|
Well, okay.... |
The National Board of Review of Motion
Pictures (originally the National Censorship Board) was begun in 1909 in
response to New York City’s Mayor McClellan’s crack down on motion picture
exhibitors. McClellan viewed movies as an encouragement to erode the morals of
the city’s masses. The Board, a non-governmental body, was formed to endorse
good and wholesome films for the public (and avoid government regulation),
giving it a stamp of approval. It also served to act as an alternative to
legalized censorship, which already existed in Kansas, Pennsylvania and Ohio.
Films were, in fact, censored by this Board. As late as 1950, films still
carried the legend “Passed by the National Board of Review.”
In 1915, the Mutual Film Corp. vs. Industrial Commission of Ohio had a
far-reaching impact on film censorship. The Ohio Board of Censors, like
other State Boards, charged a fee for the review of a film before it could
approved for viewing in the state. Anyone showing a film not approved by
the Board could be arrested. Mutual, a film distribution company, took on the
Ohio Board, accusing them of interfering with interstate commerce and,
critically, violating the right of free speech. The court ruled in the Ohio
Board’s favor, essentially ruling that freedom of speech did not extend to
film. State and municipal boards were free to impose any and all regulations
deemed acceptable to the locality. What was acceptable in New York (whose own
censorship board was instituted in 1921) was not always acceptable in Kansas.
|
Birth of a Nation: Controversial then, controversial now |
1915 was also the year of “Birth of a
Nation,” still one of the most controversial films ever made. Heavily
protested and banned, the film stirred controversy wherever it played (and
didn’t play). Kansas, in particular, waged a fierce battle over this film.
Initially banned, the fate of the film volleyed back and forth between those
who wished it never to see the light of day and those who advocated its
release.
The 1920s brought the scandals of
Hollywood into the local movie theaters. Roscoe “Fatty” Arbuckle’s films were
banned after his 1921 involvement in a wild Labor Day weekend party in San
Francisco that resulted in the death of actress Virginia Rappe. Arbuckle, after
multiple trials, was eventually exonerated of the murder charge, but his career
was finished when state and local censorship boards refused to show his films.
Comedienne Mabel Normand, whose reputation was already shaky due to her
friendship with murdered director William Desmond Taylor, found her films
banned across the country when she and actress Edna Purviance were in involved
in another drunken party, one where Mabel’s chauffer shot Edna’s boyfriend.
Purviance, Charlie Chaplin’s leading lady, also suffered, as many
localities went so far as to ban early Chaplin shorts that featured poor Edna.
It was bad enough that drunken and low down behavior was portrayed on the
screen. It was worse when the residents of Hollywood were found to be no better
than the movies that portrayed such immoral behavior.
|
Edna and Mabel visit the local precinct after a drunken sailing party and a shooting |
In 1922, in an effort to stem the
mounting call for legal oversight on Hollywood, the film industry proposed
self-policing and hired former Postmaster General and generally moral Presbyterian
Will Hays as the face to Hollywood’s commitment to censor itself. By 1927, the
pressure for governmental censorship was growing thanks to films starring the
likes of Clara Bow and Valentino, not to mention the films of C.B. De Mille.
|
Clara Bow forgot her clothes in 1927's "Hula." |
First, there was this “do’s and don’ts”
list of rules:
Resolved, that
those things which are included in the following list shall not appear in
pictures produced by the members of this Association, irrespective of the
manner in which they are treated:
·
Pointed profanity – by either title or lip – this includes the
words "God", "Lord", "Jesus", "Christ"
(unless they be used reverently in connection with proper religious
ceremonies), "hell", "damn", "Gawd", and every
other profane and vulgar expression however it may be spelled;
·
Any licentious or suggestive nudity – in fact or in silhouette;
and any lecherous or licentious notice thereof by other characters in the
picture;
·
The illegal traffic in drugs;
·
Any inference of sex perversion;
·
Miscegenation (sex relationships between the white and
black races);
·
Scenes of actual childbirth – in fact or in silhouette;
·
Children's sex organs;
·
Ridicule of the clergy;
·
Willful offense to any nation, race or creed;
And be it further
resolved, that special care be exercised in the manner in which the following
subjects are treated, to the end that vulgarity and suggestiveness may be
eliminated and that good taste may be emphasized:
·
The use of the flag;
·
International relations (avoiding picturizing in an unfavorable
light another country's religion, history, institutions, prominent people, and
citizenry);
·
Arson;
·
The use of firearms;
·
Theft, robbery, safe-cracking, and dynamiting of trains, mines,
buildings, etc. (having in mind the effect which a too-detailed description of
these may have upon the moron);
·
Brutality and possible gruesomeness;
·
Technique of committing murder by whatever method;
·
Methods of smuggling;
·
Actual hangings or electrocutions as legal punishment for crime;
·
Sympathy for criminals;
·
Attitude toward public characters and institutions;
·
Apparent cruelty to children and animals;
·
Branding of people or animals;
·
The sale of women, or of a woman selling her virtue;
·
Rape or attempted rape;
·
Man and woman in bed together;
·
Deliberate seduction of girls;
·
The institution of marriage;
·
Surgical operations;
·
The use of drugs;
·
Titles or scenes having to do with law enforcement or
law-enforcing officers;
·
Excessive or lustful kissing, particularly when one character or
the other is a "heavy".
By 1930, the Industry had adopted
the Motion Picture Production Code (“the Code”) and promised films that would
not offend.
Lax enforcement and the advent of sound
presented another challenge for the sensors. From 1930 through July 1934
Hollywood sent out a proliferation of what we now call “Pre-Code” films – some still
standing up to the definition of racy and morally questionable (not to mention
fun).
|
Ann Dvorak takes a break from sex, booze and coke in 1932's "Three on a Match" |
Enter Joe Breen in July 1934 and the
fun came to an end. The establishment of the Production Code Administration
tightened the noose and sex, booze, and good endings for bad people came to a
screeching halt. Breen’s ascent gradually diminished the need for state and
local censorship boards, although some hung on until the bitter end.
|
Jane's bosom could not be stopped! |
Jane Russell’s bosom in 1943’s “The
Outlaw” caused the ruffling of some local censorship board’s feathers, as did
the flood of foreign films (starring the likes of Bridgette Bardot) in the
1950s and 1960s. In 1952, the case of Joseph
Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson overturned that 1915 Mutual Film decision. The battle
was over a New York distributor’s right to show a Roberto Rosellini film called
“The Miracle.” Limits continued to be pushed. Billy Wilder’s 1959 “Some Like it
Hot” was not granted code approval, but the public made it a hit. Otto
Preminger went to the wall in 1953 with “The Moon is Blue” when Kansas, Ohio
and Maryland banned the film (which was also condemned by the Catholic Legion
of Decency – who generally didn’t approve of much) due to its subject matter of
illicit sex, chastity and virginity. The film was released without the code’s
certificate of approval, but when the state boards banned the showing of the
film, Preminger fought it in court, first winning in Maryland and then taking
the Kansas decision all the way to the Supreme Court and winning.
|
"The Moon is Blue" won the fight for our right to see silly sex |
By the end of the 1960s, the code was
pretty much abandoned and in 1968 the rating system of G (for general audiences),
M (for mature content), R (restricted - no one under 17 allowed) and X (for
sexually explicit content) was unveiled. I remember begging my mother to take
me to see “Rosemary’s baby” in 1968 because I wasn’t 17. Bless her, she did.