CINEMA-JAMAICA: Censors Take Heat

By IPS Correspondents Reprint | | Print |

Howard Campbell

KINGSTON, Nov 24 1998 (IPS) - Jamaican censors were under fire again this month after they banned another Hollywood movie – the second such action this year.

Critics declared the government-appointed Cinematography Authority (CA) was “out of touch” after it banned the movie “Blade” from theatres and members of the cinema industry called on the censors to display a “higher level of tolerance.”

The outcry over Blade – a comedy starring Wesley Snipes which the CA deemed “too gory” led to the censors reviewing their decision and eventually giving it the green light for public viewing.

Earlier this year, the Authority ruled that sections from the opening scene of the Steven Spielberg slavery epic “Amistad” were too violent. As a result, five seconds of the scene were edited.

The “Amistad” cut not only riled film buffs but academics as well who questioned the CA’s reasons for chopping one of the film’s most graphic scenes. Said one university professor, “All facets of black history should be shown, even slavery.”

To people like Melanie Graham – marketing executive at Palace Amusement Company, Jamaica’s oldest and largest promoters of motion pictures – the CA’s recent actions were “frustrating.” Because cinemas must compete with video outlets and increasingly- accessible cable television, her company stood to lose huge sums of money if censors persisted with a hard-line stance, she said.

“If it’s necessary (to cut), go ahead but there’s no need to go into battle if it’s not necessary,” said Graham. “We live in a very open society, most of the times I just don’t see the point.”

Stanley Webley, a 30-year member of the Cinematography Authority, dismissed the notion that his organisation was a “bunch of old fogeys,” and claimed that, much of the time, the Jamaican media made a big deal out of nothing.

“With the case of Blade all we asked for was a reduction of the goriness, and then the media had a field day,” he said.

Webley is one of five members on the censorship authority and maintained there was absolutely no bias toward any film maker or country whe n it came to issuing approval ratings or demanding that some scenes be edited.

“We have followed our best judgment over the years,” Webley said. “We decide on the elements of the film then categorise it accordingly.”

Webley was also critical of those who claim that his own standing as a clergyman might influence his personal stance. “Absolutely not, we are not rating films for a Sunday school.”

Brian St Juste, the lone cinematographer in the Authority, believes an updating of Jamaica’s censoring laws is necessary if a recurrence of the “Amistad” and “Blade” incidents was to be prevented. “The law must be revised as it relates to the movie industry,” he said.

“As a cinematographer I am totally against the cutting of films; in fact I think the word censorship is outdated.”

St Juste, who admits to being outnumbered by his moderate colleagues when the matter of editing and censorship comes up, said he will be making a number of proposals to the government regarding censorship.

“Another film person should be on the board, people have to have an open mind,” said St Juste.

Over the years, the Authority has clamped down on several films. In the late 1940s at the height of moderation, the French movie “Le Diable Avo Corps” (“The Devil In The Flesh”) was banned because it was said to be promoting adultery.

During the 1970s when Jamaica’s crime rate was at an alarming high, low-budget flicks were targeted. They took a similar stance a decade later when macho, violent films like “Rambo” and “The Exterminator” drew the crowds to the box office.

In those days before videos and cable TV, theatre companies like the Palace Amusement Co. stood to lose little because of the censor’s actions on rating movies. “When kids go into video stores or turn on their cable nobody knows what they are watching,” Graham pointed out, “so in that sense I think the ratings are a bit harsh.”

Like St Juste, Graham said she will be pursuing a campaign to ensure more lenient rulings by the censors. “We are having discussions with various people to see what can be done,” she said. “The CA is too archaic, they are not abreast of what’s going on.”