Jess Franco

[g053584398]

Originally Posted by Demdike@Cult Labs

Amazon now have Flowers of Perversion Book 2 released on Dec 25th 2018.

The release date of that book has been modified on Amazon more times than I can recall, but I just wish that it was already available!

[Susan Foreman]

We’ve Warned You About This Man” – Jess Franco And The BBFC | Reprobate Magazine

"These are two quotes from the BBFC to my [Nigel Wingrove] solicitors which show just how close to having criminal proceedings issued against Redemption we were for trying to champion Jess Franco:

SADOMANIA: … “it is grossly unsuitable for viewing in the home. Few, if any, of the sex scenes are consenting,… women that persistently refuse to succumb to the sadistic prison regime are systematically tortured, humiliated or degraded, often for the purpose of arousing the impotent male governor and through him the male viewer of the video work. … There is no doubt in our minds that the erotic presentation of such scenes would be found depraving and corrupting by a British jury”.

sadomania

DEMONIAC: … “The Board has never granted a BBFC certificate to any film or video which seeks to encourage sexual sadism, and this film is clearly sadistic in that it seems ‘to have no purpose or justification other than to reinforce or sell the idea that it can be highly pleasurable to inflict injury, pain or humiliation (often in a sexual context) on others’ (Home Office Report on Obscenity and Film Censorship, Williams, HMSO, 1979)….|

…The work of this particular film maker has often fallen well outside the parameters of BBFC standards because of the manner in which it presents scenes of vicious sexual violence or of violence to women in a sexually arousing context, offering little pleasure to the viewer other than a conscious vicarious gratification of misogyny. Where such emotions focus on the harming of others, the Board must always consider drawing a line, as we have in refusing a video certificate to DEMONIAC”."

[g053584398]

Originally Posted by Susan Foreman

We’ve Warned You About This Man” – Jess Franco And The BBFC | Reprobate Magazine

"These are two quotes from the BBFC to my [Nigel Wingrove] solicitors which show just how close to having criminal proceedings issued against Redemption we were for trying to champion Jess Franco:

SADOMANIA: … “it is grossly unsuitable for viewing in the home. Few, if any, of the sex scenes are consenting,… women that persistently refuse to succumb to the sadistic prison regime are systematically tortured, humiliated or degraded, often for the purpose of arousing the impotent male governor and through him the male viewer of the video work. … There is no doubt in our minds that the erotic presentation of such scenes would be found depraving and corrupting by a British jury”.

sadomania

DEMONIAC: … “The Board has never granted a BBFC certificate to any film or video which seeks to encourage sexual sadism, and this film is clearly sadistic in that it seems ‘to have no purpose or justification other than to reinforce or sell the idea that it can be highly pleasurable to inflict injury, pain or humiliation (often in a sexual context) on others’ (Home Office Report on Obscenity and Film Censorship, Williams, HMSO, 1979)….|

…The work of this particular film maker has often fallen well outside the parameters of BBFC standards because of the manner in which it presents scenes of vicious sexual violence or of violence to women in a sexually arousing context, offering little pleasure to the viewer other than a conscious vicarious gratification of misogyny. Where such emotions focus on the harming of others, the Board must always consider drawing a line, as we have in refusing a video certificate to DEMONIAC”."

It is all too easy for us to forget the bad old days of draconian film censorship in this country! It seems like a bad dream now.

[davcol]

Bizarre to think 20 years ago the police were conducting raids and confiscating pirate tapes of harmless horror and erotica. What a thoroughly pointless and expensive misuse of police time looking back.

[Susan Foreman]

Originally Posted by davcol

Bizarre to think 20 years ago the police were conducting raids and confiscating pirate tapes of harmless horror and erotica. What a thoroughly pointless and expensive misuse of police time looking back.

Agreed, but (playing devil's advocate) there were many more officers of the law back then

[Demoncrat]

Yes, jailing people for distributing films and the like. But that report shows again the virulent snobbery of that slimy Fer-man. Salo is awash with sexual sadism .... but that got a pass as thicko oiks wouldn't watch a subtitled film. Or so he thought ..... . It's fun to watch certain idiots on a other social media site rushing to buy BDs of these 'notorious' films ...then complaining when theyve watched say, Dont Go In The Woods . Do your homework kids!!!

[Demoncrat]

Originally Posted by davcol

Bizarre to think 20 years ago the police were conducting raids and confiscating pirate tapes of harmless horror and erotica. What a thoroughly pointless and expensive misuse of police time looking back.

Pointless? Protecting childrens fragile eggshell minds from filth ...well that's how the propoganda went anyhow. Divide and conquer. Fascism 101.

[Susan Foreman]

Originally Posted by Demoncrat

Salo is awash with sexual sadism .... but that got a pass as thicko oiks wouldn't watch a subtitled film. Or so he thought .....

Yes and no

'Salo' was actually refused a cinema certificate when it was originally released in 1976. The reason given was 'gross indecency', which is defined in British law as 'anything which an ordinary decent man or woman would find to be shocking, disgusting and revolting , or, which offended against recognised standards of propriety'

NOTE: Unlike the Obscene Publications Act - which at that stage did not apply to films - the charge of gross indecency allowed for no defense of artistic or cultural merit to be mounted on the film's behalf. Furthermore, there was no requirement to consider the film - or the film's purpose - as a whole. If any part of the film was indecent then the whole thing was deemed illegal

However, a DPP approved version, personally edited by James Ferman (though God only knows what could have been cut to make it 'acceptable') for exhibition in private, members only cinema clubs

An uncut version of the film was briefly shown in a Soho cinema club in 1977 but that resulted in a police raid!

It wasn't until 1995 that the full and uncensored version was screened at the National Film Theatre in London

[Demoncrat]

Ferman approved. There never was a more loaded phrase imo.

[Justin101]

There is a Jess Franco article in the current issue of The Dark Side magazine, it also has a feature about film versions of Jack the Ripper including the Franco version!