« Sunday Estimates by Klady - Oscar Weekend | Main | Let The Crashing Begin! »
March 05, 2006
Gotta Give It To 'Em...
Paramount knows they have a big problem with the title Failure To Launch, which is failing to catch on with the female audiences that were expected to drive the box office on the movie. Even with Sarah Jessica Parker, a dick joke for a title that she doesn't make fun of in the spots just isn't cutting it.
So a new TV campaign started this weekend featuring Kathy Bates and Terry Bradshaw, who play Matthew "Duh" McConaughey's parents, essentially explaining the title... over and over again.
It may not work, but action was demanded and action has been taken... and you have to give it to them for that.
Posted by poland at March 5, 2006 01:29 PM
Comments
Terry Bradshaw and Kathy Bates. Say it again, Terry Bradshaw and Kathy Bates. Terry Bradshaw and Howie Long, now that would be funny.
Posted by: Blackcloud
at March 5, 2006 01:36 PM
you mean "Failure to Launch" may be "Nothing but Trouble"? What's the Worst That Could Happen? Will Grey be in Big Trouble if this bombs? The whole thing just gives me Bad Vibes.
Posted by: martin
at March 5, 2006 01:41 PM
IMHO, they were idiotic moving it off 2/10, where it would have been the sole RomCom in the marketplace over Valentine's Day, a strategy that (in part) added up to big grosses for "How To Lose A Guy In 10 Days" and "Hitch." Clearly, they've reworked the ad campaign (the new "headshot only" campaign, as opposed to the "Parker holding up McConaguhey" original poster), but they left money on the table there. Now, it's just going to get lost against "Hills HAve Eyes," which will open HUGE.
Posted by: MattM
at March 5, 2006 03:29 PM
If that's their strategy - to explain a dick joke that I never thought of until I read this thread - then they have a looooong ways to go with this movie.
Posted by: jeffmcm
at March 5, 2006 03:31 PM
I have to say the title is poor. The females I know didn't even know about this movie and these are their target markets. Should be easy to sell. Matthew M, romantic comedy, Sarah JP, empty weekend, no romantic comedies in a while, a layup.
Posted by: Bruce
at March 5, 2006 03:42 PM
This is Terry Bradshaw here. Mr 4 Super Bowl wins. Like he would be caught dead married to Kathy Bates. Oscar or no Oscar.
Posted by: Sanchez
at March 5, 2006 05:25 PM
This is going to go down in history as one of the worst choices in the world. Anyone with any sense of cinema knows that all the other films deserved it more, especially Brokeback. Pardon me, I have to go vomit.
Posted by: jasctt
at March 5, 2006 08:28 PM
Even Jack Nicholson was like "What the F!"
But I've written my will and will now embark on my journey to slap some senses into every homophobic Academy member. If I don't make it, tell all my boyfriends that I love them and that each of them was my first.
Posted by: waterbucket
at March 5, 2006 08:33 PM
Tonight, waterbucket, we are all gay!
Posted by: jasctt
at March 5, 2006 08:38 PM
Let the recriminations begin!!!!!
Posted by: Blackcloud
at March 5, 2006 08:44 PM
Yay Crash, though I was glad Ang won (he's deserved it for a while). People either loved or hated Crash, there really wasn't any room in between, which you really couldn't say about the other nominees. I guess there were enough people who loved it, while the others all had their supporters who drew away support for Brokeback.
Sorry Waterbucket. I don't think it had to do with homophobic sentiment. I think it had to do with Ang's style - long and drawn out. It was more cinematic, but it was tougher to embrace.
Sorry.
Posted by: Me
at March 5, 2006 08:52 PM
The Academy has no problem with long and drawn out. The English Patient? The Last Emperor? Gandhi? Chariots of Fire?
I think Brokeback was the front-runner for too long. But God does Crash ever suck... how can so many people be so wrong? Oh well, the Academy has always been something of a joke.
Posted by: Melquiades
at March 5, 2006 08:57 PM
I love it! I've been quiet about defending Crash here from people who are ravenously overreacting to it, but now I just have to gloat. This completely rocks -- one of the first times the Academy made the wiser decision of two choices like that. Crash is a brilliant film and will be remembered in years to come as a wonderful choice. I find its detractors miss the point. They take it too literally and therefore have problems with the coincidences. But Crash is a fable, a wonderfully complex, emotionally powerful fable. The happenstances in the plot are an inherent part of this storytelling form. It's not a story told for the sake of the story -- it's a distillation of characters and principles. It's an illustration. It works beautifully that way.
Posted by: Sam
at March 5, 2006 09:00 PM
Watching Brokeback was a bit like watching a series of short films connected by that struma lumma song.
But Crash. Whew wee! This will be one of those "THAT won best picture?!" years.
Posted by: qwiggles
at March 5, 2006 09:00 PM
Well, whatever the reason is, it sucked hard and somewhere Dave Poland's 5 chins are vibrating in happiness.
That said, I'm an optimistic person so I'm just going to look at the bright side. Perhaps by losing tonight, Brokeback will be remembered as one of those films that should have won and will be used as one of the examples of how the Oscar is irrelevant. Look at how much ink Raging Bull still gets annually for losing to the ordinary Ordinary People.
But it still blew and I don't know how I can finish this stupid homework now. I just feel like getting drunk.
Posted by: waterbucket
at March 5, 2006 09:03 PM
Melquiades: "how can so many people be so wrong?"
I ask that same question every day about the last two presidential elections. ;>
That's what you get with popularity contests about something that is ultimately undefinable.
Posted by: Me
at March 5, 2006 09:06 PM
Very good points above, although the people voting in the Academy are NOT the idiots who helped put Bush in office. Twice. They are supposed to be better than that.
While you don't want to look at this as a case of homophobia, if you look at the pure definition of the word, Hollywood may be tolerant of gay lifestyle and appreciate the work done by homosexuals over the years, many are still AFRAID of it. I think that most people uncomfortable with the material realize it's not that big of a deal once Brokeback is over. The question is, how many Academy voters were just too afraid or uncomfortable to watch it? I don't see the vote for Crash as a swipe at the gay community, but a sad truth that many people who feel they are "accepting" aren't as inclusive as they think they are.
Ulitmately, Crash is the kind of sentimental, liberal pap that you'd expect the Academy to go for. It seemed like Brokeback had too many precursors in its favor, but never underestimate the amount of voters who watch screeners at home instead of doing their fucking DUTY and watching the films in theatres where they belong.
It may give some comfort to people to view Brokeback as one in a long list of also-rans that were superior to the films that bested them. It doesn't make me feel better at all. I still think the whole thing stinks. But I will say, I felt a lot worse when Marty lost last year (or the time before that).
This was Chariots of Fire all over again. Crash will not be remembered as one of the great ones, make no mistake about it.
Posted by: lazarus
at March 5, 2006 09:24 PM
Waterbucket, we who hear your angst agree with you. I think that BBM WILL be come one of those films that is endlessly discussed for years to come. Ledger's performance is going to be remembered as moment where one of the great acting feats was achieved and in the end, longevity will be its true reward while Crash will fade away into that obscurity remarked for other has been best picture craptaculars (See A Beautiful Mind and Chicago).
Posted by: jasctt
at March 5, 2006 09:25 PM
Why wasn't Eastwood there to present the directing award tonight? Is he still filming that second Jap POV WWII pic or is because he didn't want to hand out a directing Oscar for a gay film?
Posted by: jasctt
at March 5, 2006 09:26 PM
I, honest to god, don't know how to deal with this. I know it's just a movie, but for Christ's sake, Brokeback Mountain, actually matters to an awful lot of people. I've always stuck by the Oscars (especially in the year that Ordinary People beat Raging Bull -- I still remain one of those who think it's a better movie).
Is this the biggest upset ever? It is certainly bigger than Shakespeare over Private Ryan. I just can't imagine, ten years out, people thinking that CRASH is a more important film than BBM (fire away, I'm about as drunk as I've ever been).
xxoo
Posted by: hepwa
at March 5, 2006 09:51 PM
Oh, f'Christ's sake, why can't some people accept the fact that people may have preferred CRASH to BROKEBACK for reasons that have nothing to do with the gay angle? BROKEBACK was a snooze, and people finally woke up, so to speak, to that fact and voted for the better picture.
Posted by: Cadavra
at March 5, 2006 10:10 PM
Not true. I was on my edge for every second of BBM. In fact, i thought it was a perfectly paced film. Indeed, the second time I saw it, it flew by so quickly, I couldn't believe how well the thing worked. The mark of a great film is when you sit down and get up thinking you were only seated for five minutes. Great films that are that well paced are few and far between. Crash felt so overwrought that I choked before it was ever over.
Posted by: jasctt
at March 5, 2006 10:32 PM
Then we agree to disagree! :-)
Posted by: Cadavra
at March 5, 2006 10:49 PM
i liked Crash and even I find it's win disguting and insulting and pathetic.
BUT back to the topic.
Is it just me or is Failure to Launch one of those movies that is just way too prophetic with it's title. Like, What's The Worst That Could Happen. I can see the headlines now "Failure to Launch fails to launch" okay they'd come up with something better, but you get the drift.
Posted by: KamikazeCamelV2.0
at March 6, 2006 06:32 AM
The original release date for "Failure to Launch" was the same day as the opening ceremonies of the Winter Olympics.
Given the el stinko ratings for the NBC telecasts from Turin, you wonder how "Launch" would have done had it not been moved.
Posted by: Chucky in Jersey
at March 6, 2006 03:21 PM
Ditto for the Oscars. They were pushed cause of the Olympics. But, really...
Posted by: KamikazeCamelV2.0
at March 6, 2006 10:39 PM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)