18 (British Board of Film Classification)

Last updated

BBFC 18 category symbol used since 2019 BBFC 18 2019.svg
BBFC 18 category symbol used since 2019

The 18 certificate is issued by the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC), to state that in its opinion, a film, video recording, or game is suitable only for persons aged 18 years and over. It recommends that no one below that age should be admitted to view a film with an 18 certificate in a cinema, and that 18-rated video recordings should not be sold or rented to anyone below that age.

Contents

As with other British film certificates, the 18 certificate theoretically only has advisory power for films shown in public cinemas, with the ultimate say being held by local authorities. [1] In practice, the local authorities tend to follow BBFC rulings in all but a few exceptional cases.

For video and game sales, the BBFC rulings have statutory power, as under the terms of the Video Recordings Act 1984 all videos sold or distributed within the UK must be classified by the BBFC, unless they fall into one of a number of exempt categories. Unclassified recordings which are not exempt cannot legally be sold, regardless of content. [2]

History

18 certificate icon used by the BBFC from 2002 until 2019 BBFC 18.svg
18 certificate icon used by the BBFC from 2002 until 2019

The 18 certificate was created in 1982 as the successor of the previous X certificate, which in turn was the successor of the H certificate (with H standing for "horror").

Typical reasons for restricting films to the 18 category have included hard drug use, supernatural horror, sexually explicit scenes, graphic violence, sadistic violence and sexual violence — the latter two of which have in the past led to a certificate not being issued at all, in effect banning the film in the UK.

It was only around the start of the 21st century that the censors passed films with explicit ("hardcore") sexual acts despite the 18 certificate (and the more restrictive R18 certificate) existing for many years.

Sex and the 18 certificate

Until recently, works at 18 could not contain the depiction of actual sex acts, which more recently could only appear in films with an R18 certificate (when created in 1982 only simulated acts could be shown under an R18, but this was relaxed after legal challenges in 2000). Although the BBFC allowed the depiction of simulated sex scenes in 18 certificate films, actual sexual acts were still not allowed to be depicted in 18 certificate films until around 1999.

This precedent appears to have been set when the BBFC granted 18 certificates for films containing short scenes of unsimulated sex, such as Catherine Breillat's Romance (1999) and Patrice Chéreau's Intimacy (2001). In October 2004, a new precedent appeared to be set when the BBFC granted an 18 certificate for Michael Winterbottom's film 9 Songs , which featured a number of lengthy explicit scenes of unsimulated sex. [3] This was followed by certificates for Shortbus and Destricted . In the statement justifying the latter decision, it was stated that there is no limit to the number of images that can be considered to be justified.

In 2004, the board was also challenged by some pornographic video distributors to award 18 certificates to material that would otherwise be classified at R18. This could have greatly diminished the role of the R18 certificate but failed. This means there continues to be a form of artistic merit test requiring the work to be judged non-pornographic and the scenes in question "exceptionally justified by context" for a mainstream release.

In its 2009 report (available on its website), the BBFC updated its standards stating that:
"When it comes to sex in films for adults, the Board's policy is that explicit images of real sex should be confined to the 'R18' category, unless such images can be justified by their context. However, contextual justification is irrelevant if the primary purpose of the work is sexual arousal or stimulation (i.e. a sex work). Under the new Guidelines, the contextual justification for explicit images of real sex at '18' no longer needs to be 'exceptional'."

The main difference between this new policy and previous years' policies is that contextual justification for images of real sex no longer needs to be "exceptional" in an 18 rated work.

In its 2010 report (available on its website), the BBFC updated its standards again stating that:
"As in previous years, the Board's policy remains that explicit images of real sex should be confined to the 'R18' category unless such images can be justified by their context. Contextual justification, however, has less weight if the primary purpose of the work is sexual arousal or stimulation (i.e. a sex work)."

The main difference between this new policy and previous years' policies is that contextual justification for images of real sex is no longer irrelevant if the primary purpose of the work is sexual arousal or stimulation; instead, it merely reduces the amount of justification that context can provide.

In a sex work, any explicit and non-obscured sight of vaginal or anal penetration by any object whatsoever; any contact between the lips or tongue and genital/anal area; and ejaculation usually requires an R18 certificate. Any sight of a liquid resembling semen is also usually restricted to the R18 category, even if the ejaculation is not visible: images of liquid splashing onto faces, breasts or being swallowed have been cut from 18 certificate films. The R18 versions contained these images unaltered. Further reasons for classifying a film at R18, as opposed to 18, include vigorous and/or extensive genital touching (brief genital touching may be passed "18"), implied triple penetration, extreme close-ups of spread female genitals or anuses (erections are now permissible in the 18 category, however), and certain fetish material, especially urination and potentially dangerous sadomasochistic activities. However, under the new 2010 guidelines, explicit images of real sex can be passed at 18 in a sex work provided there is exceptional justifying context.

Violence, horror, and the 18 certificate

Extreme graphic violence, and violence that dwells on the infliction of pain and injury, as is frequently depicted in the Saw horror franchise, is restricted to the 18 category. Saw movie series props (5134032571).jpg
Extreme graphic violence, and violence that dwells on the infliction of pain and injury, as is frequently depicted in the Saw horror franchise, is restricted to the 18 category.

In the past, violence was one of the more problematic aspects when passing a film with an 18 certificate, whether it was sexualised or fantasised violence. Horror films were often the culprits for depicting graphic violence and this often resulted in criticism of the examiners. Particularly violent scenes must be removed before a certificate is awarded. With the advent of home video, films that were cut in the cinemas could be released uncut on video. This led to a moral panic concerning "video nasties" as coined by tabloid newspapers. The government passed the Video Recordings Act 1984 which meant all videos offered for sale must be assigned a classification agreed upon by an authority designated by the Home Office, which was the BBFC. As a result of this, many films previously cut for cinema (such as The Evil Dead and Dawn of the Dead ) had to be cut further in order to get a legal release on video.

In recent times, the BBFC has been more lenient towards fantasised violence, and so former 'video nasties' have since passed uncut. Current concerns include content such as "any detailed portrayal of violent or dangerous acts which is likely to promote the activity", and sexualised violence. The BBFC also takes into account whether the scenes are considered to glamorise sexual assault. In 2002, the board passed Gaspar Noé's Irréversible without any cuts. [4] It said that the rape depicted in the film does not contain any explicit sexual images and is not designed to titillate. Less than a month later, Takashi Miike's Ichi the Killer had to be cut by three minutes and twenty-five seconds due to sexual violence. In this case, the scenes were felt to be potentially glamourising assault.

Another example of cuts for sexual violence, as well as child protection issues, is A Serbian Film , [5] a horror film about a retired porn star lured back into performing. Over four minutes of cuts were required, primarily to remove material involving children in sexual and sexually violent scenarios. The initially banned 1980 Italian film Cannibal Holocaust had five minutes and forty-four seconds of cuts to scenes of sexual violence and actual animal cruelty on its first submission in 2001, reduced to only a single cut of three seconds in 2011. [6]

Violence that dwells on the infliction of pain or injury is considered by the BBFC to exceed what is considered acceptable in the lower 15 category and is likely to result in an 18 certificate. The strongest graphic violence is also restricted to the 18 category. [7]

References or scenes of suicide or dangerous stunts, which can be easily imitated by youth, can lead to a DVD being given an 18 certificate. Volume 3 of the anime Paranoia Agent (which is normally rated 12 or 15) is rated 18 because of suicide references and violence, mostly in the episode "Happy Family Planning", which made light of suicide and featured a scene of someone pretending to hang himself, a scene which was edited by the BBFC until the series was released uncut on Blu-ray in 2021. An episode of House titled "Under My Skin" became the first and only one to be passed with an 18 certificate due to scenes depicting a suicide technique that can easily be imitated in real life. [8] Most of the Jackass films are also given an 18 certificate because of dangerous and imitable stunts.

Horror film distributors may consider an 18 rating preferable to the lower 15 category, as the rating is an indicator of the strength of the film's content. [9]

See also

Related Research Articles

A motion picture content rating system classifies films based on their suitability for audiences due to their treatment of issues such as sex, violence, or substance abuse, their use of profanity, or other matters typically deemed unsuitable for children or adolescents. Most countries have some form of rating system that issues determinations variously known as certifications, classifications, certificates, or ratings. Age recommendations, of either an advisory or restrictive capacity, are often applied in lieu of censorship; in some jurisdictions movie theaters may have a legal obligation to enforce restrictive ratings.

Video nasty is a colloquial term popularised by the National Viewers' and Listeners' Association (NVALA) in the United Kingdom to refer to a number of films, typically low-budget horror or exploitation films, distributed on video cassette in the early 1980s that were criticised by the press, social commentators, and various religious organisations for their violent content. These video releases were not brought before the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) due to a loophole in film classification laws that allowed videos to bypass the review process. The resulting uncensored video releases led to public debate concerning the availability of these films to children due to the unregulated nature of the market.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Eirin</span> Movie regulating organization in Japan

The Film Classification and Rating Organization, also known as Eirin (映倫), is Japan's self-regulatory film regulator. Eirin was established on the model of the now-defunct American Motion Picture Producers and Distributors Association's Production Code Administration in June 1949, succeeding the US-led occupation authorities' role of film censorship during the Occupation of Japan. It classifies films into one of four categories depending on their suitability for viewing by minors of different ages.

This article chronicles the history of British film certificates.

<i>Maîtresse</i> 1975 film by Barbet Schroeder

Maîtresse is a 1975 French sex comedy film co-written and directed by Barbet Schroeder, starring Bulle Ogier and, in one of his earliest leading roles, Gérard Depardieu. The film provoked controversy in the United Kingdom and the United States due to its graphic depictions of BDSM.

<i>The Last House on the Left</i> 1972 American horror film by Wes Craven

The Last House on the Left is a 1972 rape and revenge horror film written and directed by Wes Craven in his directorial debut, and produced by Sean S. Cunningham. The film stars Sandra Peabody, Lucy Grantham, David Hess, Fred J. Lincoln, Jeramie Rain, and Marc Sheffler. Additionally, Martin Kove appears in a supporting role. The plot follows Mari Collingwood (Peabody), a teenager who is abducted, raped, and brutally murdered by a group of violent fugitives led by Krug Stillo (Hess). When her parents discover what happened to her, they seek vengeance against the killers, who have taken shelter at their home.

<i>Baise-moi</i> 2000 film by Virginie Despentes and Coralie Trinh Thi

Baise-moi is a 2000 French erotic crime thriller film written and directed by Virginie Despentes and Coralie Trinh Thi and starring Karen Lancaume and Raffaëla Anderson. It is based on the novel by Despentes, first published in 1993. The film received intense media coverage because of its graphic mix of violence and explicit sex scenes. Consequently, it is sometimes considered an example of the "New French Extremity".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">R18 (British Board of Film Classification)</span> BBFC content rating used for hardcore pornographic films

R18 is a film and video classification given by the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC). It is intended to provide a classification for works that do not breach UK law, but exceed what the BBFC considers acceptable in the 18 category. In practice, this means hardcore pornography.

The Maritime Film Classification Board is a government organization responsible for reviewing films and granting film ratings in New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Irish Film Classification Office</span> Irish censorship and classification within Ireland

The Irish Film Classification Office (IFCO) is the organisation responsible for films, television programmes, and some video game classification and censorship within Ireland. Where restrictions are placed by the IFCO, they are legally binding.

The British Columbia Film Classification Office, part of Consumer Protection BC in the Canadian province of British Columbia, is responsible for rating and censoring films under the province's Motion Picture Act. The BCFCO film ratings are also used by Manitoba and Saskatchewan by bilateral agreement.

The Lovers' Guide is a sex and relationships advice brand, produced by Lifetime Productions International Ltd, which launched with the release of the first Lovers' Guide video in the United Kingdom on 23 September 1991. Presented by the sexologist Dr Andrew Stanway, and produced by Robert Page and William Campbell, this became the only non-fiction film to top the UK video charts; it sold 1.3 million copies in the UK and went into 13 languages and 22 countries around the world.

In the United Kingdom, pornography is regulated by a variety of laws, regulations, judicial processes, and voluntary schemes. Pornographic material generally has to be assessed by regulators or courts to determine its legality. British censorship laws with regard to pornography have often been some of the most restrictive in Western Europe.

New French Extremity describes a range of French transgressive films made at the turn of the 21st century that sparked controversy, and provoked significant debate and discussion. They were notable for including graphic images of violence, especially sexual violence and rape, as well as explicit sexual imagery.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">British Board of Film Classification</span> British film classification organisation

The British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) is a non-governmental organisation founded by the British film industry in 1912 and responsible for the national classification and censorship of films exhibited at cinemas and video works released on physical media within the United Kingdom. It has a statutory requirement to classify all video works released on VHS, DVD, Blu-ray, and, to a lesser extent, some video games under the Video Recordings Act 1984. The BBFC was also the designated regulator for the UK age-verification scheme, which was abandoned before being implemented.

Much of the regulation in the adult film industry has been limited to preventing child pornography. To enforce the age of entry restriction, most adult industry production companies are required to have a Custodian of Records that documents and holds records of the ages of all performers.

The Australian Classification Board is an Australian government statutory body responsible for the classification and censorship of films, television programmes, video games and publications for exhibition, sale or hire in Australia.

The Australian Classification Review Board is a statutory censorship and classification body overseen by the Australian Government. The corporate body is responsible for reviewing classification decisions made by the Australian Classification Board concerning films, video games and publications for exhibition, sale or hire in Australia. Review decisions need to be initiated by an appeal from a previous applicant, most commonly referred to as "aggrieved party", or a Federal or State Attorney-General.

<i>The Human Centipede 2 (Full Sequence)</i> 2011 film by Tom Six

The Human Centipede 2 (Full Sequence) is a 2011 psychological body horror film written, directed, and co-produced by Tom Six. An international co-production of the Netherlands and the United States, and the sequel to Six's 2009 film The Human Centipede (First Sequence), the film stars Laurence R. Harvey as a psychiatrically and intellectually impaired English man who watches and becomes obsessed with the first Human Centipede film, and decides to make his own "centipede" consisting of 12 people by using crude and violent techniques to connect their lips to each others buttocks, including Ashlynn Yennie, an actress from the first film.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Kenya Film Classification Board</span> Government media regulation agency in Kenya

The Kenya Film Classification Board is a state corporation that operates under the Government of Kenya whose mandate is to "regulate the creation, broadcasting, possession, distribution and exhibition of films by rating them." The Board was founded in 1963 with the commencement of the laws outlined in the Films and Stage Plays Act of 1962 and has since involved itself in the rating and classification of films and television programmes. More recently, it has caused controversy by banning several films, such as the American box office success The Wolf of Wall Street, the Kenyan film Stories of Our Lives, Rafiki, and the 2015 film Fifty Shades of Grey based on the novel of the same name. The Board has also regulated television content, including advertisements.

References

  1. ↑ "British Board of Film Classification". BFI Screen Online. Archived from the original on 9 October 2012. Retrieved 18 October 2012.
  2. ↑ "The BBFC & UK Law". BBFC website. BBFC. Archived from the original on 25 August 2012. Retrieved 18 October 2012.
  3. ↑ Heard, Chris (19 October 2004). "Real sex at the cinema". BBC. Archived from the original on 1 January 2007. Retrieved 18 October 2012.
  4. ↑ "Taking out the Trash". Channel 4 website. Archived from the original on 9 February 2023. Retrieved 18 October 2012.
  5. ↑ "A Serbian Film (2010)". Letterboxd. 30 December 2012. Archived from the original on 20 September 2013. Retrieved 4 June 2013.
  6. ↑ "Cannibal Holocaust (1980)". Film365. Archived from the original on 22 November 2018. Retrieved 18 October 2012.
  7. ↑ "BBFC | BBFC". Archived from the original on 18 October 2019. Retrieved 1 February 2023.
  8. ↑ "House M.D. [Season 5, Episode 23, Under My Skin]". British Board of Film Classification. Archived from the original on 5 August 2018. Retrieved 4 August 2018.
  9. ↑ "Most common questions asked about the BBFC". Archived from the original on 17 August 2022. Retrieved 17 August 2022.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.