MPAA Seeks to Tone Down That Eyebrow-Raising Video Box-Art

In the home video market--as in the theatrical market--sex and violence sell. When the pictures on the movie packages, called “box-art,” suggest one or the other, they attract renters.

These days, though, those racy pictures are also attracting trouble.

Twenty-four states have legislation pending regarding home video, some seeking to control box-art. To head off government regulation, the Motion Picture Assn. of America, which rates movies and videos, is trying to get video companies to tone down their box-art.

“A lot of parents don’t want their kids to see these offensive pictures on the packages of home video movies,” said association executive Bethlyn Hand. “So they’re trying to get laws passed to control what their kids are exposed to in the stores.

“We’re in sympathy with the parents. Remember, the purpose of the rating system is to provide a guide for parents who are concerned about the content of the movies their kids see. But we also want to help the movie and home video industries avoid government regulation.”

Through its rating service, the association also can control box-art.

“If a video company wants a rating, they have to submit their ad campaigns and ad materials to us,” Hand said. “That’s the way it’s always worked with movies. If we think the advertising is lurid, we reject it. If we don’t approve the advertising then they can’t get a rating.”

When scrutinizing ad materials, like box-art, what do Hand and her staff look for?

“The main thing is that the advertising must be suitable for general audiences,” she said. “There’s a long list of things we look for. No nudity, no excessive violence, no guns pointed at people’s heads, no drugs or drug paraphernalia, no cruelty to animals, no people on fire, no dead people with their eyes open. I could go on and on.”

Video companies have the option to ignore the association’s restrictions and send their movies straight to the retailers. But many stores won’t carry unrated movies or they bury them with the porn titles, where most customers won’t see them.

The offensive box-art comes not from the majors but mostly from small companies that are marketing B and C titles--those cheapie movies that are low in quality but high in sex and violence.

Since the bulk of these movies have had limited or no theatrical release, most rental customers aren’t familiar with them. That’s where box-art is crucial.

“We know that fans often rent movies based on what they see on the package,” said Tom Burnett, executive vice president of Virgin Vision, which releases some B titles. “That’s what video retailers tell us. And video retailers stock many videos based on the package art. On these lesser-known movies, if they think the art will attract renters they’ll stock that video.

“Packages that are really lurid and explicit catch the customer’s eye. Those pictures plus the description on the box are often the only bases for the customer’s decision.”

Though video companies would like to avoid legislation, toning down the box-art, they contend, could lead to another problem.

“We’re concerned with truth-in-advertising,” Burnett said. “If you tone down the pictures on the boxes, people might rent the movie thinking it’s very innocent--as innocent as the pictures on the box. But then they’ll get it home and find it’s full of sex and violence. Remember, we’re talking about movies people don’t know much about--the lesser-known movies people rent based on the pictures on the package.

“The angry customers blame the retailers for misleading them, for having a package that’s not representative of the content. And then retailers blame us. But our hands are tied by the MPAA, which is restricting what we can depict on the packages.”

Though Burnett said he’s fully in favor of the association’s intentions, he’s not too happy with some of its practices, claiming that a double-standard exists--one for the movie industry and one for home video.

“They examine advertising for both movies and videos and they let the movie companies get away with things we can’t do,” he said. “For instance, in the ads for ‘Dead Calm,’ there was a head floating in the water. Yet, the MPAA rejected some pieces of art for Virgin Vision movies that weren’t as offensive as that head floating in the water. They’re discriminating in favor of theatrical advertising.”

Burnett believes the association should be more sensitive to the fact that the video business is different from the theatrical.

“Marketing movies and home videos is very different,” he said. “Movies are for broad audiences who watch in a public place. Home videos are more private, intended for use in the privacy of your home. Movies and home videos are different, so different standards should apply to the way movies and videos are marketed. But the MPAA doesn’t see that.”

Said Hand: “These video companies should stop griping about what the MPAA is doing and abide by our rules. We’re just trying to establish some control before the government steps in. If these video companies think we’re tough, wait until they see what happens if some of these states pass these laws.”