JA
The 12 rating wasnt introduced for home video until 1994, so there was a 5 year period where video releases of 12 films either had to be put up to 15 or cut to PG.
JA
The 12A certificate was already in the process of being introduced at the time, it had already been trialed (as PG-12) in some places the previous year. It's a total co-incidence it happened to co-incide with the Spiderman controversy.
I've also noticed that the BBFC have recently introduced a new logo and redesigned symbols which look incredibly bland, very reminiscent of the ones they had on VHS covers in the 80s.
From memory, Spider-Man had a 12 rating, however due to the amount of parents wishing to take their children to see it at the cinema and pressure from the cinema chains to be able to allow it, some local councils overruled it and allowed under 12s to be admitted (I believe councils have the authority to certify films themselves). I think the 12A certificate followed a week or 2 later.
The 12A certificate was already in the process of being introduced at the time, it had already been trialed (as PG-12) in some places the previous year. It's a total co-incidence it happened to co-incide with the Spiderman controversy.
I've also noticed that the BBFC have recently introduced a new logo and redesigned symbols which look incredibly bland, very reminiscent of the ones they had on VHS covers in the 80s.
TI
Spider-Man had a 12 rating but was later reclassified as a 12A.
From memory, Spider-Man had a 12 rating, however due to the amount of parents wishing to take their children to see it at the cinema and pressure from the cinema chains to be able to allow it, some local councils overruled it and allowed under 12s to be admitted (I believe councils have the authority to certify films themselves). I think the 12A certificate followed a week or 2 later.
It's a little complicated. Spider-Man came out in April 2002 with the 12 and parents complained and yes some local councils downgraded it to a PG or instructed cinemas to allow kids in with parents.
However in September 2000 the BBFC had said they were considering making the 12 an advisory rating, mainly due to complaints from parents complaining about being unable to take kids to James Bond films over the previous few years.
So for 8 weeks in 2001 they made every single 12 rated film a 'PG-12' in Norwich exclusively to test this new system and it worked. They then did a national survey and 70% of respondents said yes they would support this new 12A system.
Then on the 30th August 2002 the 12 was replaced by 12A. Spider-Man had left the cinema by this point so Columbia decided to re-release the film again and push back the video release to take advantage of the new rating in areas where councils had refused to change it.
For some reason I thought Spider-Man was the first 12A film
Spider-Man had a 12 rating but was later reclassified as a 12A.
From memory, Spider-Man had a 12 rating, however due to the amount of parents wishing to take their children to see it at the cinema and pressure from the cinema chains to be able to allow it, some local councils overruled it and allowed under 12s to be admitted (I believe councils have the authority to certify films themselves). I think the 12A certificate followed a week or 2 later.
It's a little complicated. Spider-Man came out in April 2002 with the 12 and parents complained and yes some local councils downgraded it to a PG or instructed cinemas to allow kids in with parents.
However in September 2000 the BBFC had said they were considering making the 12 an advisory rating, mainly due to complaints from parents complaining about being unable to take kids to James Bond films over the previous few years.
So for 8 weeks in 2001 they made every single 12 rated film a 'PG-12' in Norwich exclusively to test this new system and it worked. They then did a national survey and 70% of respondents said yes they would support this new 12A system.
Then on the 30th August 2002 the 12 was replaced by 12A. Spider-Man had left the cinema by this point so Columbia decided to re-release the film again and push back the video release to take advantage of the new rating in areas where councils had refused to change it.
GE
thegeek
Founding member
I'm not sure to what extent councils still have any say over individual films.
Life of Brian
was originally given an X rating in Glasgow (so effectively banned) but then allowed to be exhibited as a 15 for its 30th anniversary. It went to the council's licencing committee, but it's entirely possible they only did it for a bit of publicity.
TI
When a cinema applies for a licence, it must include a condition requiring the admission of children to any film to normally be restricted in accordance with BBFC classification categories. However, statutory powers on film remain with the local councils, which have the authority to overrule any of the board's decisions. They can pass rejected films, ban films that have been passed by the BBFC, waive cuts, institute new cuts, or alter categories for films exhibited, using their own licensing jurisdiction – although in practice this power is rarely exercised.
https://bbfc.co.uk/education-resources/education-news/same-difference
I'm not sure to what extent councils still have any say over individual films.
Life of Brian
was originally given an X rating in Glasgow (so effectively banned) but then allowed to be exhibited as a 15 for its 30th anniversary. It went to the council's licencing committee, but it's entirely possible they only did it for a bit of publicity.
Quote:
When a cinema applies for a licence, it must include a condition requiring the admission of children to any film to normally be restricted in accordance with BBFC classification categories. However, statutory powers on film remain with the local councils, which have the authority to overrule any of the board's decisions. They can pass rejected films, ban films that have been passed by the BBFC, waive cuts, institute new cuts, or alter categories for films exhibited, using their own licensing jurisdiction – although in practice this power is rarely exercised.
https://bbfc.co.uk/education-resources/education-news/same-difference
GE
thegeek
Founding member
Thanks - just found the relevant application to the council under the Cinemas Act 1985, even though the original ban was made under a superceded act and a superceded local authority.
(We really are going quite off-topic for TV now, aren't we?)
(We really are going quite off-topic for TV now, aren't we?)
MA
James Bond films often get cuts if shown before the watershed. One example being in Licensed to Kill with the somewhat graphic pressure chamber killing, which from memory with cuts you only hear the sound effect. Also unsurprisingly in other Bond films some of the bedroom scenes get cut in pre-watershed screenings (e.g. Die Another Day). Presumably in these instances the edited/censored versions are provided by the film studios, rather than the TV companies having to make the cuts.
Ha. That reminds me of watching the Bond film, GoldenEye on a BA flight from Moscow to Heathrow.
Given the plot, a rather odd choice of film to show on that route you might think, and along with BA's general policy of cutting out any form of aviation catastrophes from their in flight entertainment, the movie's duration wasn't much more than a hour !
James Bond films often get cuts if shown before the watershed. One example being in Licensed to Kill with the somewhat graphic pressure chamber killing, which from memory with cuts you only hear the sound effect. Also unsurprisingly in other Bond films some of the bedroom scenes get cut in pre-watershed screenings (e.g. Die Another Day). Presumably in these instances the edited/censored versions are provided by the film studios, rather than the TV companies having to make the cuts.
Ha. That reminds me of watching the Bond film, GoldenEye on a BA flight from Moscow to Heathrow.
Given the plot, a rather odd choice of film to show on that route you might think, and along with BA's general policy of cutting out any form of aviation catastrophes from their in flight entertainment, the movie's duration wasn't much more than a hour !
JA
My main experience of badly edited airline films was watching The Disaster Artist last year and for some reason they'd dubbed over all the swearing.
"I did naht hit her, it's bullcrap" 🤣
"I did naht hit her, it's bullcrap" 🤣
JA
They remind me of road signs.
I've also noticed that the BBFC have recently introduced a new logo and redesigned symbols which look incredibly bland, very reminiscent of the ones they had on VHS covers in the 80s.
IS
The DVD release of Shaun of The Dead had an extra of some of the lines like these that they had to record for the airline version of the film
My main experience of badly edited airline films was watching The Disaster Artist last year and for some reason they'd dubbed over all the swearing.
"I did naht hit her, it's bullcrap" 🤣
"I did naht hit her, it's bullcrap" 🤣
The DVD release of Shaun of The Dead had an extra of some of the lines like these that they had to record for the airline version of the film