'Captivity' Finds Its Rating Suspended

Wow, a penalty on a movie. Is this fair?

By: Brad Brevet
Published: Friday, March 30th 2007 at 9:43 PM

If you have been following the mayhem behind the controversial Captivity advertisements that raised such a ruckus over 10 days ago then you will be interested to hear what the MPAA has decided to do about the unapproved billboard ads (previewed above). The Motion Picture Association of America, Inc. today issued a month-long suspension of the ratings process for Captivity, which is going to put the film's release date in jeopardy, currently set at May 18. The official statement reads as follows:

The action comes in response to After Darks’ prominent display in both Los Angeles and New York of advertising that the MPAA had explicitly disapproved as inappropriate for general public viewing. The production company and its distributors will also be required to clear not only all promotional materials but also the locations and venues of all advertising buys relating to the film, marking the first time that sanction has been imposed by the MPAA.

“The sanctions in this case are severe because this was an unacceptable and flagrant violation of MPAA rules and procedures,” said Marilyn Gordon, Senior Vice President of Advertising. “After Dark Films presented their ads for approval, as all companies are required to do if they wish to receive an MPAA rating. However, their ads were summarily rejected for their graphic depiction of a woman’s torture and death. Yet After Dark proceeded to post them on billboards anyway, and these ads appeared in some of the most prominent public locations in Los Angeles and New York. It is now up to After Dark Films to restore good faith with the MPAA.”

So, that means the MPAA will take a look at the film and apply a rating, most likely, in the beginning weeks of May. Granted, After Dark can still move forward with a May 18 release and the film will most likely receive an R-rating and the audience won't be swayed either way. However, this is an odd little sequence of events that is really going to place some power in someone's hands and I think the MPAA thought about this already.

First off, After Dark's last release, The Abandoned, only did $1.3 million at the box-office. It should be considered that film didn't have any stars such as Elisha Cuthbert who stars in Captivity but it is comprable in scale and size. Next we have Captivity, which has already received some bad buzz such as this user review, this blog post and this article in the LA Times.

My guess is that the MPAA saw this as a chance to take a shot at a movie that was probably not going to make much money at the box-office in the first place and would probably be raped by critics provided it is even shown to a critical audience. Therefore this means we have what will be considered a flop on our hands that can be blamed on bad marketing tactics and people will assume it means you can't play games with the MPAA.

However, what if this was a Steven Spielberg film, or Scorsese, or Eastwood? Chances are there would have been no punishment, at least not a punishment that would effect the film's planned release, too much money is at stake.

So, is this a case of a double standard? Honestly I think it is a bit harsh, but I am pretty desensitized to the stuff used in the marketing so I can't speak for those with weaker stomachs and the need to whine and complain. For more on this issue The Hollywood Reporter has up a good article on it here.

Also, there is an interview with Hostel director Eli Roth up over at VH-1 in which he is quoted saying, "We're in a really violent wave and I hope it never ends. Hopefully we'll get to a point where there are absolutely no restrictions on any kind of violence in movies." I would like to hear his opinion on the advertising because I am sure Captivity's actual content is probably less intense than the marketing.