There was a lot to be said about the BBFC in the 1980s and early 1990s - a sign of the times though! The Conservative Governments were very proactive about film censorship - look at the whole DPP list debacle, all those prosecutions under the Obscene Publications Act in the late 70s/early 80s for the so-called "video nasties" and then the Video Recordings Act 1984. I think there was a considerable pressure on the BBFC at that time.
Mind you, that climate was the backdrop for the BBFC having as some feel so much clout during that time, and I agree. If you've got a proactive Government trying to get film distributors prosecuted under the Obscene Publications Act (I recall reading that the guy who was in charge of the company that originally distributed "Nightmares in a damaged brain" was imprisoned for 18 months - looking at the film, it seems tame compared to the likes of "Saw"), supporting and rushing the Video Recordings Bill through Parliament, it becomes law and there are all these wide new offences of supplying uncertified films, this was the sort of climate for the BBFC to flourish in. You also had all of that backdrop of screaming Mary Whitehouse complaining about everything. Nowadays though the social climate is nowhere near as concerned about this issue as it was then - hence why the BBFC have responded and are probably not as overzealous as they once were believed to be.
However, I still think they made some daft errors of judgment. Why on earth Ferman refused the release of The Exorcist for so many years defied belief. Compared to some of the material being released in the 80s (yep, including the Little Mermaid
) I really can't see why it wasn't released.
The whole Video nasties thing was a right laugh and I have to say, since Ferman's retirement, a lot has to be said for the fact that a lot of the previously unavailable films on that DPP list have now been released, though some of them still had to go through a lot of cuts to get an 18 certificate. These films hardly seem full of gratuitous gore now but I guess back in the 80s, things were different and perhaps we have become accustomed to seeing violence. I think the BBFC has responded to the changing social climate but Ferman's departure shouldn't be underestimated.
The whole right-wing press campaign with its screaming headlines surrounding the tragic Jamie Bulger killing and calling people to burn their video nasties is my long lasting memory. The Sun has a lot to answer for with its screaming headlines, it created a real moral panic as per usual. There was no evidence to suggest the Bulger killers had even watched Child's Play 3, merely that the judge in their trial in his summing up suggested the boys may have been influenced by the videos. That put a lot of pressure on the BBFC at the time.
One thing people forget about is how good old Tony Blair showed his true 'Conservative' face and could have almost caused a situation where this country would have become impossible to get horror films or other films of an adult nature released on video/DVD. When he was leader of the opposition, he backed the then home secretary Michael Howard into a corner by supporting the Liberal MP, David Alton's proposed amendment to the Criminal Justice Bill, who wanted a new rating "unsuitable for home consumption" for films. At the time, the Conservative Government's working majority had dwindled and if the Labour MPs had voted in favour of that amendment, we'd have been in real trouble! The broad effect of that proposed amendment, had it been passed, scarcely bears thinking about. Luckily Michael Howard and Alton came to a compromise.
I remember all of that happening at the time and seeing David Alton go on Richard & Judy to talk about how we needed this new film rating.
You look at some of the gore that's been out recently however and it doesn't quite seem real that a mere 15 years ago, all of that happened and the BBFC were refusing to give films like "Reservoir Dogs" a UK release on Video unless this part of it was cut etc.
