The New York Ripper (1982)

Classification Issues

• Violence
  • Scenes of strong and bloody violence include stabbings and throat cuttings. In one scene of sexualised violence, a nude woman is tied to a bed while the killer slices her stomach, breast, and eye with a razor blade.
• Sex
  • There are strong sex references and scenes of a sexual nature, including one depicting a live sex show.
• Additional issues
  • Other issues include sexualised nudity, strong language (‘f**k’), and drug references.

Initial submission to the BBFC

Lucio Fulci’s 1982 giallo thriller was submitted to the BBFC for cinema classification in December 1983. At that time, three of the director’s earlier horror films – The Beyond, House by the Cemetery, and Zombie Flesh Eaters – had been included on the Director of Public Prosecutions’ list of potentially obscene video titles.

The title of The New York Ripper and the film's theme were noted in the context of its planned UK release, which coincided with heightened public sensitivity following the conviction of serial murderer Peter Sutcliffe, the so-called ‘Yorkshire Ripper’.

Opinion was divided between the five Examiners who undertook the film's initial viewing, on 14 December 1983. Three argued the film could be cut for 18, while two felt it should be refused a classification outright. Those who argued the film should be rejected did so for two reasons – because they believed the level of cuts required would leave no viable product for the company to release, and because they were concerned that the film's perceived misogyny might have a corrupting effect on viewers. There were further viewings, during December 1983 and January 1984, but no greater consensus emerged amongst Examiners.

As a result, the BBFC's Director, James Ferman – who himself favoured refusal of classification – referred the film to the BBFC's President, Lord Harlech. 

Lord Harlech concluded that: “Two years ago it might have been worth trying to cut this very heavily for 18. But now, the law of obscenity would seem to catch this material squarely.” Harlech therefore advised that the BBFC should monitor court cases currently pending against some of the so-called 'video nasties' before reaching a final conclusion.

When the UK distributor of horror title Nightmares in a Damaged Brain was found guilty at the Old Bailey shortly afterwards (in early February 1984), and jailed for distributing obscene material, it seemed clear that The New York Ripper could be at potentially equal risk of being found obscene. On 15 February 1984, James Ferman wrote to the film’s UK distributor advising that the film could not be classified for cinema exhibition because it was likely the courts would find against it.

At that time, it was still possible to release a film on video without a BBFC rating, as the Video Recordings Act 1984 did not come fully into effect until 1 September 1985. James Ferman warned the distributor that though it was possible, releasing the film on video would only increase the risk of an obscenity prosecution and conviction, because of the greater potential for a film getting into the hands of children.

The recent conviction and imprisonment of the UK distributor of Nightmares in a Damaged Brain for offences related to distribution was a relevant contextual factor when considering the potential legal risks associated with The New York Ripper. Ferman noted that the distributor could still release the film on video, or seek local authority approval for cinema exhibition, despite the BBFC’s assessment that any form of release carried a risk of the film being judged an obscene publication.

In light of this, Ferman determined that it would be inappropriate for the BBFC to return the film to the distributor. Returning the film could have exposed the distributor to legal risk associated with possession of an obscene work with intent to commercially supply, and could also have implicated the BBFC in facilitating such distribution. Consequently, in an unusual step, the BBFC informed the distributor that the submitted print would be re-exported to the original rights holders in Italy, and advised that any additional copies in the distributor’s possession should likewise be disposed of.

Ferman’s actions occurred within a period in which UK distributors were being prosecuted and, in some cases, imprisoned for their involvement with comparable films. Within this context, a narrative developed suggesting that The New York Ripper was considered so exceptionally extreme that all prints were required to be removed from the UK. While this account has been widely circulated, BBFC records indicate that the decision was grounded in considerations of legal risk, including the potential exposure of the UK distributor to prosecution.

Video classification

The film returned to the BBFC in 2001, after James Ferman had retired. Based on new published Classification Guidelines, the result of large-scale public consultation, the film was classified 18, after 22 seconds of cuts to material involving the mutilation of a woman's breasts. 

In 2012, focus groups participating in BBFC research into audience reactions to sexual and sadistic violence watched the cut material. They concluded that the film and its effects appeared dated and that it was not particularly shocking compared to modern films. However, The New York Ripper has not been sent back for reclassification since that time.