Posters and the MPAA
Bloody Disgusting reports on the changes the Motion Picture Association have imposed on the first poster to come out for The Hills Have Eyes 2. The funny thing about the change is that, instead of portraying the victim with some small hope of escape as in the first try, the new poster has them dead already. The MPAA are a bunch of nihilists.
Like many people, I had no idea that the MPAA had jurisdiction over advertising. It turns out the MPAA can refuse to grant a film a rating unless the various advertising used to promote said production, print or otherwise, falls into line. Posterwire has a brief overview of the MPAA’s power in this kind of situation, particularly as it applies to the poster for Saw II, and just in case you think this applies to just horror movies, The Washington Post has a story on the controversy over a one-sheet for The Road to Guantanamo.
“If it’s a poster that’s hanging in a theater, anyone who walks into that theater, regardless of what movie they’ve come to see, will be exposed to it,” said (MPAA spokesperson) Osterberg. While she wouldn’t comment on the particular reason for the poster’s rejection, and while MPAA guidelines for what is acceptable in advertising aren’t made public, she did list some of the things that are not allowed: “depictions of violence, blood, people in jeopardy, drugs, nudity, profanity, people in frightening situations, disturbing or frightening scenes.”
The whole situation reminds me of the Comic Code Authority. A filmmaker doesn’t have to submit his film to the MPAA for a rating to get a theatrical release, but a failure to do so would result in the film being considered unrated, and for many media outlets and theatre chains that’s the equivalent of an “x” rating, which could seriously hamper a movie’s performance. I say could, because I wonder what would happen if a highly anticipated film, either a part of an already established franchise or with a popular director or actors, waived the right to be rated. I’m not just talking horror here, or a refusal to be rated based on pushing for heavily objectionable content, but just a straight out denial of the MPAA’s power based on principle. An experiment to see if being labelled unrated would be the kiss of death, not unlike the snubbing of the Comics Code Authority by most mainstream comic companies. What if Saw 4 were released unrated, or even You’ve Got Mail 2? Would theatres really refuse to show heavy-hitters, or would they take a look at the film in question and make a decision based upon their own conscience?
I receive the occassional missive chiding me for covering a topic that doesn’t particularly seem genre-related. I think it’s a fair concern, though anyone who doesn’t find pterodactyls receiving bjs slightly horrific should reconsider their stance on the subject. That said, based on the teaser trailers I had no intention of covering Hot Fuzz, the latest film from the team that brought us Shaun of the Dead. So what changed my mind? The 
