Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Categories

Earliest classification

MarkMark Member Posts: 644 ✭✭✭ Daybiller
Thought there might be some interest around the advent of ratings and where they were displayed. 
Any country, any source.

Cavalcade c1933 Aussie programme. Can't recall seeing another programme with printed classification like this.





«1

Comments

  • HONDOHONDO Member Posts: 9,477 ✭✭✭✭✭✭ Le Grande Collector


    The Last Frontier ( 1932 ) Everyones April 5, 1933 advertisement placed for the Australian Sydney first release.

    Lawrence
  • HONDOHONDO Member Posts: 9,477 ✭✭✭✭✭✭ Le Grande Collector


    Some information on the earliest film classification ratings appearing on Australian daybill posters and one sheets to follow. 
    Lawrence
  • MarkMark Member Posts: 644 ✭✭✭ Daybiller
    Aussie slide again from c1933 with tiny decal added. Probably one of the earliest to feature a rating. Seems to have a space left for it.


  • dedeposterdedeposter Member Posts: 126 ✭✭ One-Sheeter
    There's an interesting debate about classification from 1925 here on Page 5 of the issue. A sample is below.

    https://nla.gov.au/nla.obj-557125514/view?sectionId=nla.obj-570532416&partId=nla.obj-557233150#page/n0/mode/1up




  • HONDOHONDO Member Posts: 9,477 ✭✭✭✭✭✭ Le Grande Collector
    Mark said:
    Aussie slide again from c1933 with tiny decal added. Probably one of the earliest to feature a rating. Seems to have a space left for it.


    Not the first film advertising to feature a rating, but possibly likely to be one of the earliest, if not the first sighted usage of the Not Suitable For General Exibition rating.
    Lawrence
  • dedeposterdedeposter Member Posts: 126 ✭✭ One-Sheeter
    Here's the earliest one I've found so far.

    17 December 1930




  • HONDOHONDO Member Posts: 9,477 ✭✭✭✭✭✭ Le Grande Collector





    Mammy ( 1930 )  daybill. Released in Australia on 8 November1930 according to IMDB, with the General Exhibition rating printed on the poster. This is the the earliest example of film censorship classification that I have found appearing on any Australian poster material.



    Follow Thru ( 1930 ) Australian one sheet. Released in Australia according to IMDB on 31 January 1931. The earliest example of an Australian one sheet with a censorship rating appearing on it that I have been able to locate.

    As with the Mammy daybill, the Follow Thru one sheet and the print advertisement of The Love Lottery, they all have a General Exhibition rating and not a For General Exhibition rating that appear on both Cavalcade and The Last Frontier advertising from 1933. This first style of censorship rating starting in 1930 was short lived in that form and difficult to find many examples where it was used. There is an explanation for this happening and will be explained shortly. 

    Lawrence
  • HONDOHONDO Member Posts: 9,477 ✭✭✭✭✭✭ Le Grande Collector


    Before I comment any further I though it would be a good idea for members to go back and visit or revisit earlier postings regarding this subject that have appeared on the forum in the past. 

    I am missing at least one, if not possibly two other threads that I am unable to locate at this time. The one missing thread I clearly remember is an inaccurate chronology of the film ratings used in Aostralia that included that period of time. The relevant threads I have managed to find are as follows.They can be found by searching the following thread titles.

    Censorship In Australia - The Branding Of The Movie Posters. Started by David in April 2014.

    Classification And Dates In Australia. Started by Ves in May 2015.

    Raling Stamp On Long Daybills. Started by Ves September 2015. 
    Rating On Long Daybills.Also started by Ves on September 2015 superseding the previos entry.

    All things Censorship Related In Australia. Commenced by me. 
    Lawrence
  • MarkMark Member Posts: 644 ✭✭✭ Daybiller
    Have this 1930 US poster with snipe attached. Was found with other Aussie posters dating from around 1934 - '35.


  • HONDOHONDO Member Posts: 9,477 ✭✭✭✭✭✭ Le Grande Collector


    The original 1930 U.S.A. poster without the General Exibition rating appearing on it.

    My explanation about Matt's poster is that RKO Australia in 1931, when this film was released here, used the U.S. poster and just added the General Exhibition snipe rating at the top.

    Great poster by the way.
    Lawrence
  • MarkMark Member Posts: 644 ✭✭✭ Daybiller
    To be honest, I assumed that ratings in Aust began around 1933, because that's the year they seem to appear most commonly. I also assumed that we were pretty much following America's lead with code / pre-code standards. Never did any actual research.
    Someone previously mentioned that the triangle / circle classification was introduced so that vision impaired people could discern from a distance. Not sure if that's true.
  • dedeposterdedeposter Member Posts: 126 ✭✭ One-Sheeter
    More Wheeler and Woolsey. A trade ad from September 9th, 1930 with General Exhibition printed below, of course a trade ad is not the same as a poster. 


  • HONDOHONDO Member Posts: 9,477 ✭✭✭✭✭✭ Le Grande Collector
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        There were three different styles of advertising designed for the classification of the For General Exhibition rating that were used on Australian film posters and other publicity material between 1930 and 1934. Firstly in 1930  the General Exhibition wording was introduced.This was then followed by the For General Exhibition wording. Finally the For General Exhibition in a triangle version was introduced. The triangle version became the long term used style for many decades to come. Some more details shortly. 


    Lawrence
  • dedeposterdedeposter Member Posts: 126 ✭✭ One-Sheeter
    Great research, keep it coming.
  • HONDOHONDO Member Posts: 9,477 ✭✭✭✭✭✭ Le Grande Collector
    edited April 11

    Great research, keep it coming.
    Thanks Dede. Much appreciated.




    This isn't what you may think it may be. Explanation soon.
    Lawrence
  • HONDOHONDO Member Posts: 9,477 ✭✭✭✭✭✭ Le Grande Collector


     

    The above censorship stamp appears on the 1927 film Prince Of Adventurers daybill appearing above.. Ves had previously mentioned this form of censorship had appeared on this film poster,  as well as being stamped on The Cossacks ( 1928 ) The Red Matrk ( 1928 ) daybills.

    First of all the censorship stamp had nothing to do with any Australian Government film censorship ruling. The censorship stamp was applied in the Australian state of Victoria only. This state applied the '' 6 to 16'' clause which was included  in their State censorship regulations. This was part of the Theatres Act which prohibited the attendance of children aged 6 and 16 at Specified ''conditional'' films.

     I am unable to locate exactly when this ''6 to 16'' clause was first introduced, but some very interesting information on what happened to have this clause appliance eliminated in Victoria will follow shortly.
    Lawrence
  • theartofmovieposterstheartofmovieposters Member Posts: 4,768 ✭✭✭✭✭ Elite Collector
    That's interesting...so then posters wouldn't be shared interstate?
  • theartofmovieposterstheartofmovieposters Member Posts: 4,768 ✭✭✭✭✭ Elite Collector


    I can find reference to this requirement in the Theatres Act of 1928:

    http://classic.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/legis/vic/hist_act/ta1928109/ta1928109.html?stem=0&synonyms=0&query=theatres

    Can't find it in the 1915 or 1926 versions...
  • HONDOHONDO Member Posts: 9,477 ✭✭✭✭✭✭ Le Grande Collector


    That's interesting...so then posters wouldn't be shared interstate?
    Same posters Australia wide,  but the state of Victoria would have applied the censorshio stamp on their alloted posters. Did other states apart from Victoria  apply the censorship special rating, I cannot say. Are the three posters that Ves has originate from Victoria , again I cannot say. 

    The following two articles explain in detail information surrounding the ''6 to 16'' clause from their state censorship regulations and the reason it was terminated in 1932. The following sentence I found fascinating. '' Police were instructed to visit three times each night any theatre in which a conditional picture was showing, and business suffered to an alarming degree''.

    I am sure people would turn up at the cinemas with 6 to 16 year old children blissfully unaware of the film being classified as being a conditional film, only to be told they couldn't be admitted, or even worse if they did happen to have been admitted then asked to leave by the Police if discovered inside the theatre.

     The dropping of the clause apparently started Victoria on the road to introducing the Commonwealth Censorship ''FOR GENERAL EXHIBITION" advertising.



    ( Trove )


      ( From Everyones 6 October 1932 issue / Trove )

    More informaion regarding  Australian censorshiop ratings to follow soon.
    Lawrence
  • MarkMark Member Posts: 644 ✭✭✭ Daybiller
    For General Exhibition / Not Suitable FGE sounds more like a directive to the cinema owner, rather than the patrons. Maybe that's why they amended it to Suitable Only for Adults / Not Suitable Children.
    One company that should read above is Aussie distributor Madman. They never print their posters with any classification.
  • theartofmovieposterstheartofmovieposters Member Posts: 4,768 ✭✭✭✭✭ Elite Collector
    HONDO said:


    That's interesting...so then posters wouldn't be shared interstate?
    Same posters Australia wide,  but the state of Victoria would have applied the censorshio stamp on their alloted posters. Did other states apart from Victoria  apply the censorship special rating, I cannot say. Are the three posters that Ves has originate from Victoria , again I cannot say. 

    The following two articles explain in detail information surrounding the ''6 to 16'' clause from their state censorship regulations and the reason it was terminated in 1932. The following sentence I found fascinating. '' Police were instructed to visit three times each night any theatre in which a conditional picture was showing, and business suffered to an alarming degree''.

    I am sure people would turn up at the cinemas with 6 to 16 year old children blissfully unaware of the film being classified as being a conditional film, only to be told they couldn't be admitted, or even worse if they did happen to have been admitted then asked to leave by the Police if discovered inside the theatre.

     The dropping of the clause apparently started Victoria on the road to introducing the Commonwealth Censorship ''FOR GENERAL EXHIBITION" advertising.



    ( Trove )


      ( From Everyones 6 October 1932 issue / Trove )

    More informaion regarding  Australian censorshiop ratings to follow soon.
    Great stuff!
  • HONDOHONDO Member Posts: 9,477 ✭✭✭✭✭✭ Le Grande Collector


     ( John )

     Vanity Fair ( 1932 ) Australian daybill produced for when the film was first released in Australia in 1932.

    The censorship rating of ''Children Not Admitted By Order Of The Commonwealth Film Censor'' is the only example of this classification that I am aware of. For this style of advertising I couldn't locate any newspaper advertisements appearing on Trove that were placed for this film that incuded this classification. The only newspaper censorship I did find was for one advertisement that advertised the film as being Not Suiitable For General Exhibition. All other advertisements for this film which I sighted, which were numeouos,  were without any mention of a censorship classfication in any shape or form. 


    Lawrence
  • MarkMark Member Posts: 644 ✭✭✭ Daybiller
  • MattMatt Member, Administrator, Moderator Posts: 5,666 admin
    Dang! This a good read, so many posters I've never seen before. Keep up the good work!!!
  • HONDOHONDO Member Posts: 9,477 ✭✭✭✭✭✭ Le Grande Collector




    Models And Wives ( 1931 ). Pre code 20 minute comedy short advertised here in this 1933 Australian newspaper cinema advertisement.
    Lawrence
  • MarkMark Member Posts: 644 ✭✭✭ Daybiller
    c1932 herald. 
    Doesn't seem to be much pre-1930 with classification around.


  • HONDOHONDO Member Posts: 9,477 ✭✭✭✭✭✭ Le Grande Collector


    Uniform Australia wide Commonwealth film censorship appears to have only started being used in advertising material in 1930. More at a later date.
    Lawrence
  • BruceBruce Member, Captain Movie Poster Posts: 1,143 ✭✭✭✭ Three-Sheeter
    Mark said:
    c1932 herald. 
    Doesn't seem to be much pre-1930 with classification around.


    Not "c1932". The Man in Possession is 1937's Personal Property, and since it is on the lower half of a double bill, it surely was not in first release, so I would say likely it is from 1938 (there was a Thursday October 13th that year). I suspect Mark was misled by there being a Thursday October 13th in 1932.
    We (eMoviePoster.com) hold 3,000 auctions every other week + 6 major auctions a year.
    See all of our current auctions in one gallery here: http://www.emovieposter.com/agallery/all.html
Sign In or Register to comment.