Yeah that's pretty much it. I know we all like to hate the MPAA, but not approving something as green band (ie approved for all audiences) doesn't equal censorship. We might as well complain that Jenna Jameson movies can't get R ratings.

Too scary? Too dumb I can see, but not too scary. This is a PR stunt.

I think the problem is look what they're not giving it the green band for. Some bloody eyes? That's what's so stupid. It's like that quote said, if it's not okay for the Finding Nemo crowd, then you can't show it.

is it true LB is making a cameo in this?

Which is dumb, but is it the MPAA's fault that theaters won't show red band trailers? Actually, I don't know that answer, so if anyone knows I'd like to read. But "approved for all audiences" by nature means something fairly tame. At least, that's what I would think.

Well I'm kinda surprised this doesn't happen more often. Those trailers have to be approved its first thing you read when they pop up. This guy is just whining so people will go see the movie.

Exactly what I was thinking when I read

I wonder if the MPAA will respond to this, seems to be easy enough to refute if it is a PR move.

Are you for real?
Anyway,,,
Since when does the MPAA come out and say a trailer is "too scary for all audiences"
This is like a first.And I see a trend coming here from all this.

Here is what they should do from here on out.
Have one member of the MPAA on a movie set at all times with a megaphone yelling "CUT!!" .... "Sorry,I dont think we can allow that,remove it" "Why don't I direct this movie the way 'I' think people should see it,not your creation"

The MPAA sucks.Bottom line.Funny how I can see guts and gore on the news but not in a FICTIONAL viewing.
As for a PR move.I dont really think so.This is classic MPAA we are seeing.

I have to agree. The new Exorcist may or may not be a good movie, but I don't think this is a PR stunt. This is completely in line with the kind of shit the MPAA pulls. The studios know what can and can't go into a trailer, they make so many of them. I highly doubt they really submitted stuff that was too horrific or violent to be shown to an audience of people 13 and older.

For a long time. Take a close look at the green screen that almost all trailers start with, that's the MPAA's Green band. It says that the trailer was approved for General Audiences.

They also have a red band, which is for more graphic content and can only be played in front of R rated movies.

As much as I dislike the MPAA for other reasons, this isn't their fault. Just like with the NC-17 rating, it is the theaters' decision not to show red-band trailers.

You know,the Scream dvd has a red & green band trailers...and you know what? I still can't tell what is different between the two! They both are edited practically the same,but I guess the MPAA deemed the red band trailer 'too intense' or some BS like that.

I bet it is the same thing in this case,where the MPAA is being upitity for no real reason,other than to be pricks as usual.

I just don't really see the evidence that the MPAA did something so awful here. It's a trailer that will run in front of everything. I can understand certain requirements. There's no evidence that they're so harsh on red band trailers.

So...I know we like to hate the MPAA, but let's see some real reasons why. As far as I can tell, their problem is the lack of an NC-17 rating. The rest of this stuff is BS imo. Or small things that deal more with studio politics, though in general I rarely hear of anything worth noting in that area.

I still put 99% of the blame on the MPAA
There are theaters that will show red band trailers,just during the right movies.
I mean if a movie is showing for people 17+,there should not be anyone who CANT see it in there.Thus being ok to show it.The MPAA is suggesting that this trailer be shown to ALL GENERAL AUDIENCES.This is not a general audience movie.

I hate trying to debate and hate the MPAA.I just get upset at the shit they pull.I could care less what type of movie genra it is.They always have to jump in and ruin it.
The bottom line is I dont think a bunch of old boring 'June and Ward Cleaver' types should be telling people what they can and cant watch.It is MY choice.If a movie is to violent and they are so caring about the children watching it,it is not their duty.They are not the parent.I say what my kids watch,not them.
Besides.If they dont see it in theaters,they will see it at home on dvd or tape.Will they be there then?

AICN is confirming the story, so it must be false.

Allegedly William Friedkin himself confirmed this to Harry, and provided the trailer to him, but the link is dead.

http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=6232

Censorship.

It's a publicity stunt. Come on. You all had to know that.

If you belived for a second that this was a big deal, then I've got an up-to-the-minute story from Lucy Liu, telling you that Kill Bill's violence is so violent it'll make you sick.

also, the original teaser for the texas chainsaw massacre (the one with just screaming and no picture) was deemed innapropriate for all audiences

That is from 2000.

No offense, but it doesn't sound like you have any idea what you're talking about. The studio submitted a trailer with the intent of showing it in front of non R-rated films. Therefore it had to meet the specifications of the MPAA. If you want, I'm sure you can find the gorier trailer out there.

Nonetheless, the MPAA has no control over which films you get into, nor which films your kids get into. If the MPAA rates a movie R, guess what, you can still go! And you can bring your kids!!! But if you take your kids to see a pg-13 film, the MPAA will also make sure they're not showing trailers that aren't deemed "approved for all audiences."

No offense, but how you think the MPAA equals people telling others what they can or cannot watch is beyond me. The ONLY movies that this argument holds water with (and that I agree with) are those films that are purely for adults, and fall into the NC-17 rating. I will agree with that. But beyond that...what exactly is the MPAA at fault for? Should anything, nor matter how violent, sexual and profanity laced, be given a green band? Is this your solution? No offense but this isn't censorship...it's a freakin generally approved trailer. If it was the violent mess you want it to be, it wouldn't be approved for all audiences. Simple as that.

Well said. I didn't want to have to argue.

Why? What was so innapropriate about that?

Bay said on the dvd that it was too scary, and its what was happening off screen, which made it too much.

This thing should just straight to dvd. It's not going to turn a profit it's theatrical run. Enough already, WB. I just want too see the schrader cut.

Wow, so you're right. The stories were so similar I thought he was referring to the new Exorcist.

Now the question is- would the MPAA have the same reaction to two different Exorcist films? Doubtful.