10 movies banned for being too violent
As time wears on, audiences have become more and more desensitised to on-screen violence, something that’s reflected in how movies previously deemed controversial are treated today.
Plenty of films that would have been given R-ratings in the 1950s and 1960s barely even merit a PG-13 today, while almost the entire catalogue of ‘video nasty’ favourites have eventually been released in their original form decades after causing widespread panic and outrage for their graphic content.
However, a handful of features remain in the realm of illegality, which only inspires dedicated and curious viewers to seek them out even more. Admittedly, there are countless reasons why any film can be banned, and it varies from country to country, but violence, more often than not, tends to be the most prevalent.
The following ten titles were all banned in multiple nations for the lengths to which they sought to push the boundaries of acceptability and live-action brutality, and in many cases, it took decades for them to even be considered for a wide-scale release.
10 movies banned for being too violent:
10. The Last House on the Left (Wes Craven, 1972)
Long before he’d established himself as a horror heavyweight, Wes Craven announced his arrival on the scene with a feature-length directorial debut that generated so much controversy it was deemed a must-see by the most dedicated gore-hounds.
Despite reports to the contrary, The Last House on the Left was never banned outright in Australia, although it enjoyed the next best thing after no distributors stepped in to acquire the rights, knowing full well that it didn’t stand a chance of making it past the local censorship board.
The harrowing tale of two teenage friends being subjected to a nightmarish ordeal by a band of escaped criminals – and the retribution dished out thereafter – was denied the right to screen in the United Kingdom, though. In fact, the original and unfiltered cut wasn’t approved and classified in the country until 2008, a full 36 years after its initial ban.
9. Maniac (William Lustig, 1980)
William Lustig’s Maniac may not have been lumped in with the rest of the so-called ‘video nasties’, but distributor Intervision’s decision to release the film on home video nonetheless saw circulated copies seized by the Greater Manchester and Lancashire police in the United Kingdom.
The blood-splattered killing spree orchestrated by co-writer and star Joe Spinell’s Frank Zito on the streets of New York City features plenty of gratuitous violence and brutal imagery, which saw it banned from screening in Great Britain for decades.
Refused a classification for a theatrical release in 1980 and once more denied a home video rollout in 1998, Maniac was eventually granted an 18 certificate in 2002 on the provision that 58 seconds be removed from the film, while the unedited edition had to wait until 2022 to be given the all-clear.
8. Zombie (Lucio Fulci, 1979)
In many cases, bans can turn out to be a blessing in disguise for a horror movie, as the morbid fascination with finding out what all the fuss is about drives viewers to make a point of tracking it down and discovering it for themselves, with Zombie one of many beneficiaries.
The uncut version was deemed to be in breach of the United Kingdom’s Obscene Publications Act to grant it ‘video nasty’ status, enhancing its mythos. Zombie needed almost two minutes of footage excised simply to be rated X, and the original edit had to wait until 2005 to be released in its entirety.
It was banned completely in Norway, too, with production company Variety Film leaning into the outrage by turning it into a key part of the movie’s appeal when marketing the film’s release in other parts of the world in an attempt to capitalise on its notoriety.
7. I Spit On Your Grave (Meir Zarchi, 1978)
Banned completely in Ireland, Norway, Iceland, and West Germany, refused certification in the United Kingdom, and heavily edited in Australia and New Zealand, I Spit On Your Grave was singled out as one of the most egregious examples of horror’s newfound penchant for pushing the envelope.
Heavily criticised for glorifying the reprehensible actions witnessed on-screen, there were even protests and calls for boycotts as it geared up for release in the rapidly dwindling number of countries that were even willing to play it on the big screen.
Canada issued orders for its individual provinces to decree for themselves whether or not it was allowed to be shown within their borders, while Australia eventually decided it needed to be banned in 1997 after it had been widely available for decades before that order was lifted in 2004. Known by reputation alone, I Spit On Your Grave being welcomed back into cinemas and living rooms and even saw it be remade in 2010, with the do-over spawning three sequels of its own.
6. The Bunny Game (Rodleen Getsic, 2010)
Even at a brief 76 minutes, The Bunny Game still found itself drawing the ire of the people tasked to figure out which movies are fit for public consumption, with the overriding consensus determining that it most definitely was not.
Co-writer and star Rodleen Getsic’s drug-addicted sex worker ends up being kidnapped and tortured by a truck driver who reveals himself to be a serial killer, with the content so off-putting the BBFC decreed it was “unacceptable to the public”.
More than a decade on, and The Bunny Game is still unavailable in the United Kingdom, with the ratings oversight committee stating in no uncertain terms that “to issue a certificate to this work – even if confined to adults – would be inconsistent with the Board’s Guidelines”, to hint that not even substantial re-edits would help its case.
5. A Serbian Film (Srđan Spasojević, 2010)
The most remarkable thing about A Serbian Film – which is saying something considering the infamous position it holds within the cinematic consciousness – is that the people who made it designed it with the intention of being a parody.
Created to take shots at the current state of the local industry, director Srđan Spasojević decided the best way to accomplish his goal would be to load the story full of unspeakable acts, disturbing scenes of violence, and a status as one of the most controversial movies ever made.
Banned in Australia, Brazil, New Zealand, South Korea, Malaysia, Singapore, and Spain, the head of a local film festival in the latter nation was even threatened with criminal charges for having the gall to screen it as part of the event. A Serbian Film certainly seized the headlines, but it was in seriously bad taste.
4. Grotesque (Kōji Shiraishi, 2009)
Not too far away from the core concept of the Saw franchise but dialled so far past 11 it beggars belief, Grotesque sees a doctor kidnap a young couple and force them into a torturously twisted game of survival in an effort to prove their love for one another and satiate his own sick desires.
Not just refusing to let it be shown, the BBFC would even take a shot at the substandard storytelling on display, banning Grotesque and approving fellow torture porn titles Saw and Hostel because they “contain a more developed narrative” which offered “more contextual justification for the strongest scenes”.
For his part, director Kōji Shiraishi was thrilled to discover his movie had been outlawed in the United Kingdom, telling Gigazine he was “delighted and flattered by this most expected reaction from the faraway country”. A decade and a half later, Grotesque still can’t be distributed in the UK without laws being broken.
3. Salò, or the 120 Days of Sodom (Pier Paolo Pasolini, 1975)
Casting a further shadow over a reputation that came engulfed by controversy, Salò, or the 120 Days of Sodom was released just three weeks after director Pier Paolo Pasolini was brutally murdered having been beaten, run over, and set on fire.
It did at least play for a short while in his native Italy before being pulled from cinemas, while it remains banned in various countries. In Australia, it was finally approved in 1993 before being banned again five years later, with New Zealand not relenting and granting the uncut version a home video release until 2001.
The story of corrupt libertines kidnapping a group of teenagers for the purpose of subjecting them to violence, torture, sadism, and emotional manipulation did find itself a noted defender in Martin Scorsese, who signed a legal document arguing for its artistic merit.
2. Cannibal Holocaust (Ruggero Deodato, 1980)
So believable in its depictions of violence that director Ruggero Deodato was arrested, charged with obscenity, and even accused of multiple murders that he captured on camera for the purpose of his film, Cannibal Holocaust is arguably the ultimate example of the ‘video nasty’.
Banned in the United States, Australia, New Zealand, Finland, Norway, and Iceland, among others, New Zealand would stick to its guns as late as 2006 by rejecting appeals to make Cannibal Holocaust available for rent or purchase in the country, maintaining its status as an illegal work of cinema.
Scenes of abuse, torture, animal cruelty, death, and all-round despair necessitated heavy edits in countries where Cannibal Holocaust hadn’t been denied altogether, with nearly six minutes removed ahead of its ultimate approval by the BBFC in 2001, which was then whittled down to only 15 seconds a decade later. Either way and in any form, Cannibal Holocaust endures as one of the most infamously vicious movies ever made.
1. Faces of Death (John Alan Schwartz, 1978)
Another depraved movie that leaned into its reputation and used it as a marketing ploy, Faces of Death was regularly billed as being ‘banned in 46 countries’, a tagline gleefully used to drum up interest by distributor Aquarius Releasing regardless of its veracity.
Australia, Norway, Finland, New Zealand, Germany, and the United Kingdom definitely did, though, with over two minutes of footage needing removed to secure it a home video debut in the latter nation, which didn’t happen until 2003, while it wasn’t until 2022 that Germany relented.
Framed in a documentarian style, Mark Carr’s Francis B. Gröss lives up to his name and then some by narrating numerous sequences of death and dismemberment. Some of it was created specifically for Faces of Death, but a lot of the footage is of very real death and its after-effects, so it was hardly going to fly under the radar and make it to an audience in its original form.
