National Catholic Office for Motion Pictures (NCOMP)
Classification
A: Morally unobjectionable B: Morally objectionable in part for all C: Condemned by the Legion of Decency. The A classification was divided: A-I: Suitable for all audiences A-II: Suitable for adults; later - after the introduction of A-II, classifications A-III and A-IV were added. A-III: Suitable for adults only A-IV: suitable for adults with reservations {4] (not sure about the dates) Film reports during NCOMPs more influential reign, were filled out by members and sent to Mrs. James F. Looram for and official classification. The film report was a combination of multiple choice and short answer. [3]
Decline
The Legion of Decency underwent a name change in 1965 and was newly known as the National Catholic Office for Motion Pictures (NCOMP).
Before the name change occurred the “C” (or condemned) classification was proving to be less of an audience deterrent than in previous years beginning with that 1961 film Lolita. This film was based on an extremely controversial book about a man having relations with a 12-year-old girl name Lolita. The Legion of Decency attempted to stop production, but failed. Stanley Kubrick directed the film and Vladimir Nabokov, the author of the book, made adjustments to Lolita’s age and some of the script to make the narrative less provocative. Even so, Kubrick and Nabakov were forced to comply with censors in taking out elements in the film in order for it to be released. The Legion of Decency condemned the film, but the movie’s famous director and controversial topic led audiences to view the film. The film itself wasn’t a major box office success, but it showed how the Legion of Decency was losing their grips on power over the industry. The “C” classification started to become a signifier for controversy and got the attention of younger audiences. After NCOMP’s establishment in 1965, its classifications were seen as inconsistent. The group began holding annual awards for films that express moral values the year they changed their name. In these awards, NCOMP named Darling as the best film for mature audiences. This film contained themes previously condemned by the Legion of Decency. This code and name change from just the previous year, highlighted a sort of identity shift for NCOMP. NCOMP was attempting to broaden audience’s tastes to contemporary themes by recognizing moral themes within a not-so-moral context. Controversial films such as Who’s Scared of Virginia Woolf, that contained an obscene amount of profanity and suggestiveness, were given an A-IV classification which jumpstarted the catholic community’s rejection of NCOMPs guide [1].
NCOMP was caught between the backlash of their code revisions and expectations of their community. Confusion seemed seemed to plague NCOMP as they became more free in their analysis. Earlier in the NCOMP reign, the film Pawnbroker(1964) was Condemned on the sole justification of nudity when a couple of years later the film Hawaii(1966) with the same type of nudity and much more controversial factors was given an A-III classification [1]. When the Sydney Lumet, the director of Pawnbroker agreed to adjust the nudity scene, NCOMP gave the movie a classification of A-IV [1]. The nudity in Pawnbroker was essential to the character development in the film. Hawaii contained incestuous themes, along with a negative depiction of Christian missionaries. The topless woman in Pawnbroker was black while the indigenous woman in Hawaii was socially seen as more attractive and contextually appropriate to the condition of the Hawaiian people before white settlers came. [2] These decisions were seen as contextual to those making them, but problematic to those witnessing it. Secular audiences and production teams wanted NCOMP to see the controversial themes as artistic and essential to productions while the Catholic community was outraged, disgusted and disappointed in some of their decisions to comply. The late 60s NCOMP was losing their influence and a C classification was seen as irrelevant to audiences, producers and distributors alike.