Speech--Amir Abou-Jaoude

Rated C for Censored

Amir Abou-Jaoude

Stanley Kubrick’s quixotic project on Napoleon had finally fallen apart. Funding had run out, and now, the famed filmmaker of 2001: A Space Odyssey had nothing to direct. However, one of his assistants gave him a book by Anthony Burgess. It was called A Clockwork Orange, and it wasn’t long before Kubrick decided that it would be the subject of his next film.

           

            The result of Kubrick’s efforts to adapt the book to the screen was unleashed in 1971, and it created immense controversy, especially in the United States and Britain. Particularly of concern to the censors was a scene in which Alex, the main character, and his “droogs” commit violent acts along the Thames River. In the background, stately classical music plays. The censors accused Kubrick of glorifying violence.

            I believe that Kubrick is actually doing something different in this scene. The classical music serves as a stark contrast to the horrific acts. The British Board of Film Classification, or BBFC, the British equivalent of our ratings system, didn’t see it that way. Controversy surrounded the film, and in 1973, an embittered Kubrick withdrew the film from circulation in Britain. Should A Clockwork Orange have been censored? In the next few minutes, let’s examine the history of film censorship, the reasons for censoring a movie, and why censorship may be unnecessary.

            Film censorship dates back almost to the beginning of modern cinema. In the 1920s, there were only voluntary restrictions on the film industry, and notable directors like Ernst Lubitsch and Frank Capra turned out risque entertainment. However, in 1934, the Hollywood Production Code, or Hays’ Code, was implemented, placing severe restrictions on filmmakers. Directors could no longer show sympathy towards “crimes against the law” and had to uphold the “sanctity of the institution of marriage and the home.” Interestingly, the reasoning behind the code was that films were art, and art must be used to elevate the human condition, not debase it.

            The Code stayed in place until the 1960s, when films such as Billy Wilder’s Some Like It Hot and Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho began to subvert it. Then, in 1968, the Motion Picture Association of America, an advisory board made up of parents and film professionals that would rate films as G, PG, R, or X was created. The MPAA rating system has gone through a few changes in its fifty years of its existence—the PG-13 rating has been introduced, and the X rating has been replaced with an NC-17, but the basic structure and purpose of the organization has remained the same.

            The MPAA has come under fire for being extremely critical of sexual content and nudity in movies, while taking a more lenient attitude regarding violence.  In the United States, a film doesn’t have to be rated, but a MPAA rating lends the film credibility and is essential to making a good profit at the box office. In fact, with a few exceptions, a MPAA rating plays an integral role in a film’s box office performance—a film rated NC-17 is unlikely to turn much of a profit because, as entertainment lawyer Jason K. Albosta writes, it limits the number of potential viewers.

            Censorship exists all over the world, from Britain to China and Iran. Why would organizations be so eager to censor the cinema? The short answer is that films tell their stories visually, and the visual component of the movies worries censors. Won’t someone want to emulate what he sees on screen? If someone sees Alex and his droogs committing violent actions in A Clockwork Orange, won’t they want to commit similar actions, albeit without the classical music? A 2006 study at the University of California examined the link between violent movies and crime. The authors concluded that if there is any correlation between the two matters, it is that crime actually decreases while these movies are playing. The authors hypothesized that offenders are too busy watching the films, so they cannot perpetrate violent crimes, and there are little effects a few weeks later. Therefore, censorship in this regard is highly unnecessary.

            Now to be fair, not every film censored is a bona fide masterpiece like A Clockwork Orange. Most films that are censored or downright banned are pornographic, gratuitously violent, or political. However, the censors cannot judge what is art and what is not. The BBFC censors, for example, could not have known that films like Sergei Eisenstein’s The Battleship Potemkin or Michael Powell’s Peeping Tom would today be considered art when they cut them. These films show the inhumanity of man, and therefore, by revealing the darker elements in our society Film is art, and artists have to be able to express their thoughts freely. That does not mean that ten-year-olds should view A Clockwork Orange, but it does mean that we have to take a more pragmatic approach when examining the content of certain films. Sex, violence, language, and other material that is censored can be vital parts of a filmmaker’s vision, and this vision, in turn, can elevate humanity by providing social commentary or a new artistic perspective. As George Bernard Shaw said, “the first condition of progress is the removal of censorship.” Thank you.

Works Cited

Albosta, Jason K. “Dr. Strange-rating or: How I Learned that the Motion Picture Association of America’s Film Rating Constitutes False Advertising.” Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment and Technology Law 12.1 (2009): 115-147. Print.

Empire of the Censors. Dir. Saskia Baron. Perf. Richard E. Grant. BBC, 1995. Film.

Krakus, Anna. Interview with Andrzej Wajda. Cineaste 39.3 (2014): 3-9. Print.

Rayns, Tony. “Heard it Through the Grapevine.” Film Comment Sep. 2013: 30-35. Print.

Rickey, Carrie. “Brutalization of Women is a Constant in Popular Film.” Variety 21 Jan. 2013: 49-51. Print.

Dahl, Gordon, and Stefano DellaVigna. "Does Movie Violence Increase Violent Crime?" Quarterly Journal of Economics (2008): 1-44. Print.