BEHIND THE SCREEN with the film Censor

New Zealand Listener, Volume 34, Issue 871, 13 April 1956, Page 6

BEHIND THE SCREEN with the film Censor

NTION the Film Censor and many people will imagine a saturnine fellow who spends his life writing out stacks of restrictive certificatesa@ spoilsport who stops us seeing /films we feel we have every right to see. The Listener paid a visit to the Censor’s new offices shortly after they were opened and found that this sombre pictute rapidly faded. Here in an atmosphere of light and colour, presided over by the New Zealand Film Censor, Gordon Mirams, it was impossible to think of censoring as a dismal business. The first surprise to the layman was to see the great variety of films that pour into the office. Besides ordinary feature films and cartoons, newsreels and shorts, there are religious films, and long Chinese and Indian epics for our minority communities. And each one has to be seen by the Censor or his assistant, D. C. McIntosh, before it can be officially certificated. In dealing with the foreign films an interpreter may have to be called, but usually, The Listener learned, these films are /quite straightforward to handle. To see the censoring process at work we were taken into the larger of the. two office cinemas. This had a wide screen able to make Cinemascope and Vistavision, and was equipped with stereophonic sound. At the back was the Censor’s desk fitted with a shaded light and a small buzzer. We settled into our chairs as the lights dimmed and a Vistavision musical began to reel 4tself to an audience of three. _ "Usually only one of us, watches a film," Mr. Mirams explained. "If it’s likely to be controversial-and we generally’ know in advance-we see it to-

gether. We can discuss the film and if necessary get outside advice." When something controversial does appear the Censor presses the buzzer beside him and makes a note in his journal. This is a signal to the operator to put a slip of paper in the reel. The whole film is run through and afterwards the tagged parts are closely examined in a machine called a Film Editer. At this point we asked the inevitable "How do you know when to cut?"-

wondering if there was a list of prohibited words and forbidden topics, "No," Mr. Mirams explained, "there is no list at all. We find our ideas are continually changing. Even swearwords can become respectable. There are, of course, some words we would always delete; each country seems to havye-its own peculiarities in this respect. As for the topics, no subject is specifically banned. It all depends on the way it is preserited. Not so long ago the birth

of a baby was shown on the screen-twenty years ago this would have been thought impossible." The decisions of his predecessors and the verGicts of the special Appeal Board help the Censor to decide. He tries to keep abreast of public opinion, and to be sensitive to the values of the society he lives in. Altogether he finds cutting is often a_ highly complicated process. Curious to see how the cutting was done we moved out to the Editing machine where a Cinemascope Western was being run through. "This film is having some of its fight scenes toned down," said Mr. Mirams. "You'll find that nearly all the cuts we make are on the score of brutality -last year it was 85 per cent. This includes sadistic actions and gruesome incidents. Sex accounts for 13 per cent of cuts-here we mean situations where sex is vulgarised or made un- | duly suggestive. That leaves 2 per cent for

other reasons combined, including blasphemy." The reels on the machine whirred backwards and forwards as the operator familiarised himself with the sequence. (His skill explains why you seldom notice cuts on the screen,'since he takes pains to disturb the continuity of the film as little as possible.) Before the actual cutting gets under way the sponsoring Film Company can

appeal against the Censor’s decision. The case would be heard by a special Appeal Board consisting of three people -a Magistrate, a lawyer and a housewife. They see the disputed film and listen to both sides putting their case. Their decision may uphold or reverse the Censor’s ruling. The number of appeals varies accerding to many fac-tors-there may be a spate of unduly realistic Westerns which the Censor wants to cut so that they can have "U" certificates-but last year Film Companies appealed only eight times. On the other hand, if the Company is satisfied with the Censor’s ruling then all copies of the film, 16 mm. and 35 mm., are cut, and the certificate is issued. Cutting is the negative aspect of the Censor’s work. A more positive side is the help he can give audiences, and particularly parents, in choosing their film programmes. "As Censor, my role has, in effect, come to be partly that of an advisory officer acting on behalf of parents and children. I can recommend a film as being particularly suitable for family entertainment or I can restrict it to adult audiences, The great majority of cinema managers do their best to enforce the restrictions. With the recommendatory certificate it is, in the long run, up to parents themselves to respect the Censor’s judgment." (The italics are ours.) Regulations provide for a £50 fine if managers don’t comply with the Censor’s ruling in excluding young people from "restricted" films, but so far there have been no prosecutions. Not many people would like to sit and censor films all day. It is a job with its own occupational hazards, chief of which is eye-strain. But there is no evidence that preoccupation with human depravity has had any depressing effect on the present Censors. Their interest in human nature is uwndimmed, their sense of humour intact, and they still think of the cinema as an artistic medium with tremendous possibilities as well as a significant social force.