The British Board of Film Censors (BBFC) was founded in 1912 as board independent of the government and the film makers.

They had two classifications of film at this time. These were ‘U’ for films suitable for all and ‘A’ for adult audiences only.

The BBFC was made responsible for all cinema just a year later, up until this point it had been up to local councils to make the decision, so what could be seen in Bristol or London, may not be seen in Manchester for example. The local councils could still overrule the decisions of the BBFC, from the 1920s they generally accepted the decisions of the Board.

In the early days, the Board had, under President T. P O‘Connor, drawn up a list of 43 ‘Grounds for Deletion.’ This was a list which was used by the BBFC’s examiners as reasons to censor films, and were very representative of their the time. Whereas scenes of drug addiction (‘Trainspotting’ (1996)), realistic horrors of warfare (‘Apocalypse Now’ (1979)) and men and women in bed together (just about any film or television programme) are more acceptable now, and looking back seem dracon

And that point is one of the main reasons put forward in favour of more relaxed censorship, the sins of the “misguided” few spoiling the freedom for others.

The problem with that statement is that I am not representative of everyone who watched ‘Man Bites Dog’ much like Nathan Ramirez is not representative of all those who have seen ‘Natural Born Killers’ or watching ‘Taxi Driver’ will have the effect on you of going out and trying to kill a world leader, like John Hinckley did.

Those are just a few of the cases which can be used to advocate heavier censorship, but what are the theories behind the effect films or TV programmes can have on their audience?

The film follows around a film crew who, I assumed, are making a documentary on Ben, played by one of the directors, Benoit Poelvoorde. Ben is a serial killer and the crew watches him in his daily life, and his thoughts on many and various topics, and his ‘working life’, his killings. Ben seems to be an eccentric type, and his antics between killings make you want laugh at him and how he acts. He’s a figure of fun, nothing serious really, and this drags you into the film, almost becoming desensitised to his killings, and in a way, laughing at them.

Some topics in this essay:
Poelvoorde Ben, President O‘Connor, John Hinckley, Mickey Mallory, Travis Bickle, Nathan Martinez, Warner Brothers, Recording Act, Born Killers’, Edmondson Darras, ‘natural born, born killers’, ‘natural born killers’, john hinckley, ‘taxi driver’, mickey mallory, ‘man bites dog’, ‘man bites, jodie foster, travis bickle, film crew, killing spree, british board film,