In the early 1980s, cinema’s rules of censorship did not stretch to video releases. Cheap and often gruesome films flooded the market as VCRs grew in popularity.
Following a campaign led by Mary Whitehouse and the British advocacy group National Viewers’ and Listeners’ Association (NVALA), prosecutions commenced in the UK in the early 1980s against allegedly obscene videos.
In June 1983, the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) released a list of 72 films believed to violate the Obscene Publications Act 1959, including films that had either been previously acquitted of obscenity or already obtained certification from the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC).
39 of the films were successfully prosecuted under the Obscene Publications Act (although some were subsequently cut and approved for release). The remaining 33 were either not prosecuted or had unsuccessful prosecutions.
A second list was released containing an additional 82 titles, which were not believed to lead to obscenity convictions but could nonetheless be confiscated under the Act’s forfeiture laws.
Ridiculously, some titles were placed on a list just for their lurid packaging or use of a keyword in the title (everything with ‘cannibal’ got listed) or simply because *one* person somewhere complained.
The debate around video nasties raged for years and led to a botch of legislation, but it wasn’t just the Video Recordings Act that changed the landscape.
The video industry – weary of being on a par with sex shops and drug dealers – made a concerted effort to present itself as respectable. By the time the Act arrived, the major studios were fully onboard with rental video.
Inevitably, the DPP lists were used by horror fans like the I-SPY Book of Garden Birds, and there was great competition to see who could see and tick off all the films in the lists.
Ironically, it transpires that the Video Recordings Act was never legally enforceable – because the British Government forgot to tell the European Commission.
This mistake was rectified in 2010, but before that, Brussels could have declared all the “nasties” perfectly legal.
Ridiculously, some titles were placed on a list just for their lurid packaging or use of a keyword in the title (everything with ‘cannibal’ got listed) or simply because *one* person somewhere complained.
