The Man With The Moon Is Blue Essay

It is clear from the promotional material released before the film opened to the public that the provocative film producer/director Otto Preminger knew exactly how to attract the attention needed to make his 1955 drama The Man with the Golden Arm successful. From its conception, starting with its controversial literary source material of the same title, it was scrutinized and ultimately rejected by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) for its incompliance with the Production Code—namely its themes of drug traffic and addiction, which the Code explicitly prohibited mention of. Preminger, who had a history of bad relations with the Production Code Administration (PCA) of the MPAA with his 1953 comedy The Moon Is Blue also being rejected a seal of approval, was no newcomer to such controversy. Rather than hiding Golden Arm’s

Even in the earliest phases of the film’s production, Preminger made sure to alert the public through industry trade papers like Motion Picture Daily that the film’s script had been rejected by the PCA, which was at the time directed to do so by Federal Commissioner of Narcotics Harry Anslinger. This meant from the outset, Preminger and United Artists were quite candid about the volatility of the film’s subject matter, explicitly confirming it violated the parts of the Code concerned with the presentation of drug use. This transparency about the fight with the MPAA continued throughout the rest of the production process up until the PCA’s inevitable rejection of the final cut of the film in late November 1955. In another openly defiant act, United Artists then severed ties with the MPAA in order to continue distribution of the film without its consent. In addition, Preminger spoke with vitriol about the organization in Variety saying, “I don’t see why I should accept the rules of a private club to which I don’t even