The DPP List of 72 Video Nasties

Exploring the DPP List of 72 video nasties. Although there were a total of 72 films on the list at one time or another, only 39 films were prosecuted under the Obscene Publications Act (OPA),

Dealers could be fined or jailed and the film itself would be declared obscene if the prosecution was successful, meaning it could not be distributed or sold in the UK until the obscenity was quashed. The majority of these pre-certificate tapes were low quality horror films, but it also contained one or two films that are now regarded as banned horror classics, most notably ‘The Evil Dead‘.

What’s the Difference Between DPP39 and 72?

The DPP List of 72 Video Nasties contained tapes prosecuted under the Obscene Publication Act, they became known as the The DPP 39 list. The remaining 33 non-prosecuted video nasties were eventually dropped to the Section 3 List.

The Act defined obscenity as that which may “tend to deprave and corrupt persons who are likely, having regard to all relevant circumstances, to read, see or hear the matter contained or embodied in it” This definition is of course open to wide interpretation.

The Video Retailers’ Association to the Rescue

Since the video nasty media frenzy, the Video Retailers Association were alarmed by the video shop raids, and apparently random seizures and asked the Department of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to provide a guideline for the UK video industry, so that stockists could be made aware of what was liable to be confiscated, and what they could legitimately keep on their shelves.

The DPP recognised that the current system, where the interpretation of obscenity was down to individual Chief Constables, was inconsistent and decided to publish an official nasties list that contained names of the films that had already resulted in successful prosecutions, or where the DPP had already filed charges against the video’s distributors.

Prosecuted vs Dropped Video Nasties

The DPP lists seemed to have a ‘thing’ for films with the word ‘house’ in the title, Last House on the Left, House by the Cemetery, Don’t go in the House, The House on the Edge of the Park, and also anything with ‘Don’t in the title: Don’t go in the Woods, Don’t Look in the Basement, Don’t go in the House, Don’t Answer the Phone, Don’t Open til Christmas, Don’t go near the Park, don’t do this, don’t do that, don’t believe the hype etc etc.

The Official DPP39 List (Prosecuted)

The 33 Non-Prosecuted Video Nasties (Dropped)

Reshape of the Video Classification System

The video certification system in use at this time was constructed of G, A, AA and X, but was more of a voluntary guidance system. rather than an enforced one, which made it easy for children of any age to rent or view these new titles.

George Halliwell remembers the home video boom, saying that children would often try and rent films which were not deemed suitable for the under-aged.

“I would check the cover and view the reverse side as a guidance to the kind of material that was in the film. If it looked like it may be of adult origin, I’d ask them if their parents knew they were renting that type of film”.

The average video shop, more often than not, would allow the youth to rent the film, because no real regulations were in place. Maybe the Censors were not ready for the video boom, therefore not having a suitable system in place?

The Video Recordings Act 1984 (VRA)

At the suggestion of the National Viewers and Listeners Association the conservative MP Graham Bright introduced a private members Bill in the House of Commons in 1983, This was passed as the Video Recordings Act 1984 (VRA), which came into effect on 1st September 1985.

The Video Nasties and pre-certificated tapes were effectively cleared from our shelves with the introduction of the Act, which required every video tape to be submitted or re-submitted to the BBFC for a video classification (certification).

It was the BBFC’s task to avert prosecutions (under the OPA) for the industry that created it, which they do by censoring and specifying audience age limits, this would ensure all video material would be suitable for home viewing.

The New BBFC (British Board of Film Classification)

Under the Act, the BBFC was renamed the ‘British Board of Film Classification‘ (changing the last word from ‘Censors‘) and became responsible for the classification of both cinema and video releases. All video releases after 1st September 1985 had to comply with the VRA and be submitted for classification by the BBFC. Films released before that date had to be re-submitted for classification within the following three years.

The increased possibility of videos falling into the hands of children, required that film classification for video was a separate process from cinema classification, films which were passed uncut for cinema release were often cut for video. The supply of uncertified videos became a criminal offence, as did supplying 15 and 18 certificate videos to under aged people.