Archive for December, 2009

Social networking websites like Facebook are on Hollywood's radar for niche internet advertising

While the old standbys of television and radio continue to hog most of the money that studios spend on marketing campaigns for new releases, more and more money is being allotted for internet and mobile markets. The recent success of Paramount’s internet marketing for Paranormal Activity, for example, shows what can be done when the right demographic is reached through these digital means.

Facebook in particular allows studios to reach niche markets which correlate to their new releases much more effectively than simply advertising on demographic-related TV channels. Such a strategy is one way of spending smarter, which is exactly what the new focus on digital outlets is all about. Reportedly, the change allows studios to spend just as much money as ever on marketing their films, even though the poor economy has forced them to cut talent costs, reduce the number of films made, and let go a number of staff members.

Television and radio still take up around 60-70% of marketing budgets, but the percentage spent on digital outlets has risen from 1% (2002) to 8-12%, and continues to grow. Avatar’s marketing budget (estimated to exceed $150 million) reportedly allotted 10% toward internet ads alone. That’s over $15 million.

Niche marketing is nothing new, but Hollywood’s growing concentration on using digital outlets to take advantage of this strategy could mark a big overhaul in future film marketing in general.

Source: Variety

Quick Opinion: All of this seems well and good at first glance, however one wonders once the economy recovers if talent costs will rise back up and staff positions get refilled, or if the percentage of money spent on marketing stays the same. The success that’s possible due to the help of digital outlets could be too tempting for studios to not continue spending as much as they are.

Also, more money spent on internet and mobile ads means less ad money spent on newspapers and magazines, which are already hurting. Thinking pessimistically, this could be the final blow for big paper-based publications, forcing those companies to try and survive completely on the internet.

Are we now actively seeking to blur the line between man and machine - as this poster suggests - or do we still fear what could happen if we do (a la Star Trek's Borg)?

By my count there have been three movies released this year that involve the ability to remote control/embody a person or robot (Surrogates, Gamer, and Avatar). All three films deal with this idea differently, but the fact that they were all released within only a few months of each other is intriguing. Somewhere inside these films could lie a connection that says more than any one of them does individually.

In the case of Surrogates, the film makes an argument against the use of humanized robots as a means of living, criticizing in a roundabout way that people (particularly Americans) are on a path to losing their natural desire for human contact. Some might say that living through a robot isn’t actually living (see our review). All in all, the general opinion of the film regarding technology that enables people to avoid actual physical contact is negative to say the least.

Gamer’s usage of the remote embodiment concept is quite different. For starters, there are no robots; people control other people (prisoners) for use in a virtual videogame experience. So in other words, certain people were able to control other people who had been dehumanized to the point where their lives were worth nothing more than a subjective entertainment value. Obviously, this film’s message is not congruent to Surrogates‘. However, that the message involves the idea of dehumanization by way of technological means does give the two films at least one connection.

Avatar also promotes a different theme with its incorporation of the remote embodiment concept. Instead of making a case against the use of avatars (which in this case are aliens instead of humans), the film actually endorses their utilization. This is most likely due to the film’s apparent theme (suggested in our review), which proposes that an avatar is in fact an allegory for modern telecommunication technologies, and that using such resources ought to be used for the purposes of learning about people different from yourself as opposed to just seeking out like-minded, comparable individuals who aren’t liable to disagree with you. One can reasonably suggest from this that Avatar’s use of remote embodiment is not about dehumanization but of rehumanization. Thus, those humans in the film who choose to utilize available technology for this purpose are considered the protagonists, and those who do not are considered the antagonists.

If only one thing can be said to connect all three films, it is that they all seem to criticize/warn us about the dangerous path we are on that could lead us to, by way of newer and newer technology, dehumanizing ourselves as well as others. However, Avatar’s greater message allows us to consider this path less as a straight shot towards doom and more as a double-edged sword. And so, there is no agreement of what will happen, but only an agreement of what can happen. It appears that it is up to us as members of an increasingly technological society to A) retain our basic humanity by not allowing advanced telecommunications to completely substitute direct human contact, and B) use our technological resources to expand the breadth of our humanity by seeking to learn from and understand the different and “unusual.” Personally, it seems that – based on the subject matter of recent sci-fi/action films – there is an increasing trepidation with our society’s increasingly advancing technology, as even this past summer’s Terminator: Salvation sought to ask what will happen if the line between man and machine (i.e. technology) is blurred. The question of whether man as he is defined is inexorably linked to his technology is certainly a relevant one, but alas it is a question for another time.

What do you make of these three films? What conclusions do you draw when considering them connected in some way? Tell us what you think.

Director Guy Ritchie

Back on December 21st ComingSoon.net published an interview they had with director Guy Ritchie about his newest film Sherlock Holmes. Since the movie opened just this past week, and most of those who had wanted to see it have probably done so, I thought it would be interesting for those of you who have seen the film to read the interview and tell us what from it you learned aside from the information given by Ritchie’s answers. Hindsight is 20/20 as they say, so take a look at the interview and remember the movie to see what you come up with.

As the interviewer points out before the actual transcript, Guy Ritchie obviously does not enjoy the interviewing process. With this in mind, don’t expect elaborate answers. However, there should be enough material to build off of and make your own conclusions.

One question that stood out asked how the involvement of Robert Downey Jr. (an actor known for favoring improvisation and suggesting last-minute changes) fit with a story that’s fairly intricate and thus difficult to reconstruct while filming. I’ll let you all read Ritchie’s response for yourselves.

In other news…

Roland Emerich’s 2012 has broken China’s box-office record with $67.3 million (460 million yuan), with the previous record-holder being Transformers: Rise of the Fallen with $63 million.

Source: Variety

Writer/Director/Producer J. J. Abrams

HollywoodReporter.com has recently published an interview it conducted with director/writer/producer J. J. Abrams, the director of this year’s Star Trek remake. The film made almost $400 million worldwide, and has made Abrams’ name bigger than ever.

The interview itself is short and unfocused, which probably means that is was held over the phone when Abrams had some free time during his very busy schedule. Being that the movie was released May 8th the interview isn’t very timely, but with fans it is usually the case that good exposure is never too late.

The interviewer, Jay Fernandez, asks a short line of questions that don’t seem to be searching for elaborate answers. Being that there was a probable time-crunch this is somewhat understandable, however the simplicity of the questions (as is almost always the case) leads to answers that aren’t all that illuminating. One example is the very first question, “Was there any part of making Star Trek that felt personal?” The wording of this particular question asks for a very broad response because A) it’s relatively common knowledge that directors typically invest their personal feelings into a project at least somewhat (hopefully more than just a little), and B) because of this the general answer of “yes” is already known before the question was even asked. Abrams, as well as most interviewees, know all this at least subconsciously and respond accordingly by replying “yes,” followed by a short list of summarized examples. Knowing that Abrams was sure to say “yes,” the question should have been phrased in way that asked for particulars, such as “What facet of the film did you have the most personal connection with and why?”

I fault Fernandez only slightly, as a lack of time will always keep an interview and its questions from being as interesting as possible. However, that being the case it would behoove him to ask better questions so as to take better advantage of the short amount of time.

Just a thought.

Should 'Avatar' be considered exemplary of what Hollwood should regularly strive to create?

Much has been made about James Cameron’s newest cinematic juggernaut Avatar. With the film’s production said to exceed a record-setting $400 million, it has made back roughly 75% of that cost just 5 days after its release (domestic + foreign).  The vast majority of that price tag is due to the groundbreaking special effects and 3D presentation (as I’m sure you’ve all heard), which required the kind of technology and personnel that only the likes of a Hollywood studio can provide. Many like to deride Hollywood because of its “gross” financing for projects intended for mass consumption, however on occasion (such as with Avatar) we are reminded that Hollywood is capable of delivering us something truly striking and amazing. Peter Jackson’s The Lord of the Rings trilogy is another example that can be referenced from this decade. Big name studios love cashing in on such films, and audiences love paying to see them. When done right (unlike with, say, Waterworld) big budget extravaganzas have the ability, and by all accounts likelihood, to be very notable and even pivotal artifacts within the world of movies. So, then, what could all of this mean? What could the tremendous success of Avatar lead to? Read the rest of this entry »

Hopefully the holidays aren't as hard on you as they are on the Griswalds

Here at Movie-Thoughts we try to be as unbiased in our analysis as we can, but we also like to take your opinion into the equation as much as possible. Public opinion plays a huge roll in the cultural status of films, and such a value must (at least when most appropriate) be considered in a film’s long-term evaluation. Being that it is the Christmas season we would like to know which Christmas/holiday movies you consider to be the best of the best. Our only requirement is that the film you choose be of feature length (80mins or longer) – sorry, votes for A Charlie Brown Christmas or How the Grinch Stole Christmas (animated version) wont count. Some movies to mull over are listed below, in no particular order.

The Santa Clause

White Christmas

It’s a Wonderful Life

A Christmas Carol (you must identify a specific version, e.g. the one with George C. Scott, the one with the Muppets, etc.)

Christmas Vacation

A Miracle on 34th Street (1947)

The legitimacy of each vote will be judged on a case by case basis, as many films incorporate the holidays into their storylines (such as Die Hard, Sleepless in Seattle, Edward Scissorhands, and this year’s The Merry Gentleman). So in other words, candidates require only minimal justification. We can’t wait to hear what you think, so let us know by submitting your vote in this post’s comments section or our contact page!

Dan O'Bannon in a 2003 interview for the Special Edition "Alien" DVD

Famed screenwriter Dan O’Bannon passed away this week at St. John’s Hospital in Santa Monica Ca. after a 30 year battle with Crohn’s disease.

His most famous work includes the writing for Alien and Total Recall, as well as writing and directing the cult favorite The Return of the Living Dead. O’Bannon began his career as a sci-fi icon by working together with director John Carpenter on writing for their student-film-turned-low-budget-feature Dark Star.  And like Carpenter, he is a graduate of the University of Southern California’s film program.

O’Bannon was 63, and is survived by his wife and son.

Source: Variety

Short Take: Jaw-dropping visuals, and a list of relevant messages

Director: James Cameron (Titanic)

Screenwriter: James Cameron (Titanic)

Cast: Sam Worthington (Terminator: Salvation), Zoe Saldana (Star Trek), Sigourney Weaver (Prayers for Bobby), Stephen Lang (Public Enemies)

Length: 2h 42m

Synopsis: Humans have landed on an earth-like alien planet named Pandora, where they hope to collect precious minerals that are worth unimaginable sums. Standing in their way are an indigenous people called the Na’vi (pronounced Nah-vee), whose physical prowess and territorial inflexibleness have made diplomatic resolutions exceedingly difficult. In the mix is a man who is able to take control of his own alien body and permeate the Na’vi’s intense and scrupulous social boundaries in order to persuade them to peacefully make way for the humans. Read the rest of this entry »

A R Rahman, winner of Best Original Song 2009 for "Jai Ho," from "Slumdog Millionaire"

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has released their list of all 63 songs eligible for nomination for the Best Original Song Oscar at the upcoming 82nd Academy Awards.

The voters will rate each song on a point basis, with an 8.25 rating needed for a song to be nominated. If no songs receive that high of a rating, the category is scrapped for the year. If only one song receives an 8.25 or higher, it and the runner up will be the only nominations. Up to 5 songs can become final nominees.

The list of all songs eligible for nomination are as follows:

“All Is Love” from Where the Wild Things Are
“Almost Over You” from My One and Only
“Almost There” from The Princess and the Frog
“AyAyAyAy” from The Maid
“Back to Tennessee” from Hannah Montana the Movie
“Being Bad” from Duplicity
“Blanco” from Fast & Furious
“Brothers in Arms” from Brothers at War
“Butterfly Fly Away” from Hannah Montana the Movie
“Cinema Italiano” from Nine
“Colorblind” from Invictus
“Depression Era” from That Evening Sun
“Don’t Walk Away” from Hannah Montana the Movie
“Dove of Peace” from Bruno
“Down in New Orleans” from The Princess and the Frog
“Fly Farm Blues” from It Might Get Loud
“Forget Me” from I Love You, Beth Cooper
“God Bless Us Everyone” from Disney’s A Christmas Carol
“Here” from Shrink
“Hideaway” from Where the Wild Things Are
“Hoedown Throwdown” from Hannah Montana the Movie
“I Bring What I Love” from Youssou N’Dour: I Bring What I Love
“I See You” from Avatar
“(I Want to) Come Home” from Everybody’s Fine
“If You’re Wondering” from The Lightkeepers
“Impossible Fantasy” from Adventures of Power
“Innocent Child” from Skin
“Invictus 9,000 Days” from Invictus
“Legendary” from Tyson
“Let Freedom Reign” from Skin
“Loin de Paname” from Paris 36
“Ma Belle Evangeline” from The Princess and the Frog
“My One and Only” from My One and Only
“Na Na” from Couples Retreat
“Never Knew I Needed” from The Princess and the Frog
“New Divide” from Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen
“New Jersey Nights” from Adventures of Power
“New York Is Where I Live” from Did You Hear about the Morgans?
“No Time for Love” from Simon & Malou
“One Day” from Post Grad
“Only You” from The Young Victoria
“Other Father Song” from Coraline
“Petey’s Song” from Fantastic Mr. Fox
“Ponyo on the Cliff by the Sea” from Ponyo
“Possibility” from The Twilight Saga: New Moon
“Raining Sunshine” from Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs
“Running Out of Empty (Make Ourselves at Home)” from Lymelife
“Smoke without Fire” from An Education
“Somebody Else” from Crazy Heart
“Stu’s Song” from The Hangover
“Take It All” from Nine
“Through the Trees” from Jennifer’s Body
“Trust Me” from The Informant!
“Un Bouquet des Violettes” from New York, I Love You
“We Are the Children of the World” from The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus
“We Love Violence” from The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus
“The Weary Kind (Theme from Crazy Heart)” from Crazy Heart
“When You Find Me” from Adam
“Winter” from Brothers
“The Word Is Love” from Oy Vey! My Son Is Gay!
“You Got Me Wrapped around Your Little Finger” from An Education
“You’ll Always Find Your Way Back Home” from Hannah Montana the Movie
“You’ve Been a Friend to Me” from Old Dogs

Hannah Montana The Movie and The Princess and the Frog have the highest number of eligible songs. Official nominations for all categories will be released February 2nd.

Source: Hollywood Reporter

Writer/Director Joss Whedon’s 2005 film Serenity combines genre conventions of both Westerns and futuristic science fiction films.  Though the events of Serenity and the Fox television series that inspired it, Firefly, take place a little over 500 years into the future, everything from the character typology and dialogue to the stories and costuming are more akin to classic Westerns than sci-fi films.  However, though series-creator Whedon more heavily utilizes elements from Westerns, he does not simply transfer them unchanged.  Instead, Whedon rewrites traditional Western conventions in order to make them more reflective of and relevant to contemporary society. Read the rest of this entry »