Took my mother to see There Will Be Blood tonight at a Regal Cinema. During the 'Regal First Look' segment they had a preview for some new film from the guy behind 40 Year Old Virgin and Knocked Up.
I was quite shocked to witness three minutes that consisted of a couple sex scenes, full frontal male nudity, a joke about ass play, and a crude gag that resulted in a joke about a pearl necklace.
I know some people will say, "It was an R rated movie, it's fair game." I really disagree. TWBB was Rated R for very minor language and two brief violent scenes. I know parents who took their kids to it, because the content was rather mild. I think showing crude sex jokes in front of a film that has no such content is quite tasteless.
Anyone see this crap from Regal yet? I honestly think if they have to show explicit previews, the content needs to match the content of the film. I'd imagine some people would be upset going to see a raunchy sex comedy and getting a brutally gory preview beforehand.
Matthew Chmiel
03-03-08, 02:55 AM
Seriously?
Like I mean seriously?
Regal has been doing this for years.
They have three-to-four "First Look" spots going at a single time.
One devoted specifically to G and PG rated movies.
One or two devoted specifically to PG and PG-13 rated movies.
One devoted specifically for R, NC-17, and unrated movies.
I think your argument is bullshit. If you don't know the content of the film prior to going in, you damn well know what it's rated.
I, myself, who loved There Will Be Blood and I am looking forward to Forgetting Sarah Marshall. And this is coming from someone who had parents that took me to raunchy sex comedies theatrically when I was 13.
What your proposing is almost censorship and questions the validity of filmgoers as you feel that the specific audience going to see There Will Be Blood won't enjoy any other genre, especially a comedy with adult material.
Why can't a theater promote a red-band trailer theatrically with what is an R rated movie?
In a nutshell, the film in question has an R rating for a specific reason and nobody under the age of 17 is admitted unless they have an adult with them.
And the horror trailer before a sex comedy? Cut me a fucking break. That would be gold to a majority of the people on this board, myself included (hell -- it may be one of the reasons why I enjoy Club Dread).
zombiezilla
03-03-08, 07:07 AM
Damn right, Matthew.
Jay G.
03-03-08, 08:07 AM
I was quite shocked to witness three minutes that consisted of a couple sex scenes, full frontal male nudity, a joke about ass play, and a crude gag that resulted in a joke about a pearl necklace..
The "pearl necklace" gag is in the green band trailer for this film too.
RichC2
03-03-08, 09:16 AM
full frontal male nudity? Thankfully must have seen a different red band for it, don't think I've seen penis in a red band trailer before.
And yeah, the pearl necklace gag isn't explicit at all and was by far the funniest gag in the ads (and that joke airs on regular tv ads).
I get what you're saying, though, as if you go to an R-rated movie thats rated R for violence and language you may not want to see explicit sex before it starts and/or vise versa. Complaining would probably get them pulled completely before they'd start taking the time to sort the trailers like that, though. And that would suck (though I've never seen a red band trailer in theaters before, including Regals).
The funniest combo to me in recent times was them showing the Sex in the City trailer before The Golden Compass.
DVD Josh
03-03-08, 09:22 AM
Well considering the several gruesome deaths in There Will Be Blood, I'd say you should not be so surprised.
And no full frontal in a preview, get serious.
Cosmic Bus
03-03-08, 10:01 AM
I've never seen a single one of these "First Look" trailers at the Regal theater here. I guess it isn't surprising, though, considering ours is one of the worst theaters in the country.
The Bus
03-03-08, 10:49 AM
After There Will Be Blood, did the parents take the kids bowling?
Kicker_of_Elves
03-03-08, 11:43 AM
Probably took him bowling and got him a milkshake too.
RichC2
03-03-08, 12:22 PM
Probably took him bowling and got him a milkshake too.
Only so they could distract him long enough to abandon him.
Giles
03-03-08, 12:25 PM
hmmm... I should frequent Regal more often ... :D
Peep
03-03-08, 12:35 PM
I think your argument is bullshit. If you don't know the content of the film prior to going in, you damn well know what it's rated.
I, myself, who loved There Will Be Blood and I am looking forward to Forgetting Sarah Marshall. And this is coming from someone who had parents that took me to raunchy sex comedies theatrically when I was 13.
What your proposing is almost censorship and questions the validity of filmgoers as you feel that the specific audience going to see There Will Be Blood won't enjoy any other genre, especially a comedy with adult material.
Why can't a theater promote a red-band trailer theatrically with what is an R rated movie.
In a nutshell, the film in question has an R rating for a specific reason and nobody under the age of 17 is admitted unless they have an adult with them.
I think this response is "bullshit" and totally agree with the original poster.
Studios post why a movie is rated "R' for a reason. It's to warn people what to expect. As you yourself said - "...the film in question has an R rating for a specific reason..." If parents choose to let their kids, for instance, see an R-rated movie because of these reasons and a much more explicit trailer is shown in advance, it robs parents of the ability to determine what is appropriate for their kids to see.
Tarantino
03-03-08, 12:43 PM
Disagree. Rated 'R' is rated 'R'. If you bring your kids to a rated 'R' movie, it's on you.
If you're scared that a 'bad' preview might come up, well...take your kids to PG13 movies or wait until that flick hits DVD.
= J
maxfisher
03-03-08, 01:02 PM
While I think it's a bit silly for an adult to get up in arms over seeing a penis, I have to agree with the OP on this. If you go to Regal Cinema's website and click on a movie, it takes you to a page that includes the reason for that movie's rating. So when I click on Vince Vaughn's Wild West Comedy Show, it says there's going to be 'pervasive language and some sex-related humor'. If a parent reads that and decides to take their 14-year-kid to see the movie, they shouldn't have to worry about seeing, say, the rape scene from The Hills Have Eyes.
The whole purpose of the ratings explanations is to allow people to make informed decisions about what they or their kids are going to see. If the explanations are posted by a theater, they shouldn't circumvent their purpose.
Patman
03-03-08, 01:37 PM
If the red-band trailers bother the OP so much, go ahead and mark some seats as occupied (put a jacket or sweater, something to show the seats are occupado) simply make the kids wait outside until after the trailers are done, and then let them back in when the main feature starts. Problem solved. Don't expect the world to cater to your own world view, take control of the situation, don't sit back and get offended when things don't happen your way.
Rated R is rated R. No theater is going to make a big distinction and only show Rated R trailers for similarly rated R flicks with the same category of rated R material (like films with mainly graphic language and violence, vs. films with graphic sexual content, both types of films are rated R). Rated R encompasses all sorts of stuff (the F-bomb used for fornication purposes, graphic depictions of sexual situations, higher nudity levels, graphic violence shown (not simply implied), graphic depiction of drug use, etc.). Be a parent and don't take your young kids to Rated R movies because you did't want to pay for a babysitter to watch over them if you wanted to go out and see a Rated R film.
PopcornTreeCt
03-03-08, 01:38 PM
I can't imagine them showing that in First Look preview. They always seemed more tame than actual trailers.
Matthew Chmiel
03-03-08, 01:41 PM
Rated R is rated R. No theater is going to make a big distinction and only show Rated R trailers for similarly rated R flicks with the same category of rated R material (like films with mainly graphic language and violence, vs. films with graphic sexual content, both types of films are rated R). Rated R encompasses all sorts of stuff (the F-bomb used for fornication purposes, graphic depictions of sexual situations, higher nudity levels, graphic violence shown (not simply implied), graphic depiction of drug use, etc.). Be a parent and don't take your young kids to Rated R movies because you did't want to pay for a babysitter to watch over them if you wanted to go out and see a Rated R film.
Exactly. :thumbsup:
SuckaMC
03-03-08, 01:43 PM
I've seen this "first look" and there is NO full fronal. He opens his towel, but its shown from the waist up, then he is shown sitting nude on the couch, with his legs hiding his penis. Sorry man, you can't add stuff to make it sound worse to make your point.
The Bus
03-03-08, 01:59 PM
I bet the OP is making things worse than they seem. I've only seen full frontal in two movies last year (Eastern Promises and Walk Hard) and I would highly, highly doubt that they would show actual cock during the previews.
devilshalo
03-03-08, 02:33 PM
Segel is bare assed when he's looking away and crying. The outrageous sex is with a bikini clad Kristen Bell in a number of positions that covers both their genitals.
I've seen worse on FX. Meh.
This reminds me of the family that sat down to watch American Beauty. Looked like Mom, Grandma and 3 kids under 12. They got into the first 4 minutes and promptly left after Spacey is shown jerking off in the shower. -ohbfrank- "Hello, it's rated R!" -rolleyes-
The Bus
03-03-08, 02:46 PM
This reminds me of the family that sat down to watch American Beauty. Looked like Mom, Grandma and 3 kids under 12. They got into the first 4 minutes and promptly left after Spacey is shown jerking off in the shower. -ohbfrank- "Hello, it's rated R!" -rolleyes-
Someone left during a showing of Romero's Diary of the Dead immediately after the scene where:
one of the zombies has their eyes liquefied and popped
That's like me leaving during Step Up 2 because there's a lot of dancing.
Fanboy
03-03-08, 03:23 PM
Here is the red band trailer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkBOHHss2OM). No full-frontal, except in the OPs mind.
redrum
03-03-08, 03:33 PM
lol @ taking kids to TWBB.
dcprules
03-03-08, 03:40 PM
The funniest combo to me in recent times was them showing the Sex in the City trailer before The Golden Compass.
Actually, in a couple of months, that might not be too funny. I think they are aiming for Sex in the City to be a PG-13. I remember when seeing The Golden Compass there was a preview for Semi-Pro
I really don't find it offensive considering the movie beforehand. Yes, if you were going to see The Spiderwick Chronicles and you see the spot for Forgetting Sarah Marshall than that would be quite a different story but not when the movie is There Will Be Blood. It's rated R and it only makes sense to include R rated trailer on an R rated movie.
Side note: Really looking forward to Forgetting Sarah Marshall. It's Marshall (How I Met Your Mother) and Veronica Mars in the same movie, it's gotta be good.
DVD Josh
03-03-08, 03:43 PM
I've seen this "first look" and there is NO full fronal. He opens his towel, but its shown from the waist up, then he is shown sitting nude on the couch, with his legs hiding his penis. Sorry man, you can't add stuff to make it sound worse to make your point.
I knew he was making that up.
RoyalTea
03-03-08, 03:51 PM
graphic violence and explicit language = good
a boob = bad
jjcool
03-03-08, 03:54 PM
Wow. What are the chances they would show a R-rated preview before a R-rated movie? How dare they?
Boba Fett
03-03-08, 04:12 PM
Yeah, I retract what I said about full-frontal. I thought it was a bit more graphic than it actually was.
Boba Fett
03-03-08, 04:26 PM
While I think it's a bit silly for an adult to get up in arms over seeing a penis, I have to agree with the OP on this. If you go to Regal Cinema's website and click on a movie, it takes you to a page that includes the reason for that movie's rating. So when I click on Vince Vaughn's Wild West Comedy Show, it says there's going to be 'pervasive language and some sex-related humor'. If a parent reads that and decides to take their 14-year-kid to see the movie, they shouldn't have to worry about seeing, say, the rape scene from The Hills Have Eyes.
The whole purpose of the ratings explanations is to allow people to make informed decisions about what they or their kids are going to see. If the explanations are posted by a theater, they shouldn't circumvent their purpose.
Thank you for supporting the point I was trying to make. The MPAA added the RATED FOR tagline to ratings for a specific purpose.
I know people who if they saw a Red-Band Trailer for No Country for Old Men before Superbad would be upset by the violence.
The trailer wouldn't have bothered me before a film with certain content. I also thought it was stupid that a preview for the remake of Prom Night aired before TWBB as well.
I don't think its censorship for previews to be appropriate to the film they're attached to.
There was a big hulabaloo a few years back over Green-Band trailers for PG-13 and R rated films attached to G and PG rated films.
So I don't see the difference in saying an R-Rated sex comedy doesn't belong with an R-Rated art film that has a couple shocking moments of violence compared to saying a PG-13 or R action film shouldn't be advertised before a family film.
Peep
03-03-08, 05:39 PM
Rated R is rated R. No theater is going to make a big distinction and only show Rated R trailers for similarly rated R flicks with the same category of rated R material (like films with mainly graphic language and violence, vs. films with graphic sexual content, both types of films are rated R). Rated R encompasses all sorts of stuff (the F-bomb used for fornication purposes, graphic depictions of sexual situations, higher nudity levels, graphic violence shown (not simply implied), graphic depiction of drug use, etc.).
I continue to think that it's pointless to describe why an R-rated movie is R-rated if the previews shown before it can show all sort of unrelated rudeness. Obviously the people who thought the explanations behind why an R-rated movie is R-rated don't agree that "R-rated is R-rated".
Be a parent and don't take your young kids to Rated R movies because you did't want to pay for a babysitter to watch over them if you wanted to go out and see a Rated R film.
roll eyes, stick out tongue, ignore ridiculous comment
dhmac
03-03-08, 05:52 PM
I don't have any problems with the trailer, but it is an odd one to show before There Will Be Blood because the main target audience for these two movies is very different.
Julie Walker
03-03-08, 05:53 PM
What I'm offended with from that trailer is......actresses wearing bras and skirts while having sex to shield nudity!
Someone needs to get real when it comes to sex in film. And say,if you're making an R rated film with sex in it,nudity is required,no questions about it!
This is the one thing that really annoys the hell out of me about modern films. Especially so called 'raunchy' flicks.
zekeburger1979
03-03-08, 07:15 PM
What I'm offended with from that trailer is......actresses wearing bras and skirts while having sex to shield nudity!
Someone needs to get real when it comes to sex in film. And say,if you're making an R rated film with sex in it,nudity is required,no questions about it!
This is the one thing that really annoys the hell out of me about modern films. Especially so called 'raunchy' flicks.
I guess Julie and I both want to see Kristen Bell naked! :)
Why can't theaters simply adopt a policy of only showing same-rated trailers with the movies? For example, if they want to show a trailer for an R-rated movie, whether it's green or red band, it can only be shown before a R-rated movie. Same with PG-13, PG and G. It's common sense which means it won't be implemented. :)
dtcarson
03-03-08, 07:30 PM
So now when people actually try to research the film they're going to see, and see if it's appropriate for their family *based on the content of that film*, that's no longer good enough? ie, they're actually trying to *be a parent*. Apparently they now have to be aware of the ancillary viewing, which they may have no warning or knowledge of. There's R and then there's R. Just like in videogames, there's M and then there's M, some R/M i'd share with some people and others I wouldn't, based on the specific content of that title.
Apparently "be a parent" now means "either leave your kids at home, always" or "hey, whatever they see they'll see, your efforts mean nothing."
I don't think it's "censorship" at all to request certain trailers not being played in front of certain movies or for the theater to make that decision.
Disclaimer: I've not seen TWBB or this "red ribbon" trailer thing. I see a movie in the theater roughly once a year.
Neil M.
03-03-08, 07:44 PM
I don't have kids nor do I care about content in movies but I have to agree with the OP. The only purpose of the ratings system is so that parents can decide whether or not it is appropriate for their children. Ratings are irrelevant to me but they should mean something if they're going to be used. Movie previews should reflect the content of the film. I don't have a Regal cinema by me but my theater shows movies similar in content with what is being shown.
Why anyone would disagree with the OP is beyond me.
devilshalo
03-03-08, 07:58 PM
I don't have kids nor do I care about content in movies but I have to agree with the OP. The only purpose of the ratings system is so that parents can decide whether or not it is appropriate for their children. Ratings are irrelevant to me but they should mean something if they're going to be used. Movie previews should reflect the content of the film. I don't have a Regal cinema by me but my theater shows movies similar in content with what is being shown.
Why anyone would disagree with the OP is beyond me.
http://www.mpaa.org/_images/restricted.gif
An R-rated motion picture, in the view of the Rating Board, contains some adult material. An R-rated motion picture may include adult themes, adult activity, hard language, intense or persistent violence, sexually-oriented nudity, drug abuse or other elements, so that parents are counseled to take this rating very seriously. Children under 17 are not allowed to attend R-rated motion pictures unaccompanied by a parent or adult guardian. Parents are strongly urged to find out more about R-rated motion pictures in determining their suitability for their children. Generally, it is not appropriate for parents to bring their young children with them to R-rated motion pictures.
:shrug:
Neil M.
03-03-08, 08:09 PM
You make my point devilshalo. Generally it is not appropriate for children but when it is, you should not expect to see content that you are trying to avoid.
If I don't want to see graphic violence in a movie, I should not have to see it in the preview before the movie. It defeats the whole purpose of the ratings system.
The ratings system has moved beyond just the letter rating. And I'm perfectly fine with that.
Brack
03-03-08, 08:20 PM
I guess I was a freak of nature and could handle R-rated movies when I was a kid. They didn't turn me into some oversexed nincompoop.
devilshalo
03-03-08, 08:21 PM
But this generality is what the movie theater is following in its advertising prior to the movie. If this had been shown in front of Ratatouille or the Indiana Jones and the Last crusade, then, yeah, there's a problem, as it is not ratings appropriate for those two films. But if you're in a ratings related film, then I don't see a problem. TWBB could have the next SAW movie advertising in front of it, but it's more appropriate since it is generally ratings specific.
Neil M.
03-03-08, 08:28 PM
The ratings system is not only the letter rating. It now contains the listing of content in a movie. If the previews don't follow the list of content, then it really serves no purpose. I agree with you if all we got was a letter rating but that is not the current system.
devilshalo
03-03-08, 08:55 PM
Then I guess it's a matter of personal tastes and values. If I had a child under 17, for something like TWBB, I don't think I'd take them if they were under the age of 14. At which age, I think they could handle a trailer for Forgetting Sarah Marhsall.
Of course, I was 11 when my father took me to see '10' and my uncle took me to see Alien. At 12, I had my mom take me to see Richard Pryor Live on the Sunset Strip. :shrug:
Julie Walker
03-03-08, 09:15 PM
I guess Julie and I both want to see Kristen Bell naked! :)
Yes:)
And I'm totally honest about the lack of nudity issue though. I think if an actor or actress takes a role that requires nudity and refuses to do so. They should not get the job!
I can understand not seeing much nudity in non-R rated love scenes and stuff like that. But when this pathetic prudish attitude slips into R rated sex comedies/dramas. It just annoys me to no end.
Especially if a film is supposed to be 'free spirited/carefree/outrageous'...and or 'realistic'. Clothed sex scenes makes little sense and contradicts the atmosphere/intent of the film.
Why can't theaters simply adopt a policy of only showing same-rated trailers with the movies? For example, if they want to show a trailer for an R-rated movie, whether it's green or red band, it can only be shown before a R-rated movie. Same with PG-13, PG and G. It's common sense which means it won't be implemented. :)
That makes no sense. Since it's called marketing,and by limiting to only similar rated films. That limits the amount of people who will see them. And what to do about tv advertisements then?
Also the OP is only upset at a 'red bad' trailer,not a 'green band' trailer. So that doesn't really solve the problem. And since the 'green' trailer would also contain raunchy humor. It's a bit strange that he thinks a 'red' trailer shown only before an R rated film somehow 'crosses the line'.
And the content listings are only to give an idea of what the film may contain. BUT you can't assume that 'language' or 'violence' will somehow mean it is an 'ok' 'tame' film compared to others. Since some films can deal with pretty mature subject matter despite 'not so bad looking' ratings descriptions.
And 'red' trailers are only allowed to be shown before R rated films. So as rare as they are in theaters. Don't be surprised if you see one while going to an R rated film. If you don't like it,tough luck.
Though personally I find most 'restricted' trailers less effective at marketing than the 'green' trailers. Since the 'restricted' ones spoil to much of a film(Aliens Vs Predator shows everything!) and in case of comedies,destroys many jokes by running them into the ground. Whereas the 'green' trailers will use clever editing to deliver puns without spoiling it all.
But I don't think they should be forbidden from being previewed before R rated films. Nor do I think theaters should list what trailers(and version of trailer) are shown before a film. Nor should they try to limit the trailers shown to similarly rated films.
dtcarson
03-03-08, 09:24 PM
That's exactly right.
Parent decides, based on his personal tastes and values, his Child age X can see Movie A, said parent having educated himself on the content of the movie thanks to the rating, the writeups, the content descriptors, maybe even reviews. This is the Educated and Involved Parent, that all propagators of filth and anti "censorship" fanatics claim to want.
Parent and child go to the movie--together (since "under 17 must be accompanied by an adult"). Again, family involvement. No, it's not playing baseball with the Kids 'n' Dads team, but it's involvement. Much to their surprise, in addition to the main R-rated feature of Teen Sex Comedy 3 (which is likely not much worse than recent prime time sitcoms, that is, when those existed), they get a graphic preview of the more jugular scenes of Sweeney Todd as a "coming attraction". Parent is (IMNSHO) justifiably upset, perhaps complains to the theater management and gets the trailer moved--not canned, moved in front of a more relevant feature. (NB: this is *not* "censorship").
I'm still with the OP.
Julie Walker
03-03-08, 09:40 PM
That's a big 'what if' example DT and how often would such a graphic violence trailer be shown in a theater?
Regardless,you could do this quite simple thing if you see a 'red band' logo before a trailer. Take your kids out of the theater until the 'offending' trailer is over! Problem solved!
And it makes little sense in a marketing perspective to only show similar plot films before similar plot films. Or same genre before same genre. A little variety is never a bad thing and is more fun actually.
So while I would expect to see mostly comedy trailers aired before a comedy. I'm not upset at the action or drama...or horror trailer tossed in the mix. It'd be boring only watching comedy trailers before a comedy and same for other genres.
Unfortunately it appears most people are less adventurous and want everything sanitized to their exact needs. So just leave the theater until a 'red band' trailer is over.You have ample enough warning time once the logo is onscreen! It's a far more common sense easy thing to do,than expecting a theater to change it's programing all because you decided to take your kids(or mom in OP case) to the film.
dtcarson
03-03-08, 09:51 PM
I don't think anyone's saying they want it sanitized, and that's a massive oversimplification of the scenario (at least in my mind). I haven't seen a 'red strip' trailer, so I'm going on posts and theory. If I go to a trashy R rated sex comedy, I know what I'm in for. I don't necessarily want to see a violent slasher flick or trailers for that slasher flick that show the graphic scenes.
The trailers don't necessarily have to be the same genre, but it should be 'relevant' or at least make sense in the "You might also enjoy..." way. I personally do enjoy seeing all sorts of trailers, I might see a movie that looks interesting that I wouldn't have known about otherwise. (However, the "if you only want comedy trailers in front of your comedy movie, then you're boring and desire sanitized movies" sounds somewhat condescending, I'm not sure if that's purposeful or not).
You're right, it's much "easier" to leave the theater to avoid the red band trailer than, you know, sharing my experience as a consumer with the management of the theater. If I and enough other people say, You know, I didn't like that, and I'm not coming back, the theater could change its programming--unless it has enough other customers saying "keep it as is." Either way is perfectly valid.
It's interesting, based on your posts you're still on the "Hey, if you don't like it, get out, you have no right to complain/comment" side (even in the scenario of the educated consumer), which in my opinion every paying customer has the right to complain and comment. No, the customer is not always right, but every customer has the right to share his feedback with the vendor.
Boba Fett
03-03-08, 09:56 PM
The "leave when the Red Band" appears wouldn't have worked in this case.
It was in the promo segment prior to the regular previews.
It basically went: 'When we return get a first look at the new comedy Forgetting Sarah Marshall'
They showed a quick commercial for something.
Then the preview started: no green band, no red band.
Deftones
03-03-08, 10:16 PM
Why haven't you addressed the fact that you essentially lied about the promo. There's no nudity in it.
Gerry P.
03-03-08, 10:19 PM
There is nothing wrong with showing R Rated trailers in front of R Rated movies.
There is no rule that says that violent trailers must only be shown before violent movies and sexy trailers before sexy movies. Both types of movies are aimed at adults, so marketing one with the other seems logical.
Boba Fett
03-03-08, 10:31 PM
Why haven't you addressed the fact that you essentially lied about the promo. There's no nudity in it.
I already did. There was rear nudity and that was it. I thought I had saw more than what was there. I watched the red-band trailer to see if it was the same one they showed and realized I was mistaken and admited so.
Flynn
03-03-08, 11:05 PM
Also, as a former General Manager for a Regal Theatre, I can tell you that the 'type' of movie shown in the first look has nothing to do with the 'type' of movie you're about to watch usually. This also goes (generally) for the actual film trailers before the feature. This list is made by the film department (who are paid by the film companies for spots in front of certain movies). The First Look is purely profit for the company, so if the company behind 'Sarah Marshall' wants that preview there and is willing to pay, they're going to get the spot.
Rypro 525
03-04-08, 12:27 AM
I didnt know regular theaters ever showed red band trailers... I know they're made, but thought they were made for the internet. I know i saw the green band trailer of Clerks 2 before Scary Movie 4.
KillerCannibal
03-04-08, 12:53 PM
I could <i>maybe</i> understand the OP's point if there were trailers for NC-17 movies before TWWB, but you said you were watching a rated R movie. That to me says that they should be able to show red band trailers for other rated R films. The studio, and theater, don't assume that because you're seeing TWWB that you aren't into seeing films of any other genre that are also rated R. The idea is to showcase other R-rated fare coming up in theaters. The content listed on the poster shouldn't matter. A film that is rated R states that <b>no one under 17 will be admitted without a parent</b>. That covers not only the content of any film shown, but also of the trailers shown beforehand. If you are so easily offended then you should wait until it comes out on home video where you can just watch the film.
Sounds to me like having your mother with you made the sexual content more uncomfortable for you than it should have been.
Artman
03-04-08, 01:07 PM
I didnt know regular theaters ever showed red band trailers... I know they're made, but thought they were made for the internet.
Same here... I go about once a month...and have never seen a preview other than "approved for all ages". Sure, some are more intense than others, but still not R-rated.
I'd have a problem with R-rated previews because it eliminates all context surrounding any content. And just because a movies rated R doesn't mean I'm signing off to see anything and everything.... as has been stated there's a big difference between many R rated films. I doubt someone wanting to see a romantic comedy which might have some sex references and language would really want to see an R-rated Saw preview.
majorjoe23
03-04-08, 01:27 PM
I didnt know regular theaters ever showed red band trailers... I know they're made, but thought they were made for the internet. I know i saw the green band trailer of Clerks 2 before Scary Movie 4.
Wasn't Scary Movie 4 PG-13? They'd have to show the green band.
devilshalo
03-04-08, 02:11 PM
If I go to a trashy R rated sex comedy, I know what I'm in for. I don't necessarily want to see a violent slasher flick or trailers for that slasher flick that show the graphic scenes.
However, it's the same market demographic both films are aimed at.
And we're really not talking about a trailer. We're talking about First Look (fka The 20). 20 minutes of advertising before the movie/trailers and put together by the studios not only to promote movies and tv shows, but also for other ad market dollars, too. I think it's mainly Sony and Universal jointly using this as it seems it's their movies/tv shows that are pushed.
Boba Fett
03-04-08, 02:54 PM
Sounds to me like having your mother with you made the sexual content more uncomfortable for you than it should have been.
Yeah, pretty much. Had I been there on my own or with friends I wouldn't have cared either way. My mother though rarely goes to films and her taste in comedy is old-fashioned.
Peep
03-04-08, 04:59 PM
http://www.mpaa.org/_images/restricted.gif
An R-rated motion picture, in the view of the Rating Board, contains some adult material. An R-rated motion picture may include adult themes, adult activity, hard language, intense or persistent violence, sexually-oriented nudity, drug abuse or other elements, so that parents are counseled to take this rating very seriously. Children under 17 are not allowed to attend R-rated motion pictures unaccompanied by a parent or adult guardian. Parents are strongly urged to find out more about R-rated motion pictures in determining their suitability for their children. Generally, it is not appropriate for parents to bring their young children with them to R-rated motion pictures.
You highlit the wrong part. Try...
An R-rated motion picture, in the view of the Rating Board, contains some adult material. An R-rated motion picture may include adult themes, adult activity, hard language, intense or persistent violence, sexually-oriented nudity, drug abuse or other elements, so that parents are counseled to take this rating very seriously. Children under 17 are not allowed to attend R-rated motion pictures unaccompanied by a parent or adult guardian. Parents are strongly urged to find out more about R-rated motion pictures in determining their suitability for their children. Generally, it is not appropriate for parents to bring their young children with them to R-rated motion pictures.
I don't mind, as a parent, determining the suitability of a movie before taking my kids. How would you propose that I determine the suitability of the previews?
Drop
03-04-08, 07:45 PM
I don't mind, as a parent, determining the suitability of a movie before taking my kids. How would you propose that I determine the suitability of the previews?
I don't know how, as a parent one could find TWBB suitable for children. Thematically it's over their heads, and the intensity of some scenes seems too much as well.
When judging a film on whether or not it's appropriate for children I base it on what I know about the plot, not the reason why it's rated r. I could see being upset if that preview was shown before Pan's Labyrinth, but the really little kids shouldn't even go to that as they wouldn't be able to follow along with the subtitles.
Aegean2007
03-04-08, 08:13 PM
...Pan's Labyrinth, but the really little kids shouldn't even go to that as they wouldn't be able to follow along with the subtitles.
...or the head smashed in by a bottle, or the cheek ripped open by a knife, or the person that got shot point-blank in the face?
devilshalo
03-04-08, 08:14 PM
You highlit the wrong part. Try...
I highlighted the correct part about the MPAA as well as the advertisement company and the theater, in that they make a sweeping generalization about what constitutes an R rating and who should NOT attend this type of viewing.
I don't mind, as a parent, determining the suitability of a movie before taking my kids. How would you propose that I determine the suitability of the previews?
So you'd want the theater to determine it for you? Are you saying that PG, PG-13, and R are basically the same content? All 3 require the same amount of parental guidance. Prior to society being uptight about everything having to be spelled out for it, what did an R rating mean to you?
When I was younger, R meant I would hear a lot of foul language, see gratuitous violence, drug use, and/or full on naked people.
TWBB is pretty much given an R rating for realism. Otherwise, it's no different than RotS or LotR. But because the later are sci-fi/fantasy films, it doesn't garner the same recognition and gets a tamer rating. So TWBB loses because it's it generalized as a R.. no matter what the content is. There's no disctinction on what is a hard R or a soft R or whatever to a theater or to advertisers. R is R.
SterlingBen
03-04-08, 08:25 PM
Dude, people have sex. Get over it.
Stuff like that is on TV in Europe.
I hate living in a red state :(
fumanstan
03-04-08, 10:01 PM
And we're really not talking about a trailer. We're talking about First Look (fka The 20). 20 minutes of advertising before the movie/trailers and put together by the studios not only to promote movies and tv shows, but also for other ad market dollars, too. I think it's mainly Sony and Universal jointly using this as it seems it's their movies/tv shows that are pushed.
People seem to keep missing this point.
I don't think there's that many variations of the First Look, as it feels like i've seen the same one over and over again, so I bet they have one that features R rated content and a different one for younger audiences.
Peep
03-05-08, 11:17 AM
Prior to society being uptight about everything having to be spelled out for it, what did an R rating mean to you?
When I was younger, R meant I would hear a lot of foul language, see gratuitous violence, drug use, and/or full on naked people.
TWBB is pretty much given an R rating for realism. Otherwise, it's no different than RotS or LotR. But because the later are sci-fi/fantasy films, it doesn't garner the same recognition and gets a tamer rating. So TWBB loses because it's it generalized as a R.. no matter what the content is. There's no disctinction on what is a hard R or a soft R or whatever to a theater or to advertisers. R is R.
Is this the part where, having lost the argument, you bring up a bunch of irrelevant concepts?
I don't care what R meant to you as a kid. I don't care that you think fantasy films get a pass by the ratings board. And we're not talking about what an R rating means to advertisers.
The point is simple. It negates the purpose of having a description of why a movie got an R rating the the theater shows R-band trailers that feature all sorts of different objectionable content.
devilshalo
03-05-08, 12:31 PM
And we're not talking about what an R rating means to advertisers.
The point is simple. It negates the purpose of having a description of why a movie got an R rating the the theater shows R-band trailers that feature all sorts of different objectionable content.
Which goes back to the statement BY THE MPAA that GENERALLY, it is not appropriate for parents to bring their young children with them to R-rated motion pictures.
gen·er·al·ly –adverb
1. usually; commonly; ordinarily.
2. with respect to the larger part; for the most part.
3. without reference to or disregarding particular persons, things, situations, etc., that may be an exception.
Also from the MPAA, re: Advertising
Film companies do have the option, however, of creating advertising for a limited audience (not including younger children) for whom the material is appropriate, i.e., "restricted" trailers, which may be shown only before "R" and "NC-17" films, restricted-access internet sites, and television spots reserved for late-night audiences.
I don't see them making a distinction about the content of an R rated film in order for a red band trailer/advertisement to be shown. You want to put the blame on someone, then it goes to the MPAA; not the theater, not the advertiser.
Peep
03-05-08, 12:48 PM
I'm assuming you provided the definition of the word generally so you could feel good about saying one thing ("hey, I defined 'generally' right!).
Whether or not it's generally appropriate to bring "young children" to an R-rated movie has nothing to do with the argument in question. I can't speak for anybody else here, but I'm talking about teenagers who are not yet 17.
But good job trying to change the subject again. And good job providing a definition of "generally". If you can also define "suitability" I just may have to concede.
:)
devilshalo
03-05-08, 12:57 PM
So the argument is that Regal Cinema is in the wrong for showing questionable advertising?
Or that the MPAA is incorrect in using descriptions for content since it cannot follow their own rules and guidelines about advertisements?
Enlighten me.
chris_sc77
03-05-08, 01:15 PM
I saw this same "first look" yesterday when it played during a showing of Charlie Wilson's War at a cinemark dollar theater....
I was kinda shocked cause I thought they played these same First looks on all the movies in the theater. I didnt know they had different versions of these pre-show entertainment promo reels.
I think what shocked me the most though was how unfunny it looks. I will still see it though. Might wait till DVD but I'll still look forward to checking it out.
maxfisher
03-05-08, 01:35 PM
I think people might be arguing about two different situations. The first would be what the OP originally described: A situation where graphic, R-rated material is shown prior to a movie that is rated R for material of an entirely different nature. The second is what it sounds like actually happened to the OP: A situation where non-R-rated material is shown to promote a movie that is rated R for reasons different than the main feature it precedes.
In the first situation, I stand by my original post. If someone goes to a movie and the theater's posting that the MPAA rated it R for language, an attendee shouldn't have to worry about seeing someone getting their throat slit or a brutal rape or having dick/tits/pussy bouncing across the screen.
That said, there's really no basis at all for complaint in the second situation. Unless the material being shown is explicit and worthy of an R rating, there's no reason to complain. In other words, an 'all audiences' preview of a movie that might contain some graphic violence or sex is still an 'all audiences' preview. Even if the subject matter is completely different than the movie you're seeing, the majority of the people there are probably considered to be the same demographic by the studio/theater and it makes sense for them to take advantage of the advertising opportunity.
Peep
03-05-08, 02:22 PM
I think people might be arguing about two different situations. The first would be what the OP originally described: A situation where graphic, R-rated material is shown prior to a movie that is rated R for material of an entirely different nature. The second is what it sounds like actually happened to the OP: A situation where non-R-rated materials is shown to promote a movie that is rated R for reasons different than the main feature it proceeds.
In the first situation, I stand by my original post. If someone goes to a movie and the theater's posting that the MPAA rated it R for language, an attendee shouldn't have to worry about seeing someone getting their throat slipped or a brutal rape or having dick/tits/pussy bouncing across the screen.
That said, there's really no basis at all for complaint in the second situation. Unless the material being shown is explicit and worthy of an R rating, there's no reason to complain. In other words, an 'all audiences' preview of a movie that might contain some graphic violence or sex is still an 'all audiences' preview. Even if the subject matter is completely different than the movie you're seeing, the majority of the people there are probably considered to be the same demographic by the studio/theater and it makes sense for them to take advantage of the advertising opportunity.
I agree. I'm talking about the first situation also.
Tarantino
03-06-08, 03:10 AM
lol @ taking kids to TWBB.
Maybe he wanted them to take a nap...
= J
Hank1215
03-07-08, 04:57 AM
I saw this in front of "Jumper" which was only PG-13. It is not a red band trailer, it's just part of the "First Look" advertisements that used to be called "The 20". I did not see anything that would have warranted higher than PG-13 for this. I also saw it in front of "Semi-Pro" and it was no different.
Matthew Chmiel
03-07-08, 01:57 PM
Or that the MPAA is incorrect in using descriptions for content since it cannot follow their own rules and guidelines about advertisements?
The MPAA just started recently giving descriptions for content -- and a lot of the time, it's still not detailed at all. Especially when the film has nudity.
The MPAA doesn't have to give descriptions, they're trying to let people know why it has that rating -- but if it's still R, it's R for a reason.
Hostel, Rated R for brutal scenes of torture and violence, strong sexual content, language and drug use.
No mention about the film's graphic (full frontal) nudity that is in the film's first 35 minutes.
Knocked Up, Rated R for sexual content, drug use and language.
No mention about the film's nudity either, especially the graphic "birthing" at the film's climax. I didn't know I would see a chick's vagina in full plain view with a baby coming out. Not to mention the film has language that rivals The 40-Year-Old Virgin (which originally got an NC-17 for language alone). Why is it not labeled as perverse?
Scary Movie, Rated R for strong crude sexual humor, language, drug use and violence.
I didn't think I'd see a man's penis go in someone's ear or a woman getting splashed with semen as she's bottomless.
Do you see where I'm going?
The MPAA descriptions are usually worthless, especially in comparison with the rating systems in Canada and the UK.
Ironically, we're stricter in nudity and sex (Walk Hard was listed as having graphic nudity for two shots of a penis), yet we're very loose on violence (especially now) were as it's the opposite in the UK and Canada (and to be honest, violence was pretty lenient in Canada whereas the UK is loosening up a bit).
devilshalo
03-07-08, 02:01 PM
The MPAA descriptions are usually worthless.
Which is why R means R. Yet some people want to argue that descriptions mean something. R has and will always mean "No one under 17 allowed without a parent or guardian" regardless of why it was given an R.
droidguy1119
03-07-08, 02:38 PM
The thing you saw was part of "The Twenty" or the "AMC Movie Watchers Network", which starts approximately 20 minutes before a film and ends about a minute before the actual trailers start.
So, easy solution: Just don't go into the theater until a couple minutes before the showtime. Since the showtime corresponds to the previews, you won't miss the trailers, if you like them, and it seems less likely to cause a problem. If you see a redband trailer (which I might add I have never actually seen in a theater), then just step outside for a second or tell the children not to watch it.
However, I still agree with the other posters in that it a) is not the theater's responsibility to watch out for the content in the previews, b) that you are exaggerating the explicit nature of the ad you saw, and c) that you should probably just leave your kids at home with a babysitter or something if you want to go see R-rated movies.
I mean, I understand the content ratings are there for a reason, but your purpose seems weird to me -- like, did the kids actually WANT to see There Will Be Blood? It's not like if I was a parent that I would just drag my kids to any R-rated movie that I wanted to see that fell within the lines of what I felt was acceptable just because it was acceptable. Maybe it was family movie night, but again, why TWBB? Maybe you were just unclear and the kids did want to go see it, but in my mind the system was always there because kids tend to want to see all kinds of things and then you can make a judgment call on whether it's okay for them, but were your children sitting around begging to see There Will Be Blood?
Trevor
03-07-08, 05:31 PM
I think what shocked me the most though was how unfunny it looks. I will still see it though.
Agreed. I like the occasional raunchy comedy, but that looked terrible.
Hank1215
03-08-08, 04:51 AM
The thing you saw was part of "The Twenty" or the "AMC Movie Watchers Network", which starts approximately 20 minutes before a film and ends about a minute before the actual trailers start.
So, easy solution: Just don't go into the theater until a couple minutes before the showtime. Since the showtime corresponds to the previews, you won't miss the trailers, if you like them, and it seems less likely to cause a problem. If you see a redband trailer (which I might add I have never actually seen in a theater), then just step outside for a second or tell the children not to watch it.
However, I still agree with the other posters in that it a) is not the theater's responsibility to watch out for the content in the previews, b) that you are exaggerating the explicit nature of the ad you saw, and c) that you should probably just leave your kids at home with a babysitter or something if you want to go see R-rated movies.
I mean, I understand the content ratings are there for a reason, but your purpose seems weird to me -- like, did the kids actually WANT to see There Will Be Blood? It's not like if I was a parent that I would just drag my kids to any R-rated movie that I wanted to see that fell within the lines of what I felt was acceptable just because it was acceptable. Maybe it was family movie night, but again, why TWBB? Maybe you were just unclear and the kids did want to go see it, but in my mind the system was always there because kids tend to want to see all kinds of things and then you can make a judgment call on whether it's okay for them, but were your children sitting around begging to see There Will Be Blood?
Actually, the OP didn't bring kids to the movie, he brought his mother, who he felt the preview was inappropriate for.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/film/news/e3i177ff2f002836ece08a4dec4a0571a85
From the article:
In recent months, Regal quietly has experimented with screening red band trailers at its Regal Cinema Art Theaters that show indie and specialty movies. "We've been monitoring their use carefully," Westerling said. "And there haven't been any issues that have come up at the theater level."
"I don't think anybody is arguing that all red band trailers are appropriate in front of all R-rated movies," Fogelson said. "For example, it would not be appropriate for a red band trailer for a movie like 'American Pie' to run in front of 'Schindler's List.' We all want to be smart and careful about the use of red band trailers, working closely with our partners in exhibition. We don't want moviegoers seeing material that is inconsistent with the movies they are going to see."
Buy: