8 SEPTEMBER

NEW ZEALAND GAZETTE

considerable concern. For example, the extreme acts of violence occurring at frequent intervals throughout the video should have resulted in death or grievous bodily harm and permanent damage and yet these acts caused little or no longstanding harm to the principal characters. Similarly, a totally dishonest depiction of prison life was portrayed.

(d) The depiction of a dwarf is distasteful and could offend little people.

(e) Women were included in brief scenes as sex objects, enjoying violence and subservient to the male characters.

(f) The many antisocial themes running through the video in which the purported message is ultimately that ‘good triumphs over evil’ could confuse its target audience of young males, particularly if they are immature and unsophisticated. Only violence is used to obtain ‘the good’. No other means of redressing the wrongs and resolving the conflict was shown.

7. The board took into consideration, as it is required to do pursuant to section 38 (3) of the Act:

(a) The dominant effect of the video.

(b) The extent to which the video recording has merit, value, or importance in relation to artistic, social, cultural or other matters.

(c) The persons, classes of persons, or the age groups of the persons, by whom the video recording is most likely to be viewed.

(d) The extent and degree to which and the manner in which the video recording depicts or treats antisocial behaviour or offensive language or behaviour.

(e) The extent and degree to which and the manner in which it denigrates any particular class of the general public by reference to colour, race, ethnic or national origins, sex or religious beliefs.

(f) The particular purpose for which the video is intended to be used.

(g) Whether or not the soundtrack is an integral part of the video, its content and relationship with the video.

The board also considered the number of videos of a similar nature available to the public and the likely cumulative effect of those videos.

8. Having considered these matters, the board concluded that:

(a) The dominant effect of the video was the depiction of brutality, violence and cruelty.

(b) Although technically competent, it had no artistic, social or cultural merit. The prison setting and boxing was used merely as a means of showing violence and brutality.

(c) As already noted, the video was obviously targeted at the young male audience.

(d) A large part of the video portrayed antisocial acts. For this reason, it would be difficult to make cuts in the video. There was little use of offensive language.

(e) The video, as already noted, denigrates women.

(f) The video is intended to be used for home viewing, principally by a male audience.

(g) The soundtrack was an integral and important part of the video. It was used effectively to enhance the violent acts. For example, the thudding beats every time a blow was struck compounded the violence.

9. A large number of videos that are available to the public depict violence and cruelty. Videos such as Penitentiary III which depict violence in unrealistic and glamorised ways could have the effect of inuring the public, particularly young males to whom the video is targeted.

Conclusion

Taking into account the matters referred to in section 21 of the Act and reaching the conclusions outlined above, the board, by a majority of 4 to 1, has determined that the video Penitentiary III be classified as indecent. One member of the board was of the view that the video be classified as indecent in the hands of persons under 18 years of age providing cuts were made to the protracted violent scenes.

BRENDA CUTRESS, Chairperson.

Decisions of the Video Recordings Authority, July 1988

The decisions made by the Authority for this period are published in accordance with section 28 of the Video Recordings Act 1987.