Siteadmin, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
125,794
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 10:
Line 10: − + Line 40:
Line 40: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Motion Picture Production Code (view source)
Revision as of 04:03, June 4, 2007
, 04:03, June 4, 2007no edit summary
Hollywood responded by forming the Motion Picture Production and Distribution Association and pledging to write a code governing film content. The producers did this to avoid having the content of their projects come under federal law. The first president of the MPPDA was [[William Hays]].
Hollywood responded by forming the Motion Picture Production and Distribution Association and pledging to write a code governing film content. The producers did this to avoid having the content of their projects come under federal law. The first president of the MPPDA was [[William Hays]].
Hays tried for eight years to enforce a rough moral guideline on film content, but the producers paid him little heed. But with the invention of talking pictures in 1927, the situation became more urgent, and the producers finally agreed to write a formal code. This the MPDAA did in 1930. They did not ''enforce'' this code until the middle of 1934, when [[Joseph I. Breen]] was named to head the new Production Code Administration. With this appointment, and a new rule requiring all films to obtain a rating from the PCA, enforcement was definite and consistent.<ref name=Brandeis>Doherty, Thomas, [http://my.brandeis.edu/news/item?news_item_id=105052&show_release_date=1/ The Code Before 'Da Vinci'], ''The Washington Post'', Saturday, May 20, 2006, page A23; quoted in ''Brandeis News'' and retrieved from its on-line archive on April 6, 2007</ref>
Hays tried for eight years to enforce a rough moral guideline on film content, but the producers paid him little heed. But with the invention of talking pictures in 1927, the situation became more urgent, and the producers finally agreed to write a formal code. This the MPDAA did in 1930. They did not ''enforce'' this code until the middle of 1934, when [[Joseph I. Breen]] was named to head the new Production Code Administration. With this appointment, and a new rule requiring all films to obtain a rating from the Production Code Administration (PCA), enforcement was definite and consistent.<ref name=Brandeis>Doherty, Thomas, [http://my.brandeis.edu/news/item?news_item_id=105052&show_release_date=1/ The Code Before 'Da Vinci'], ''The Washington Post'', Saturday, May 20, 2006, page A23; quoted in ''Brandeis News'' and retrieved from its on-line archive on April 6, 2007</ref>
== Workings of the Code ==
== Workings of the Code ==
In 1968, the now-renamed Motion Picture Producers of America abandoned the Code completely in favor of their present ratings system.
In 1968, the now-renamed Motion Picture Producers of America abandoned the Code completely in favor of their present ratings system.
== Supreme Court Decisions ==
The [[U.S. Supreme Court]] began in May 1967 to invalidate numerous local laws and decisions that had been limiting pornographic materials. In just 13 months, the [[Warren Court]] rendered 27 decisions in favor of more pornography.<ref>Per Curiam unsigned decisions in favor of pornography
<br>1. Redmond v. United States, 384 U.S. 264 (1966)
<br>2. Potomac News Co. v. United States, 389 U.S. 47 (1967)
<br>3. Conner v. Hammond, 389 U.S. 48 (1967)
<br>4. Central Magazine Sales, Ltd. v. United States, 389 U.S. 50 (1967)
<br>5. Chance v. California, 389 U.S. 89 (1967)
<br>6. Keney v. New York, 388 U.S. 440 (1967)
<br>7. Friedman v. New York, 388 U.S. 441 (1967)
<br>8. Ratner v. California, 388 U.S. 442 (1967)
<br>9. Cobert v. New York, 388 U.S. 443 (1967)
<br>10. Sheperd v. New York, 388 U.S. 444 (1967)
<br>11. Avansino v. New York, 388 U.S. 446 (1967)
<br>12. Aday v. United States, 388 U.S. 447 (1967)
<br>13. Corinth Publications, Inc. v. Wesberry, 388 U.S. 448 (1967)
<br>14. Rosenbloom v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 450 (1967)
<br>15. A Quantity of Copies of Books v. Kansas, 388 U.S. 452 (1967)
<br>16. Schackman v. California, 388 U.S. 454 (1967)
<br>17. Books, Inc. v. United States, 388 U.S. 449 (1967)
<br>18. Mazes v. Ohio, 388 U.S. 453 (1967)
<br>19-21. Redrup v. New York, 386 U.S. 767 (1967) (three cases)
<br>22. Felton v. Pensacola, 390 U.S. 340 (1968)
<br>23. Rabeck v. New York, 391 U.S. 462 (1968)
<br>24. I. M. Amusement Corp. v. Ohio, 389 U.S. 573 (1968)
<br>25. Robert Arthur Management Corp. v. Tennessee, 389 U.S. 578 (1968)
<br>26. Lee Art Theatre, Inc. v. Virginia, 392 U.S. 636 (1968)
<br>27. Henry v. Louisiana, 392 U.S. 655 (1968)
<br>28. Teitel Film Corp. v. Cusack, 390 U.S. 139 (1968)
<br>29. Carlos v. New York, 396 U.S. 119 (1969)
<br>30. Von Cleef v. New Jersey, 395 U.S. 814 (1969)
<br>31. Bloss v. Dykema, 398 U.S. 278 (1970)
<br>32. Cain v. Kentucky, 397 U.S. 319 (1970)
<br>33. Walker v. Ohio, 398 U.S. 434 (1970)
<br>34. Hoyt v. Minnesota, 399 U.S. 524 (1970)
<br>Signed decision:
<br>Interstate Circuit, Inc. v. Dallas, 390 U.S. 676 (1968) (two cases)</ref>
These decisions unleashed a flood of pornography into the marketplace and largely prevented local governments from stopping it. In 1965 the Best Picture was the ''Sound of Music'', a family film enjoyed by millions to this day. In 1969 the Best Picture was ''Midnight Cowboy'', a depressing pornographic film that had an X rating and has long been forgotten.
== References ==
== References ==