04:00 to 07:15 – O’Hara’s men strip and grope the Mexican waitress as Carlo (James Arena) looks on. This is intercut with flashbacks to the attack on his sister.
21:00 to 27:00 – O’Hara’s men have sex with prostitutes in the bar.
29:00 to 31:00 – O’Hara (Joseph Mascolo) beats his wife (Virginia Gordon) and rapes her. This is intercut with flashbacks to the attack on Carlo’s sister.
56:00 to 57:45 – Carlo strips and gropes O’Hara’s wife as he has flashbacks to the attack on his sister.
60:00 to 67:30 – Carlo rapes O’Hara’s wife. This leads to a long flashback where it is reviled that when Carlo was eleven, O’Hara and his men had raped his seventeen-year-old sister.
76:00 to 76:30 – O’Hara’s wife is tied up naked and gagged. Carlo whips her as her husband and his men attack the cabin.
The Captives
aka The Captives (Vi Fangni)
Directed by Lee Frost / 1969 / USA / IMDb
In August 1981, a 1766.20-meter (64:23) print of THE CAPTIVES was banned because of ‘sexual violence and drug abuse’.
A 1561.73-meter (56:55) ‘reconstructed version’ was passed with an R-rating in November 1981. It was awarded for sex, which was described as being:
Frequency: Frequent
Explicitness/Intensity: Medium
Purpose: Gratuitous
In both cases, Cinerama Films was the applicant.
THE CAPTIVES is now listed as being a lost film.
Love Camp 7
aka Nazi Love Camp 7
Directed by Lee Frost / 1969 / USA / IMDb
In February 1973, a 2094.43-meter (76:20) print of LOVE CAMP 7 was banned because of ‘indecency and excessive violence’.
A reconstructed version was passed with an R-rating in July 1974. This was only after a further 59.13-meter (02:09) was removed from the 2630.40 meter (95:53) print. The reason for these extra cuts was given as indecency.
Regent Trading Enterprises was the applicant.
It is unclear why the original submission was so short. Presumably, this was a transcription error by the Film Censorship Board.
How the censorship system works
Here is the Chief Censor describing the process a film such as LOVE CAMP 7 would have gone through to get released in Australia.
April 1974
CP: Can we just go through the procedures that a Film must pass after it arrives at Customs?PROWSE: Well usually they go into bond. When the importer wants a particular film he puts in an application for registration. The film comes out of bond and comes here where it goes through the screening process. Once we give the decision the film goes back into bond where it is held until such time as the importer wants to release it. He will then pay the customs duty on it and get it out of bond and go ahead with his release.
With the regular importers we programme screenings from them months ahead, so many days, according to the volume of their business.
CP: Right. How does it actually pass through your department?
PROWSE: Through the censorship?
CP: Yes. How is a film viewed?
PROWSE: The film is screened before a board of one, two, three or up to nine. We have now nine members. A possibly controversial film of any integrity or merit would, if it is at all possible, be seen by the whole board before a decision is made. Each individual board member has the same power in its vote and if we get a split decision a majority rules, the Chief Censor has no over-riding vote.
CP: Now say you have got a group of three people watching the film. How are the cuts arrived at if say they all agree that it is an R film with eliminations. Does each person list what they consider should be eliminated?
PROWSE: If there is only a board of three looking at an R film, it would have to be a unanimous decision that eliminations were required, because even if only one person out of a board of three said R uncut or M uncut or anything uncut, I would put two or three more board members on it to get a wider range of opinions. Obviously if one out of three says that a thing is O.K. for R uncut, an enlarged board might swing the vote to R uncut and we, contrary to popular opinion, don’t like making cuts in film.
CP: You said that if one person out of the three thought a film as, say M uncut and you put on more board members, the chances of inconsistency must be lessened?
PROWSE: Well, we think so. I mean if we had time I think the ideal situation would be to put the nine member board on every film. It is obviously just not necessary always because some of the films go through with just one board member when we know there are no problems or we suspect there are no problems.
CP: Once a film has been passed with a certain classification is there any way the board can reclassify that film?
PROWSE: Well, if we put say an R or an M on a film and an importer disagrees with this and asks could he come and discuss it, we will meet the importer. Now they can put up an argument and in the discussions convince us that maybe we are too lenient or even too tough, whatever they are contesting. We then may agree with them and agree to a rescreen, but if we think that they have no case for reclassification, they still have the avenue of the Board of Review.
CP: Can you give a brief rundown of the things that at the present time worry you most in films.
PROWSE: There’s the hard drug problem, incitement to crime, gross and explicit depiction of sexual activities, and extreme utter sadistic violence. This last is of course a problem because when does violence become extreme and excessive. Our yardstick in regard to violence is when it becomes obscene. We don’t believe that obscenity only relates to sexual matters.
CP: How much does what you hear from overseas about a film influence you? Would it influence the way you select the board?
PROWSE: No. No. Because the Board is on a rotation system they don’t even know what they are going to see until the morning of the day before. We find a lot of material we get from Overseas is misleading.
Two particular cases that we found misleading, and we couldn’t understand the furore about, were CLOCKWORK ORANGE and the other one you mentioned earlier STRAW DOGS.
– The Censor Speaks, Richard Prowse, Chief Censor
– Cinema Papers No. 2
Banned in Queensland
April 1977
– Errol Heath, Managing Director, Regent Trading
LOVE CAMP 7 was shown to the board privately prior to any theatrical release being set for the film in Queensland. We were subsequently advised that although the board would not officially ban the film, they would go ahead and do so if we attempted to release it in Queensland.
– Cinema Papers No. 12
It appears that a release was attempted, because on 23 February 1977, the censored R-rated version of LOVE CAMP 7 was prohibited by the Queensland Films Board of Review.
The distributor was Regent Trading Enterprises.
Censored videos
In the early 1980s, LOVE CAMP 7 was issued by K&C Video on their Starbase label. The censored print ran 83:13 (PAL).
K&C released a large number of Regent Trading’s titles, so this was presumably the Australian theatrical version.
It was rereleased in the late 1980s/early 1990s on a ‘no-name’ label. It appears to be taken from the same print, or more likely, was a direct copy of the Starbase Video.
The cover renames it NAZI LOVE CAMP 7, although the on-screen title remains the same. Running time was again 83:13 (PAL). The R (Mainly concerned with sex and violence) rating is fake.
Both of these Australian tape releases are missing over eight minutes of footage.
Customs confiscation 1991
LOVE CAMP 7 was part of a package of fifteen tapes that were seized by the Australian Customs Service in October 1991.
They were forwarded to the Office of Film and Literature Classification (OFLC) who found them to be ‘prohibited pursuant to Regulation 4A (1A)(a)(iii) of the Customs (Prohibited Imports) Regulations’.
See the NEKROMANTIK (1987) entry for more information about this case.
Uncut Australian premiere
In October 2005, Siren Visual Entertainment released LOVE CAMP 7 on DVD as part of their Something Weird range.
The print ran 95:37 (NTSC).
Slaves in Cages
aka Slaves in Cages: ‘Slaver i bure’
Directed by Lee Frost / 1972 / USA / IMDb
In August 1981, a 1906.40-meter (69:29) print of SLAVES IN CAGES was banned because of ‘sexual violence’.
A 1645.80-meter (59:59) ‘reconstructed version’ was passed with an R-rating in December 1981. It was awarded for sex, which was described as being:
Frequency: Frequent
Explicitness/Intensity: Medium
Purpose: Gratuitous
In both cases, Cinerama Films was the applicant.
The essence of Lee Frost
Matt reports.
VHS – 69:29
A playboy kidnaps, cages, rapes and humiliates women until they are willing to perform in live sex shows for an audience. This ultra-sleazy film from Lee Frost (credited here as Carl Borch) is almost dialogue-free and large parts are just extended scenes of the sex shows.
Sexual violence is scattered throughout, so is it hard to pinpoint exactly where the censor would have snipped ten minutes.
41:00 to 55:00 – This would have suffered the bulk of the cuts. It shows the Captor (Ray Sebastian) breaking Nancy’s (Brigit Krøyer) spirit by first raping and then subjecting her to an extended slow-motion whipping.
The month before the censor cut SLAVES IN CAGES, they also removed over eight minutes from Frost’s THE CAPTIVES (1970). This too had been picked up for Australian distribution by Cinerama Films.
Although shot in America, both films were made to look like Danish imports. At the time, anything from Denmark was considered more extreme than a home-grown film. This explains why ‘SLAVER I BURE’ was tacked onto the title of SLAVES IN CAGES, and VI FANGNI added to THE CAPTIVES.
THE CAPTIVES (1970), so it would be great to see what became of the Cinerama Films print.
Two for the Money
Directed by Lee Frost / 1972 / USA / IMDb
In April 1977, a 2304.00-meter (83:59) print of TWO FOR THE MONEY was censored by 86:50-meters (03:09) for an R-rating. The cuts were made to remove ‘indecency’.
Lestrig Trading (aka Lestrig Films) was the applicant.
Banned in Queensland
On 25 October 1978, the censored R-rated version of TWO FOR THE MONEY was prohibited by the Queensland Films Board of Review.
The distributor was Lestrig Films.
Poor Cecily
Directed by Lee Frost / 1974 / USA / IMDb
In August 1977, a 2349.00-meter (85.37) print of POOR CECILY was banned because of ‘indecency and indecent violence’.
The following month, a ‘reconstructed version’ lost a further 101.80-meter (03:43) before being rated R. The extra cuts were made to remove ‘excessive violence’.
There appears to be an error in the Film Censorship Board’s listing. It is claimed that the submitted length of the ‘reconstructed version’ was 2955.00-meters (107:43), which then lost 03:43 for an R-rating. The National Classification Database has a 75-minute running time for the R-rated version, which appears to be closer to the truth.
Lestrig Trading (aka Lestrig Films) was the applicant.
The torture dungeon
Simon reports.
VHS – 85:49 (NTSC)
The ‘indecency and indecent violence’ would have come from the infamous torture dungeon sequence.
54:00 to 68:30 – Cecily (Angela Carnon) is taken to the dungeon, whipped and raped by the guards.
The remainder of the film contains other softcore sex sequences that the censor may have trimmed for indecency.
A Climax of Blue Power
Directed by Lee Frost / 1975 / USA / IMDb
In August 1977, a 1954.00-meter (71:13) print of A CLIMAX OF BLUE POWER was banned because of ‘indecency’.
Lestrig Trading (aka Lestrig Films) was the applicant.
Pink Video release
The X-rating was introduced in February 1984. That month saw a 68-minute tape of A CLIMAX OF BLUE POWER passed with that classification. It was awarded for sex, which was said to be:
Frequency: Frequent
Explicitness/Intensity: High
Purpose: Gratuitous
14th Mandolin reportedly released it on their Pink Video label.
Private Obsession
Directed by Lee Frost / 1995 / USA / IMDb
In 1995, a 103-minute VHS of PRIVATE OBSESSION was banned by the OFLC.
The applicant was Peacock Films.
What’s the problem?
Simon reports.
Image Entertainment (us) – DVD – 100:51 (NTSC)
Richard (Michael Christian) kidnaps and holds prisoner a feminist fashion model, Emanuelle (Shannon Whirry). The plot is sleazy and Whirry spends much of the time topless. However, unlike other Lee Frost titles, this one contains zero sexual violence.
There are two instances where Emanuelle seduces Richard to escape. However, these are not scenes that should have resulted in an RC-rating. The Image DVD may be cut, as it is shorter than the version that was banned. Alternatively, maybe the OFLC just did not approve of the tone of the film.
In the UK, the BBFC removed 00:08 from a 100:55 version. This 1999 classification was released on DVD as WATCH ME.
