Chief Censor in the hot seat

By JENNY FORSYTH

The R18 rating slapped on the New Zealand comedy Savage Honeymoon has sparked a furore as intense and heated as an lpg-fuelled bonfire.

The movie has Film Commission funding and TVNZ backing, so it is no wonder the age restriction - prompted, among other things, by a gas tank being thrown on a fire - created widespread debate. The decision is up for review on Monday.

Film and video distributors have been quick to stress that the severe rating was not a one-off.

They complain that the growing number of cuts and severe restrictions dates back to late 1998, when Chief Censor Bill Hastings started.

His reply: "They're trying on the new boy."

Mr Hastings is well aware that it is not just mainstream distributors who reckon he is playing the strict schoolmarm.

Fiona Gibb, of Vixen Digital, New Zealand's second-largest importer of "adult products," reckons he has cost her company a fortune because of all the extra cuts he has demanded.

"We had had enough of the inconsistencies, so we asked him for a meeting. We had a graph that showed the huge increase in cuts we'd had to make since he started."

The Motion Picture Distributors Association of New Zealand is now pushing for a change so New Zealand simply follows Australian ratings rather than create its own.

"Why reinvent the wheel?" asks Andrew Cornwell, manager of Columbia TriStar.

"Most titles that are sent to the censor's office as an R come back as an R. Why send down all these titles to get the same result? It costs money and causes delays."

The classification system works like this:

*Films arrive from overseas and, if they carry no age restriction in Britain or Australia, are simply cross-rated (given the equivalent New Zealand rating) by the Film and Video Labelling Body.

*If they have been age-restricted in either Britain or Australia, they are sent to the Office of Film and Literature Classification in Wellington (the censor) for a decision.

Distributors have asked the Government to let the Film and Video Labelling Body take on cross-classification as well as its normal role of cross-rating. So far, there has been no response.

Bill Hood, secretary of the film distributors' association, says distributors cannot understand why a raft of films rated MA (parental guidance required for those aged 15 and under) end up being rated R16 or R18 here.

"It's difficult to see how the average New Zealand family differs so much from the Australian one. Auckland is closer to Sydney than Sydney is to Perth, yet there's a three-year difference in some age restrictions when they cross the Tasman."

The anomalies show up in a list of how films, all rated MA in Australia, are classified in New Zealand.

Distributors admit some films get an easier ride here. The Blair Witch Project was rated R13, True Crime, Life, Girl, Interrupted, Sleepy Hollow and Strange Planet got an M (unrestricted) rating.

On the other hand, South Park - Bigger Longer and Uncut, The 13th Warrior, American Pie, Election, Holy Smoke, Two Hands and The Debt Collector were rated R16.

And in what distributors see as the worst cases, Hurly Burly, The Corruptor, Go, End of Days and Joan of Arc ended up R18.

Mr Hastings has a ready response. "Yes, films do get different ratings here, but we also have a different classification system. In New Zealand we have a detailed list of criteria which focuses on harm.

"Violence, sexual violence and anything which is likely to injure the public is restricted. It's a risk assessment here, whereas over in Australia they take a more moralistic stance."

Under the Films, Videos and Publications Act 1993, the basic test censors use is whether the availability of a publication is likely to cause injury to the public good.

The Australian Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995 says content must meet generally accepted standards of the community.

In adult movies censors gauge offensiveness, whereas in unrestricted movies they look at levels of harm.

Canadian-born Mr Hastings says he is working within the same set of rules as his predecessor Kathryn Paterson. Asked if he is taking a stricter approach, he says: "I think not. The very fact that there are also a lot of movies which are restricted there but not here shows the distributors' argument is inconsistent.

"Also, there's very little scope to impose personal opinion. The legislation is very specific, and that was a conscious decision Parliament took."

So why the accusations?

Robert Crockett, head of BVI (distributor of Disney and Miramax movies), says: "Under his leadership, it has got tougher. There seems to be some inconsistency in the ratings. We'd like to see more consistency."

Mr Cornwell, of Columbia-TriStar, adds: "Prior to him coming, we had no appeals for seven years. We've had three in the past year, and UIP also had to appeal when Saving Private Ryan was rated R16. It ended up being dropped to R15."

Classification appeals go to a body called the Board of Review, which is chosen by the Minister of Internal Affairs.

The president is lawyer Sandra Moran and its members are retired law professor Margaret Bedggood, JP Bernadine Pool, Miles Rogers and Stephen Danby, both from National Radio, film producer Pamela Meekings-Stewart and independent film-maker Stephanie de Montalk. There are two vacancies.

Columbia Tristar's three appeals have involved Go, Joan of Arc and Cruel Intentions. Only Cruel Intentions won a rating relaxation, but Mr Cornwell has now resolved to appeal again over Joan of Arc.

"Even though it will cost us we will give it another go. It was a ludicrous decision.

"There is a rape and murder scene 11 minutes into the movie, but in the context of the whole film it wasn't worth giving an R18 rating.

"Germany gave it R16, many countries, including France and Ireland, gave it no age restriction, and it was an MA in Australia."

Vixen's Fiona Gibb argues that the content of adult imports has not changed," but we're having to cut a lot more now."

"We already spend around $100,000 a year at that office. We have six video titles a month, and it costs $1000 each to review them, plus $1200 for DVDs [video discs].

"Now we're spending another $1500 on the review plus $17,000 on the review's legal costs."

The video in question is called Triple X 31, a film which had to be cut in four places. Fiona Gibb says one of the points in question is whether it is acceptable for a man to ejaculate into a woman's face.

"That's a normal ending to heterosexual adult videos."

Mr Hastings begs to differ. "Their product is changing. It contains more coercion and pressure [on the women].

"I have an open-door policy for complaints here and I listen to people, but I have to say we haven't changed tack."

As you might expect, Mr Hastings also rejects the idea of using Australian ratings. "I think New Zealand has already ceded enough sovereignty over film censorship. Do we really just want to follow whatever the Australians say?

"I don't think there have been wild inconsistencies between ratings in Australia and New Zealand, and, to be honest, I don't think there has been a dramatic increase in the number of reviews to the board either.

"They're trying on the new boy ... But the more they try and push the envelope, the more I'll respond."