No wonder Bush can torture and get away with it.
:rolleyes:
Look at the jokes about what is a serious OP.
FCC doesn’t control commercials. That’s the FTC, and they mainly watch over claims (this new tea will grow hair and make you lose 10 pounds in three days!) Contact the network or your local affiliate. Hell, even call Lion’s Gate.
I work in broadcasting. We received a complaint once because we ran a hard liquor ad in a show geared for children. We now have safeguards in place to make sure that doesn’t happen again. If the local affiliate knew that you found the ads inappropriate, they may take steps to work around that next time. Then again, they may not.
Shit, this guy’s right!
.
.
.
:rolleyes:
Exactly. Times have changed. These type of commercials are all over primetime nowadays. It’s not going to be any different for the Orange Bowl.
I agree with you 100% Captian WaWa. I don’t know how the rest of you can just brush this off. Even the visual idea of someone getting their toe cut off with bolt cutters seriously squicks me out. We are not talking about a little nipple here but flat out torture.
Even if it passes FTC muster, I do think the Hostel ad is pretty intense for a network in prime time during a major sporting event. And I think it’s really disgusting, but that’s a separate thing.
I absolutely agree with the op, and I can’t believe how many people are being blowing him off so snidely.
I don’t think the OP is even talking about censorship. Concessions? Maybe. But I think if the Orange Bowl had declined running the ad, I don’t think they would’ve gone broke or had a problem filling the space with something else.
I mean, really, would your experience have been lessened any had the ad not run? Sports are always talking about how they’re family-oriented fun. This movie ain’t that.
Does corporate America always need the government to step in and tell it when it’s doing something inappropriate?
It may have caused your kids some distress, but don’t you think it’s better for them to understand what’s going on in their world? Don’t you think they’re better off now that you’ve had to explain Hostel to them? Or should the world screen itself from its pleasures so that your family could put off that explanation as long as possible?
That commercial is everywhere, anyway–not just the Orange Bowl.
I agree with Exapno Mapcase here.
It’s a good thing you’re so sure about yourself. Consider this, though: maybe the world doesn’t revolve around your personal idea of what you do or don’t want your children to see and when. Your world might, and probably should. But the rest of us have enough in our own lives to worry about.
I spent 18 years waiting for the day I could watch whatever I wanted to watch whenever I wanted to watch it and take advantage of all of the other freedoms that come with being an adult. There’s absolutely no reason I should be dragged back into the hellhole of minordom for the sake of somebody else’s idea of how to raise their kids on primetime network television. Do you want the major networks to abandon the college students who are watching, so that your personal life is easier? Sorry, man. Life doesn’t work that way.
This is a good point. Children learn how to deal with their emotions by watching their parents deal with theirs. If you freak out at something, they’re going to freak out too.
Sure he is. He’s saying that something of interest to the majority should be verboten on public media for the benefit of the few’s individual views. What does that sound like to you?
If ABC or the NCAA or the Orange Bowl or Kinkos refused to let the commercial run because it might be inappropriate to younger viewers, that is not censorship.
I’m against censorship; I’m not against corporate America (or individuals for that matter) monitoring their own actions for inappropriateness.
I know a lot of college-age kids that watch Spongebob Squarepants. Does this mean ads for Hostel would be appropriate during that show? Of course not; it would be inappropriate.
I would also wager that as many kids (or more) watched the Orange Bowl as do any given episode of Spongebob.
I’m not saying don’t run the Hostel ads, but sheesh, do they need to be on during one of the most-watched college sporting events of the year?
I don’t have kids, I’m not a prude, I love a good horror flick, and I really do want to see Hostel, but the entire ad teases with horrifying images not appropriate to young children. If I did have kids, I’d rather them see JJ’s tit than this ad.
Happy
With television becoming so stratified, you would think it would have exactly the opposite effect – if you can get porn on HBO, then the broadcast networks should be safe for all age viewers.
Pretty much, yeah. If we left it up to corporate America we’d still have children working in coal mines for $1/day.
I’m not buying this. They’re old enough that they know movies aren’t real, I’m sure. The ‘people make movies with pretend torture sometimes and nobody’s toe got snipped off or chainsawed’ is, understandably, probably not a talk most parents look forward to giving. I doubt it’s good for the kids.
I wasn’t offended by the nipple slip and I’m not offended by this.
I pay an extra $10-15 a month for my cable so I don’t have to watch commercials during the Sopranos. I tend to stay away from network TV whenever possible. I realize that’s difficult with sports.
Captain Wawa, I have to ask, would you be surprised to see risque commercials during the Super Bowl? After the nipple slip their advertising is gone over heavily for content and you still see edgy stuff. Why would you expect the Orange Bowl to be different?
You make two big points here:
- Parents don’t look forward to talking about horror movies.
I’m sure they don’t look forward to giving a lot of other talks, such as The Talk itself, but that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be given.
- It’s not good for the kids.
There are a lot of things in this world that aren’t pleasant for either adults or children. Each adult and child will be exposed to some of these things eventually. It’s unfortunate when this happens during a football game, but seeing either a breast or a chainsaw-wielding maniac will probably not cause any harm to the kids. They might be freaked out for a little bit–although, as one poster noted above, who’s to say they weren’t just freaked out because their dad was freaked out?–but it seems pretty shortsighted to put that much importance into a short period of discomfort. Personally, as a kid I hated being sheltered and cut off from things. It bothered me much more not to know what was going on around me than to experience some discomfort from being exposed to something that was unpleasant for me.
Well, recall you don’t have advertisements on HBO ;). I mean the movies want to get their message out to the proper audience (and the 18-34 numbers for the Orange Bowl were probably through the roof) and the networks want the money from advertisers (Hell, that’s what they are in the business for). It’s completely understandable.
I absolutely agree with the OP. As a mom of a young child I wouldn’t want her to see this commercial.
There is such a limited amount of time for a child to be innocent and unaware of such things (like torture) and enjoy being a kid.
I say complain, I know they take complaints pretty seriously.
Am I the only one amused by the fact that the OP was upset at implied torture scenes interrupting a perfectly good show where 300+ pound men throw themselves violently into one another, sometimes break body parts and have to be carried off the field, or (in the case of a recent college game) flip off the crowd to the chants of “rapist” and “child molester”?
Maybe I am. 
Prime time means just that- prime time. You should not expect networks to change their ad schedules, whether it’s for the annual showing of Wizard of Oz or the season premiere of Oz*, once the clock hits 8pm EST. Your overreaction- really, THROWING your kids off you?!?- probably did more damage than the 15 seconds of movie violence they saw.
If your ten and eight year old (you know, I MIGHT have more sympathy for you if we were talking about a 5 or 6 year old) are so innocent and sheltered, perhaps you need to get rid of the TV altogether, suck it the hell up, or TiVO the game and watch it later. But don’t expect us to get all riled up with you- you sound like Mrs. Lovejoy.
[sub]* Yes, I am aware that Oz was on a commercial-free channel.[/sub]
I’m usually the first to criticize people for sounding like Helen Lovejoy, and I’m not a parent, but are kids who are scared by the toe with the pliers and the chainsaw that sheltered? This is a movie that’s billing itself as uniquely disturbing, and the ads reflect it.
LOL! Good point.
Scared within reason, certainly. Think of all the folks here who have been utterly freaked out by less overt things, like the flying monkeys in Wizard of Oz, or the Oompa Loompas in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (I personally still can’t watch that movie). But this reaction:
Over what amounts to fifteen seconds of screen time is a bit of an overreaction. Having to calm your kids down, or worse:
implies, to me, that these are not your normal ten and eight year olds. God help them if they catch a minute of a horror movie- they’ll wind up catatonic under their beds!
The movie is being billed as over-the-top disturbing, not the blink-and-you’ll-miss-it ads. This was not some bizarro-world version of the Heidi Bowl, where the middle of the game got preempted by Faces of Death. This was an ad, shown during prime time.
And thank you for providing Mrs. Lovejoy’s first name- it just wasn’t coming to me. 