Note: to keep articles of a reasonable length, this post has now been split into two. This post deals with the BBFC generally, while the second post (available here) deals with the 12/12A certificate. Equally, there is extra reading here if the topic of the BBFC interests you and you'd like to know about some ways in which the regulator has faced criticism.
As part of Section B, your Media Industries question might cover who the BBFC are and what they do.
It won't be an extensive question, but you still need to know about them.
The BBFC themselves have some excellent, student-friendly resources at https://bbfc.co.uk/education/student-guide but even this is more than you need to know.
Simply, the BBFC is the British Board of Film Classification. It is their job to classify films that are released via cinemas and physical or home media (i.e. DVDs and Blu-rays) to make sure that unsuitable content is not viewed by minors (i.e. under 18s). They no longer classify video games except in rare cases, as this is now handled by PEGI or Pan European Game Information.
Online services are a bit more complicated. First, they're not broadcast in cinemas or on home media, so second, the expectation is that the bill-payer will control access to any age-sensitive content. As such, online services aren't expected to use the BBFC system in the UK. Often, they use their own ratings systems or those of the country they're from (usually the USA).
All that being said, the BBFC's system is trusted by UK parents, which is why Netflix made the decision to apply BBFC ratings to all of its content in the UK as of November 2020. It's a move which has drawn praise and support from its UK customers and the BBFC themselves.
The BBFC will watch films and judge them against a set of criteria, finally arriving at a certificate for the film that determines what age groups the film is suitable for. This process is undertaken by at least two specially trained officers, though bigger teams or more senior officers may be used, especially if it's difficult to decide between certificates.
No such difficulties exist for the viewer, as the certificates themselves are deliberately simple and easy to understand, allowing parents in particular to make quick and informed choices.
Though all the certificates are relatively easy for the consumer to understand (especially 12, 15 and 18), what actually underpins them?
The BBFC's officers look at seven major content descriptors and an overall adjective for what level of content is acceptable for each certificate.
The descriptors are:
violence,
sex & nudity,
discrimination,
drug references (the BBFC differentiates between legal, prescription and illegal drugs as well as between mentioning them and taking them),
threat & horror,
bad language,
dangerous behaviour (especially that which could be copied by children).
The presence and strength of these types of content in a film will determine what rating the BBFC gives it. Universal (U) films are allowed only very mild examples of some of the content - and others are forbidden completely. Cartoon violence and threat with quick resolution and assurance throughout that 'everything will be okay' are permitted. The BBFC states that a film awarded a 'U' should be considered safe viewing for those aged 4 and over even if unsupervised by a parent or caregiver, and that means that even the reactions of characters must be such as not to scare or confuse a young viewer (e.g. a Dad shouting angrily at his child would not be allowed in a U film). A film cannot attain a 'U' rating if it features any of the other types of content looked at by the BBFC. To make the U rating even clearer, the BBFC colours it green. Parental guidance (PG) films are films best enjoyed with just that - guidance from a parent or caregiver. Accordingly, the BBFC uses a yellow colour for PG. The BBFC states that a PG film can be viewed independently and safely by most 8-year-olds. PG films may have mild examples of most of the BBFC's content descriptors. Reference to legal or prescription drugs (e.g. painkillers or a beer) is fine, but the film can't show them actually being taken. PG films may show non-sexualised nudity (e.g. a shirtless character at the pool). Bad language must be infrequent and mild (e.g. 'crap,' 'damn'). Discrimination and dangerous behaviour might feature, but with a very clear context that the film doesn't endorse or promote them and that they are wrong. Fantasy violence is permitted or violence which leaves no injuries or marks (e.g. two siblings fighting) and threat can be less mild than a U but must still have a quick, clear and reassuring outcome.
12/12A - we'll talk about the important difference between these two certificates in a separate post, but the content is identical. 12/12A films can have moderate examples of the BBFC's content descriptors, and the BBFC keenly monitors school curriculums to work out what 'typical' 12 year olds would (and would not) know about. Sexually suggestive nudity (e.g. a nude character viewed from the back) would be permitted provided the reference remains suggestive. Moderate bad language is permitted, particularly that with context and narrative significance. Violence can be stronger and leave marks/injuries, but blood etc. is likely to earn the film a 15 instead. Drug references, including the taking of legal drugs (e.g. opening or drinking a beer) are permitted. For clarity, 12/12A are presented with an orange logo. 15 and 18 - 15 and 18 films can, unsurprisingly, be watched or purchased only by audiences over 15 and 18 respectively, and can feature all of the BBFC's content descriptors. 15 is presented in light red (i.e. pink) and 18 in dark red so that there is no confusion. The key difference is that a 15 film can feature strong examples while an 18 film can feature very strong examples without much in the way of limit except in the most extreme examples. Filmmakers aim to get the lowest certificate possible for their film - as a rough guide, for every 3 years of age you expand your audience by in the UK, you add between 3 and 5 million potential viewers. The BBFC very much takes the line that it is better to overrate a film and review the rating later than it is to underrate a film. The BBFC doesn't just rate films, either. It rates the trailers as well. Filmmakers tactically make their trailers even more likely to get a lower rating, maximising the number of films the trailer can be shown with even if the film itself later gets a higher rating. On rating a trailer or a full film, the BBFC gives filmmakers advice about how to make the next rating down. It can be very small things: Spectre, your film case study, had to change the filming angle of one violent scene from front to back, alter the sound effects and move the death of a character off-camera. This affected well under a minute of footage, but dropped the film from a 15 to a 12/12A. The two main trailers for the film had a sound effect changed and less than a second of footage removed, changing the trailer from a '12A' to a 'PG'. This situation, especially when it comes to the finished film, can put film studio executives at odds with producers and directors. The execs want the film to make the most money possible, and therefore aim for the lowest certificate possible. The production staff (and especially the writer, producer and director) have an artistic vision that they want altered as little as possible. This is why so-called 'Director's Cut' editions of films can be very popular with collectors of DVDs and Blu-rays, as this missing content is often re-added. In rare cases, the BBFC can even refuse to classify a film altogether. In this situation, it is illegal for the film to be released, shown or sold in the UK.
When the BBFC does classify a film, that classification is legally binding if selling tickets to it at the cinema or copies of it on DVD/Blu-ray in a shop - on- or offline. However, in the cinema, the certificate is advice: the final say actually lies with local authorities. Generally, it's advice that they follow, but here are two case studies where they did not: 1979's Life of Brian was classified then as suitable for viewers 14 and up (it probably would have got a 15 if today's system had been in place). The moral panic surrounding the film's release, however, saw many local authorities ban it in their cinemas.
It's interesting to note that certificates are not set in stone and can be revisited. As we've already said, the BBFC is unapologetic for overrating films so that it doesn't have to apologise for underrating them. As such, certificates do change: 40 years later, Life of Brian is a mere 12, while Jaws (1975), originally advised at 14+ (so what would have been a 15 under today's system), became a PG at one point in time and is now a 12. This points to the changes in the attitudes and responses of society over time. What used to offend, shock or worry us no longer does in the same way.
In the same way, what didn't used to be considered shocking or offensive may now be viewed very differently. This can particularly affect older films and you can read more about it in an extended reading post here.
This raises two questions around sensitivity. On the one hand, we are becoming desensitised to certain issues in media such as language, violence or horror. On the other, we are also becoming newly sensitive to other issues in ways that we were not before. It means the BBFC always has to be ready to revisit certificates as times - and attitudes - change, one way or the other.
When it comes to the certificate on a DVD or Blu-ray, however, there is no debate. The BBFC's ratings are law. A retailer caught selling age-restricted media to minors can be criminally prosecuted, which is why any good retailer asks for ID and refuses the sale if unsure! Remember that home media releases can end up with different certificates to the cinema release - usually higher, if there is a difference - and usually because of deleted scenes being available, a director's cut or even something as small as a cast or crew member using stronger language on a bonus feature interview or commentary.
Comments