Film, List, Opinion

JANUARY 2016 IN FILM 

PicMonkey Collage

Happy new year! 2016 is finally upon us, and it promises to be one of the biggest years in cinema yet. January is an exciting month, with the UK finally getting to see some of the major oscar contenders that have been out in the US for months. Here is the lowdown of what will be coming to screens this month…

The Danish Girl:

the-danish-girl-posterOut: January 1st 2016

Directed: Tom Hooper

Starring: Eddie Redmayne, Alicia Vikander, Ben Wishaw

What’s it about?: Tells the story of the marriage of Gerda and Einar Wegener, the latter of who became one of the first gender reassignment patients in 1920’s Copenhagen. The film is based on the book by David Ebershoff, a fictionalised account of the real life couple.

Will it be good?: In an oscar-baiting way, undoubtedly. Whilst The Danish Girl is a film that has been trying to get made for over a decade, it has been released in the midst of the biggest ever dialogue about trans issues, and is sure to make good of its two leads.

Vikander is an up and coming star who well and truly broke out into mainstream consciousness last year with Ex-Machina and The Man from U.N.C.L.E, whilst Redmayne scooped an oscar for his transformative performance as Stephen Hawking in The Theory of Everything – a film which also, incidentaly, portrays a marriage in unusual circumstances.

British director Hooper won the Best Director oscar back in 2010 for The King’s Speech, and his latest film is sure to tick a lot of the boxes that the Academy look for, so The Danish Girl is not to be missed if you want to know what everyone’s talking about come February.

Joy:

Joy-PosterOut: January 1st 2016

Directed: David O Russell

Starring: Jennifer Lawrence, Robert DeNiro, Bradley Cooper

What’s it about?: Loosly based on the true story of Joy Mangano, the inventor of the Miracle Mop. The film tells the story of her rise to prominence and as a matriarch of her family.

Will it be good?: Russell must know that if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it, because he has reunited his triangle of talent for the third time with Joy, and there is no denying that its a talented trio. Lawrence is arguably one of the biggest names in Hollywood at the moment, and she is riding high on the conclusion of the much loved Hunger Games series at the end of last year, whilst DeNiro is a living legend, and no amount of questionable roles (more on that later) will change that. Cooper has also proved his worth in recent years, moving further away from romcoms and comedies to take on some really interesting roles – whatever your view is on American Sniper (2014), you can’t deny his ability.

Russell has also proved himself a skilled filmaker, particularly with a string of generally well recieved releases since 2010’s The Fighter, but there is still the feeling that his work has a hollow quality that is difficult to put into words. American Hustle (2014) for example, was a great and enjoyable film on first viewing, but it feels empty upon repeated watches, holding it back from gaining any lasting status. That said, Joy will be hard to ignore this month, and is sure to be worth seeing based on Lawrence alone.

The Hateful Eight:

the-hateful-eightOut: January 8th 2016

Directed: Quentin Tarantino

Starring: Samuel L Jackson, Kurt Russell, Jennifer Jason Leigh

What’s it about?: A snowstorm in the heart of a Wyoming Winter leaves eight individuals taking refuge at Minnie’s haberdashy in post-civil war USA.

Will it be good?: Almost certainly. Tarantino fans will be falling over themselves to see the latest from the director, which is set in the same universe as 2012’s Django Unchained. It looked like the film may never see the light of day when the director shelved it following a script leak in early 2014, but its finally here and it is sure to be glorious.

Tarantino has cited The Thing (1982) and Resevoir Dogs (1992) as the two main influences on the film, and this fact alone is enough to send excitement levels into overdrive. The idea of eight shady people being cooped up together in a tavern is an interesting premise that could go in any direction, and The Hateful Eight should be one everyone’s must-see list this month.

Creed:

creedpostersmallOut: January 15th 2016

Directed: Ryan Coogler

Starring: Michael B Jordan, Sylvester Stallone

What’s it about?: AKA Rocky VII – Former heavyweight champion Rocky Balboa becomes mentor to Adonis Johnson, the son of his former rival and late friend, Apollo Creed.

Will it be good?: When Creed was first announced there was a collective sigh from anyone who had ever seen a Rocky movie – what were they thinking? Stallone had managed to bring the series back and end it on a high in 2006 with Rocky Balboa, but in the process he had provided an appropriate end for the chracter, why ruin that? But against the odds the film has actually been very well recievec in the states, moving the story along by introducing Creed and placing Stallone in the mentor role.

It is the first Rocky film not to be written by Stallone, and also the first where Rocky doesn’t fight. This allows Rocky Balboa to maintain its definitive end of an era vibe whilst also allowing the series to continue in a way that doesn’t feel increasingly ridiculous. The up and coming Jordan also seems like the perfect candidate to play Creed, and the film is a must-see out of curiousity if nothing else.

The Revenant: 

revenant-leoOut: January 15th 2016

Directed: Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu

Starring: Leonardo DiCaprio, Tom Hardy, Domnhall Gleeson

What’s it about?: Set in the 1820s. the film tells the story of Hugh Glass (Leonardo DiCaprio) – a frontierman who survives being mauled by a bear and sets out on a quest for revenge against his confidant John Fitzgerald (Tom Hardy).

Will it be good?: It is set to be a technical marvel above all else, and it is looking like it will cement Gonzalez Inarritu as one of the most inventive filmakers working today. The follow up to Birdman, which won big at the 2014 oscars, the film had a well-documented troubled production, largely due to the fact that it was filmed on location and using only natural light, meaning that only a few hours could be filmed per day.

The film will live or die by DiCaprio, who gave everything to the role and said it was one of the toughest of his career. Sure, this opens him up to a lot of jokes about how far he is willing to go to try and finally bag an oscar (he ate a raw bison’s liver, in spite of being vegetarian), but it also proves why he is one of the best in the business. He turned down Steve Jobs (2015) for this, and it looks like it has paid off. The film has already been recieving rave reviews and is another strong oscar contender, as well as the type of film that was painstakingly designed to be appreciated on the big screen, so make sure you don’t miss it in cinemas.

Room:

Room_PosterOut: January 15th 2016

Directed: Lenny Abrahamson

Starring: Brie Larson, Jacob Tremblay

What’s it about?: A mother and her five year old son live out their lives in a 10 by 10 feet room, where the mother works hard to keep her sons imagination alive before they decide to try and break out into the real world.

Will it be good?: It has been getting excellent write-ups, with Larson’s central performance gaining the majority of the praise. It is an interesting concept, based on Emma Donoghue’s novel, which she wrote after hearing about the5 year old Felix in the Fritzl case. A film of this sort can only work if the performances are good, and all the indacators are pointing towards this being the case, with an oscar nomination even being mentioned for Larson. Anyone interested in the awards race will have to add this to the already crowded must-watch list.

The Big Short:

tbs_1-sht_teaserOut: January 22nd 2016

Directed: Adam McKay

Starring: Christian Bale, Steve Carrell, Ryan Gosling, Brad Pitt

What’s it about?: Tells three seperate tales about the mid 2000s mortgage housing crisis in the USA.

Will it be good?: Bar seeing the trailer, I haven’t heard a lot about this film, but I am banking on it being good based on the stellar cast. McKay is much better known for his comedy work, and this is the first film of his not to feature Will Ferrell, but the trailer looked like the film had a comedy-drama vibe that should suit the director well.

Carrell proved he can do dramatic well with Foxcatcher (2015), and his comedy talent is untouchable, so he seems like a perfect fit for the film, whilst it is great to see Gosling back on screen following his break from acting since 2013. Bale and Pitt are also industry stalwarts, and bringing the four talents together has the potential for brilliant storytelling – it all hangs on McKay’s ability to maintain the more dramatic elements.

Our Brand is in Crisis:

Our-Brand-Is-Crisis-posterOut: January 22nd 2016

Directed: David Gordon Green

Starring: Sandra Bullock, Billy Bob Thornton, Anthony Mackie

What’s it about?: Based on the documentary of the same name (available on Netflix), the film depicts a Bolivian politician who hires an American political analyst in a bid to win the 2002 election.

Will it be good?: The film, produced by Bullock and George Clooney, has every chance of being good, yet for some reason I’m not sold. It might be the poster, which makes it look like a generic thriller starring Liam Neeson. It might also be the fact that it is basically just remaking a documentary that I could easily watch on Netflix from the comfort of my own bed.

That said, Bullock, Thornton and recent Avengers addition Mackie are all strong performers, and it isn’t fair to write a film off totally because of poor marketing, so Our Brand is in Crisis could turn out to be that excellent film that I didn’t bother to see.

Ride Along 2:

file_612412_ride-along-2-poster-640x1013Out: January 22nd 2016

Directed: Tim Story

Starring: Ice Cube, Kevin Hart, Olivia Munn

What’s it about?: Ben’s (Kevin Hart) wedding is looming, and he accompanies his soon to be brother in law James (Ice Cube) to Miami to bring down a drug dealer.

Will it be good?: Granted I have never seen the first Ride Along (2014), but hopes aren’t particularly high for this one. With Straight Outta Compton (2015) coming out last year, it has reminded anyone who may have forgotten of the greatness of N.W.A, which just makes it seem even stranger that Ice Cube – the man responsible for Fuck Tha Police – is playing a police officer. There isn’t anything wrong with it per se, it’s just weird. Hart on the other hand is funny, but he has also appeared in a fair few lacklustre comedies, and I’m willing to bet that is the category Ride Along 2 will fall into.

The 33:

the33_1sht_main_dom_2764x4096Out: January 29th 2016

Directed: Patricia Riggan

Starring: Antonio Banderas, Rodrigo Santoro

What’s it about?: Based on the 2010 incident which saw 33 Chilean miners being trapped underground for 69 days. The film is based on the official account of events as depicted in the book Deep Down Dark.

Will it be good?: If handled right, yes. Films of this sort can be extremely effective, but the impact is based on the director’s ability to make the audience experience the trapped feeling of the characters. Mexican director Riggan doesn’t have a gigantic backlog to go from, and other work includes TV Movie Lemonade Mouth (2012) which was shown on the Disney Channel, so she clearly doesn’t have experience in this genre. That doesn’t mean it should be written off – it is an intriguing incident and if handled well it will be an affecting watch. So far it has recieved mixed reviews from critics, some of whom have noted that it relies too heavily on formula. It is hard to gage, but the film probably won’t take precedence in my choices for the month.

Dirty Grandpa: 

dirty-grandpa-posterOut: January 29th 2016

Directed: Dan Mazer

Starring: Robert DeNiro, Zac Efron, Audrey Plaza

What’s it about?: A young, engaged lawyer is tricked into attending Spring Break with his Grandfather.

Will it be good?: Remember earlier when I said nothing could tarnish DeNiro’s legacy? This is what I was talking about. Over the last decade or so, it seems a bit like he has thrown caution to the wind and decided to have some fun (or the more cynical and probably more realistic view is that he has decided to make some real money), and that has led to some…questionable choices. Dirty Grandpa, like a lot of the comedies DeNiro has put his name on in recent years, is the sort of film that looks like it would have been a lot of fun to make, and it is sure to be enjoyed by any number of teenage boys, but that’s about it really. See it at the weekend if you’re looking for some gross out, easy viewing.

Spotlight:

2B89064B00000578-0-image-a-25_1440115471750Out: January 29th 2016

Directed: Tom McCarthy

Starring: Mark Ruffalo, Michael Keaton, Rachel McAdams

What’s it about?: The true story of how the Boston Globe uncovered child molestation allegations within the Catholic Church.

Will it be good?: Without a shadow of a doubt. The filmm has already recieved critical acclaim in the states, and it looks set to repeat the feat over here. Made with co-operation from the Boston Globe and looking like it is going to have a very All The President’s Men (1976) feel to it, this is one of the films I have been willing to appear in UK cinemas ever since I first heard about it months ago. As a journalism student myself, it is a subject that I find fascinating, as will many others.

My own personal excitment aside, there is a lot to look forward to here, most notably an excellent cast. Keaton, Ruffalo and McAdams are all excellent in their own right, and the ensemble is sure to be something special. Spotlight looks set for awards glory and is THE must-see film of the month.

Youth: 

youth-posterOut: January 29th 2016

Directed: Paolo Sorrentino

Starring: Michael Caine, Henry Keitel, Jane Fonda

What’s it about?: Fred (Michael Caine) is a retired composer and Mick (Harvey Keitel) a film director are old friends staying at a hotel in the Alps when Fred gets a request to compose for Prince Phillip.

Will it be good?: In a word, yes. Caine is another living legend, and Sorrentino wrote the film with him in mind as a main character, so it is sure to be a treat. Going by the trailer it looks like an understated, visually striking film which could be some of Caine and Keitel’s best work in years, whilst it will be great to see Fonda back onscreen. That said, with such a jam-packed month it might be hard to fit it in!

As you can see, it’s a jam packed month of awards contenders, and it could prove difficult to fit them all in, but the five films I will be making sure to see are:

  • Spotlight
  • The Hateful Eight
  • The Revenant
  • Creed
  • The Danish Girl

(I will probably be checking out Joy, Youth and The Big Short for good measure)

Which films are you looking forward to seeing this month? Let me know in the comments section!

Standard
Film, List, Opinion

THE MISLEADING MARKETING OF MOVIES

Movie-Marketing

Since the dawn of the internet we have been living in a world where information is more widely and easily available than ever before. This has made pretty much everything more competitive, especially in the entertainment industry. It is harder than ever before to get a film made, and even if a great film is backed by a studio it will still bomb if it isn’t marketed in a way that gets people interested.

Advertising is in itself a huge business, and there are people out there who have dedicated their entire lives to working out what it is that sells things to people. It turns out that we as the human race are not an overly imaginative bunch, and mainstream cinema audiences are more likely to react to marketing that they recognise – be that a notable actor/actress or a typical narrative, marketing experts will generally gear advertising material about a film to fit certain quotas.

PicMonkey CollageThis can often lead to misleading marketing material that more often than not doesn’t actually represent the product that is being sold to us. This can work both ways, either selling an indie film as more mainstream fare (Me, Earl and the Dying Girl earlier this year was very much marketed as a YA adaption in the vein of The Fault in Our Stars in spite of being a vastly different film, for example) or tricking audiences into seeing a generic flick.

The ways in which marketing material can be misleading varies in a number of ways, but most tactics generally centralise around the ‘bait and switch’ idea where material will lure audiences in before turning out to be something totally different – this is done with actor/actresses, notable directors and trailers, as well as posters and even titles of films.

The thing is, advertising works. As much as many of us would like to believe that we are not susceptible, but with advertising being a multi-billion dollar industry the odds are stacked against us, and a lot of what makes marketing material work is the fact that it can sometimes operate on a subconscious level.

This post will look at these tactics in more detail using various examples of real life marketing material that was essentially misleading in the representation it provided of the film in question.

POSTERS:

PicMonkey Collage

Posters are one of the main forms of marketing when it comes to movies – they generally set the tone and establish the stars of the film, as well as generally alluding to what the film is about. However, there are plenty of examples of times where distributors have provided movie posters which quite drastically misrepresent the film in some way.

A notable example from earlier this year was Legend, which made the headlines when it was revealed that it had strategically placed a two star review from The Guardian to look like it was a five star review. The review, from critic Benjamin Lee, was decidedly less than complementary about the Tom Hardy starring gangster biopic, yet the way the stars had been placed in the poster made it look like it was yet another excellent review of the film, leading to Lee himself writing an article about the dangers of misleading advertising. He pointed out that this was far from a one off, and the practice of taking critics quotes or ratings out of context and placing them in marketing material is a surprisingly common.

Other examples of posters which were essentially misleading include one of the US posters for The Aviator (2004) which tries to entice fans of Saving Private Ryan type films by taking an action still completely out of context, or the Spanish poster for The Godfather (1972), which was based on an early draft of the script which involved a spaghetti restaurant and just ends up coming across as promoting stereotypes.

Here are some of more examples of misleading movie posters…

  • PicMonkey CollageKramer . Vs. Kramer (1979) – shows a happy family even though the film is the depiction of the breaking up of said family
  • Drugstore Cowboy (1989) – selling a movie about drug addicts is always going to be hard, but the main characters on the poster are much chirpier than they appear in the film.
  • My Sister’s Keeper (2009) – Much like Drugstore Cowboy, marketing a movie about cancer is difficult, but this poster contains a lot more smiling than we ever see in this tearjerker

TITLES:

PicMonkey Collage

It goes without saying that a movie title is one of the most important elements, as it tends to be a consumers first point of contact with the product. A poor or bland title is unlikely to entice audiences, and sometimes quirky or unusual trailers can be used for generic films, or vice versa. Titles differ from other marketing materials in that they are often taken from other mediums – for example, if a film is based on a book the title will often be retained.

However, there are examples of films based on books where the title was changed, presumably as part of the marketing strategy. This would include the likes of Slumdog Millionaire (2009), which was based on Q&A by Vikas Swarup. From a marketing perspective the name change is quite obvious – the idea of a slumgod millionaire is much more evocative than a Q&A session, and it immediately gives the consumer a bigger insight into what the film is about.

Love, Rosie (2014) is based on Irish author Cecilia Aherne’s second novel, entitled Where Rainbows End (2004) and is another example of a title change, with the movie title nodding more towards rom-com material.

trainspottingFilms such as Trainspotting (1994) retained their book titles, but no longer make sense in the context of the film. The book contains a line which alludes to the act of trainspotting and also acts as character development for the pyschotic Begbie, who was immortalised on screen by Robert Carlyle. However slight this alluding to the title was, it was still present, and no such instance occurs in the film, essentially making the title obsolete. This did nothing to impact the overall quality of the movie however, and it was going to be a hard task for the marketing strategists to come up with a title for a film about Edinburgh based heroin addicts and sociopaths.

Film titles can also change from country to country, the most famous recent example being the Avengers/Avengers Assemble instance in 2012. The culmination of the Marvel Cinematic Universe was markered in the US as The Avengers, whilst in the UK it was distributed as The Avengers Assemble. This was done due to the existence of a TV show titled in The Avengers in the UK, making it crystal clear to audiences that they were not the same thing.

Other examples of differences between the US/UK movie titles include…

  • Harry_Potter_and_the_Philosopher's_Stone_postersHarold and Kumar go to White Castle (US) became Harold and Kumar get the Munchies (UK) due to the lack of White Castle fast food chain in the UK.
  • Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone (UK) became Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone (US) – there is much debate as to why this was the case, but it is generally deemed to be because the idea of a sorcerer was one that implied ‘magical’ more than philosophers in to the US market.
  • Dracula 2000 (US) was changed to Dracula 2001 internationally due to the fact that it was released the year after. Apparently audiences wouldn’t buy that a film about Dracula was set a year in the past.

Whilst these title changes are not misleading in themselves, it shows how important titles are as part of the overall marketing strategy, with distributors being willing to actually change a title if they feel it will sell a movie better.

More examples of titles that are misleading…

  • The Squid and the Whale (2005) – It’s not about a squid, or a whale, though dioramas of both are seen in the film at the American Museum of Natural History. Does this count?
  • Antichrist (2009) – Whilst it may sound like your run of the mill horror/possession/exorcism movie, its actually part of Lars Von Trier’s overly depressing depression trilogy.
  • 12 Monkeys (1995) – It’s not about 12 monkeys, ok?

STARS:

PicMonkey Collage

The old bait and switch is one of the oldest tricks in the book – marketing a film with a well known star at the forefront of all the material, only for them to hardly appear in the film itself, which people will only find out once they have already paid to see it. It’s a concept thats still around because it works, and despite social media making it easier and easier for audiences to deduce what is going on before a film comes out, we are still being collectively duped more than you would think.

Just this year the marketing material for Suffragette (2015) had us all thinking that Meryl Streep was in the main cast as the notable real life campaigner Emmeline Pankhurst. She featured heavily in all the material including trailers and posters, but turned out to only be in the film for a grand total of about five minutes. There was no reason to believe that Streep had anything less than a leading role, but it turned out that Cary Mulligan was the lead, with Helena Bohem Carter appearing in a supporting capacity. Streep was really no more than a cameo, making her appearance in the marketing material extremely misleading. It’s clear why this was the strategy however – Streep is one of the most famous and successful actresses of all time, and whilst Bohem Carter and Mulligan are both respected they in no way carry the level of traction that Streep does. Featuring her heavily in the marketing was also a clever move in enaging with US audiences, who will recognise her much more than the British Mulligan and Bohem Carter.

One of the first notable uses of the bait and switch of a star was in Alfred Hitchcock’s Pyscho (1960), which was marketed with Janet Leigh as the lead. She is then killed off in the first half an hour of the film, a feat that was famously repeated by Wes Craven with Drew Barrymore in Scream (1996). Both films were hugely successful – arguably partly due to the marketing of famous actresses Leigh and Barrymore as respective leads.

Other examples of this in practice include…

  • 273894_oriLeprechaun (1993) – The DVD release of this horror film capitalised on the fact that Jennifer Aniston, who has a relatively minor role in the movie, had struck gold as Rachel Green on Friends (1994-2004), and she is featured on the cover design.
  • Fast Times at Ridgemont High (1982) – Sean Penn is implied as the lead but it actually just part of a larger ensemble cast.
  • Halloween: Resurrection (2002) – Marketed almost wholly on the grand return of Jamie Lee Curtis, who is then killed off in the first half.
  • The Place Beyond the Pines (2012) – Marketed on Ryan Gosling and Bradley Cooper’s names, completely leaving out the other half which focuses on their sons, played by the then lesser known Dane DeHaan and Emory Cohen respectively.

DIRECTORS:

PicMonkey Collage

This is a trend that is slightly less obvious, but is still prevalent across Hollywood marketing material. Once a director has made a name for themselves, sticking their name on a poster or in a trailer is a surefire way of convincing people that a movie is worth seeing. The thing is, advertising will tend to stick a directors name on it even if their involvement with the film was not in a very large capacity, as it is easier to sell a picture on their name than that of a newbie or a less established film-maker.

Guillermo del Toro is a director that has had his name attached to several films, to the point that he actually spoke about it in an interview, saying:

“I only do it when – (a) I am introducing a filmmaker to the world, but (b) I endorse and say I believe in this movie very, very strongly. For whatever reason, it’s a more risky proposition in one way, but it’s one that I believe needs to continue to support first-time filmmakers. . . . I only do it when I fully believe I was involved in the product in a way that is meaningful.” 

del Toro was attached to Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark (2013), which was directed by Troy Nixey and The Orphanage (2007), directed by J . A Bayona. Regardless of the reasons why a director may choose to allow their name to be attached to a film, there is no doubt that it is both an effective and misleading marketing tactic. Audiences are going to see something based on the fact that they know and like the work of the director appearing on the poster, which can sometimes lead to them seeing a rubbish movie bolstered by the name, or give an up and coming film-maker a chance by viewing it, albeit under false pretences.

Other examples include…

  • The_nightmare_before_christmas_posterNightmare Before Christmas (1993) – Generally marketed as Tim Burton’s Nightmare Before Christmas. Whilst the king of kook is responsible for the concept and is credited as a producer, the film was actually directed by Henry Selik.
  • Hostel (2005) – Splat pack director Eli Roth’s super violent torture horror film had Quentin Tarantino serve as an executive producer, and it was his name that the film was marketed on in spite of the fact Roth both wrote and directed the film.
  • Sanctum (2011) – Advertised as coming from executive producer James Cameron ‘the creator of Avatar and Titanic’, the way it is written on the poster makes the words James Cameron, Titanic and Avatar the ones that stand out. Considering they are two of the most financially successful films of all time, it is little wonder that is the slant the marketing took, in spite of the film being directed by Alister Grierson, who has no such accolades on his CV.

TRAILERS:

PicMonkey Collage

Trailers are increasingly becoming the most important part of the marketing of a movie, providing without a doubt the biggest insight into what the film is going to be about. However, like everything else that has been explored in this post, they can be edited in a way that totally misrepresents the narrative and overall tone of a film.

The films of Nicolas Winding Refn are notable for being marketed in ways that do not fully represent the final product. Three examples are Valhalla Rising (2009), Drive (2011) and Only God Forgives (2013). Valhalla Rising’s entire marketing campaign piggy-backed on the success of Zack Snyder’s 300 (2006), right down to the DVD cover and posters. However, the film is actually a deep study of a norse warrior. Drive is a neo-noir crime thriller that was marketed as a Fast and Furious style caper, whereas the final product is something much darker and broodier. Only God Forgives was advertised as a marital arts flick, but again was a thriller where marital arts was only a component factor. The marketing of these films, along with the fact that the very bankable Ryan Gosling (who is also featured heavily in the advertising) starred in the latter two allows them to be accessible to mainstream audiences in a way that they may not have without these elements.

Some other examples of misleading trailers include…

  • 126166377_iron-man_406735cIron Man 3 (2013) – the one that left comic book villains the world over bitter, the trailer advertised famous Iron Man foe The Mandarin as the big bad, only to pull a bait and switch and reveal Ben Kingsley’s character to be an drunken actor.
  • Magic Mike (2012) – Steven Soderbergh’s film was a deep character study marketed as a flashy chick-flick based around male strippers.
  • The Grey (2011) – capitalised on the Liam Neeson as an action lead phenomenon that began with 2009’s Taken, but The Grey was actually a study of the human relationship with death that is surprisingly light on the action.
  • Cabin in the Woods (2011) – marketed as a run of the mill teen slasher flick, but Drew Goddard’s Cabin in the Woods takes the idea of meta-horror to a level that makes Scream (1996) look as though it lacks self-awareness.

Which films do you think had misleading marketing campaigns? Let me know in the comments section!

 

Standard