Abolish the BBFC

The British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) is an immoral and useless organisation. It is immoral since it is part of the machinery of censorship. It is true though that over recent years they have moved towards classification rather than censorship but as evidenced by their banning of Manhunt 2 they still will censor films or games if they so wish. This is not to say, though, that the current BBFC is trigger happy with cutting films. They have become ever more lax with their classifications, especially over the last ten years. Yet the principle behind the BBFC is wrong. If I create a film why I can't I just release it without the BBFC getting their hands over it? If people don't like what I make then don't watch it. Then there is the problem of the censorship machinery. It may presently manned by liberal types but it is at least conceivable that more authoritarian individuals may take over. Now given the persistent attacks on our liberties such 42 Day Detention without charge and the British version of the enabling act (The Civil Contingencies Bill) I can see political censorship returning in the medium term.

Not only is the BBFC is immoral its also rubbish at its job. I thought the idea regarding film classification was that it gave you a good idea of the content of the film. Yet the continuous change in what is suitable for a certain classification makes this redundant. For example up and till a few years ago the Godfather was given an 18 certificate however on the digitally remastered boxset it was re-rated 15. Even the controversially 12 rated Spiderman was nothing compared to the recent Dark Knight.

Not only are the ratings watered down but they are inconsistent. How There Will Be Blood (TWBB) got a 15 and the Dark Knight didn't I'll never know (But the fact is I do. TWBB wasn't a blockbuster and so didn't have the marketing men laying on the pressure). Both films hardly have a positive worldview. There is one scene of violence in TWBB in which Daniel Day-Lewis bludgeons to death Paul Dano with a bowling pin. Though it's relatively graphic and unpleasant, the scene where the Joker holds the knife to that guy's throat for ages is far more affecting. The reason for the this is the general tone of the film which the rating doesn't adequately take account of. To give the BBFC some credit they do provide more detailed reasons why they rate films than they used to.

What the is the root cause of the BBFC's uselessness? They're a monopoly: everyone has to take their films to the BBFC for rating. They can't go to Dobson's ratings or anywhere else. Consequently the universal result of monopoly kicks in- the quality of the product or service falls and its price rises. Therefore any attempt to reform the BBFC will fail. The only solution is abolish it and allow free competition in film and computer games ratings.

Free competition will allow different ratings agencies to arise. They could use the same criteria although they'd probably differ. And as with all market activities the one that satisfies the customers best will win. If the quality of the rating of one organisation falls people can simply move and use another agency. This is legally precluded at present. But what incentive does the film-maker have in presenting his film for rating? Advertising. In the USA it is possible to release films unrated but the takings of the films are a lot lower. Now that may well be due to the fact that the films only have a small target audience. Yet if you were a parent or conscientious adult would you be more or less likely to see a film not knowing what the content of the film would likely contain? Having a film rated by a respected agency will increase its marketability. Won't this mean that there will be loads of different ratings for films which would confuse the customer? Well, possibly though it would be highly unlikely. I'd expect for an area of similar moral views a dominant rating agency to emerge. Anyway a cinema may just advertise the rating of one agency so at the point of purchase there is still only one rating to view.

Wouldn't my proposal allow children to see anything since there is no legal restriction on anything? Yes. However this would be a good thing as parents would actually have to take more responsibility for their child instead of relying on a monopoly body endorsed by the state. Anyway cinemas are at liberty to refuse children entry on grounds of age so I can't seeing it being a huge problem. But suppose Dobson cinemas allow an eight year old to see the new Rambo film I don't think it beyond the realms of possibility that a lot of parents might boycott me and go else where.

To sum up. The BBFC is rubbish and the market better and more moral.