This just in from the "This is what it must've been like to be around during the decline of the Roman Empire" Department...
In short :
A movie ad campaign has normally tolerant/1st Amendmenty artist-types up in arms. And by artists, I don't mean "I build bottlecap unicorns 'cuz they're purty" or "the hostile hues illustrate society's diaphanous cacophony..."
No, these are Hollywood types. You know what I'm talking about : soulless, godless, child-molesting, gay-recruiting, family-destroying, flag-burning, multi-hyphenated traitors-to-the-mareken-way.
You ask : what could have even these folks saying enough?
It's the campaign for the movie "Captivity", which features 4 shots, each "artfully" depicting the following :
One :
- Image : a crying woman with a gloved hand over her mouth
- Headline : CAPTURE (caps are theirs, by the way.)
Two :
- Image : same woman, now in a cage, a bloody hand reaching out from behind the bars
- Headline : CONFINEMENT
Three :
- Image : Now she is battered/bandaged and wearing some kind of mask (ala Saw) with blood-filled tubes coming out of her nose
- Headline : TORTURE
Four :
- Image : woman, now dead, lying on her back, with one of her breasts exposed.
- Headline : TERMINATION
This campaign was posted in NY & LA, on billboards, bus-stops and cabs. A grassroots movement has arisen, seeking to (select one)
a) arrest the film-makers!
b) burn all of the copies of the film!
c) outlaw the movie!
Nope, it's D, none of the above.
The grassrooters are just quietly asking for the MPAA to enforce their own rules - which the film-makers broke when they posted this campaign despite it having been rejected as inappropriate for general public viewing. This would result in the movie's rating being "withdrawn", thereby leaving the film without a rating (such as G, PG, etc.) An unrated film is a bit of a commercial pariah, unlikely to be carried by most commercial theatres or advertised in most media outlets. This would, theoretically, dramatically reduce the film's ability to make money, which would, theoretically, negatively impact the associated studio and production company, which would, theoretically, serve as a deterrent to others thinking about doing the same thing. Theoretically.
The film-maker's response :
1 : They apologized for an unspecified error in process that led to the campaign being put up.
Um, anyone who has ever EVER worked in advertising or marketing or corporate communications (I'm guilty on all three counts, your honor) knows : the idea of a major media campaign making it through the complex production process without receiving multiple explicit approvals is ludicrous.
2 : They swore to take the pieces down immediately.
As of yesterday (the story broke last week) they have not removed them all. (Not that it's an easy task - but people do jump when told to with sufficient vehemence.)
3 : They exploited the situation :
- They replaced the ads with a new one that featured a scrawled "Capitivity was here" and the site url
- On the site, they are using links to stories on the public outcry as their new marketing (which of course include explicit descriptions of the offending campaign.)
I find it all depressing and overwhelming : that the filmmakers would lie (and not well : venality deserves better representation); that they would exploit the situation to their own gain; and that we, as a society, would even be having this conversation.
It leaves me with the following :
Porn is fine.
Body hair, body excretions, girls on boys, boys on boys, girls on girls on boys on boys (where is Dr. Seuss when you need him?) - whatever floats your boat, tickles your pickle, etc. It is fine if you want to watch it, me and WGP™, after all, have our own favorite flavors. Someone will happily make a new sales bin for "splatter" and "torture." But don't make me have to watch your kink. Don't sh*t where I eat, please.
We are not fine. (And I know these two conflict.)
I was raised in a liberal bunker somewhere in the South and was steeped in the concepts of
freedom of speech and pluralism (even the tricky stuff like matrix/matrices and focus/focii.) But for some reason this dustup ... (That's what it is : you know that this will blow over. You know that the MPAA will most likely not act. You know that people will go see it. You know the film will suck. You know that there will be a sequel. I do not kid myself about this.)
As I was saying, for some reason this has awoken in me a deep feeling that somehow, I should be doing, I don't know... something. (Surprisingly, I am finding it difficult to translate this feeling into any specific sort of action.) I have this feeling that we, as a people, (and I never ever use phrases like this, even in the privacy of my own home while watching reruns of The West Wing) have crossed a line somewhere and are headed for ... trouble.
I know that censorship is the slipperiest of slopes (well, next to having "just one more spoonful" of Ben & Jerry's Brownie Batter Ice Cream) and that "one man's tinder is another man's books", but damn.
I find it hard to believe that a country where we all immediately grok the terms tortureporn and splatterporn is "doing just fine, thank you." This same week found me reading the Entertainment Weekly story on the double-feature retro-exploitation flick Grindhouse (which I was planning on seeing.) It described how the MPAA had insisted they edit footage from one of the faux trailers due to its presentation of a "topless cheerleader being impaled on a knife while doing a split on a trampoline." Incredibly, the reporter went on to write "Believe it or not, it's even nastier than it sounds..." (And no, I'm not taking any bets as to just where that knife impales her. Or start the "why it was a her, not a him" conversation, valid as it may be.)
As previously confessed, I was a marketer, for all different kinds of organizations, big and small. The process for each basically worked the same : analyze your client's needs and objectives, analyze who their audiences are (demographically, behaviourally) and then create an approach that blends the needs of the advertiser with the needs of the audience in order to promote a desired effect/behaviour. This means, in essence, that you win your audience by giving them what they want. And that is the most disquieting thing : the ad agency didn't get it wrong.
Somewhere, somehow... this is what we want.
And I don't know what to do about that.
--------------
"Captivity" Ad Campaign
Remove the Rating" Campaign
Official "Captivity" Site