Okay, I swore up and down that I was not going to write another word about those everloving snakes, but I'd be truly remiss if I let this one slip by. I let it simmer for a couple days, thinking I'd be able to avoid it, but it's just stuck in my head like an annoying Britney Spears song, and it won't leave until I write it out, so here you go. Chuck Klosterman wrote a piece on Snakes on a Plane, and how its "create your own adventure" marketing might just, if the film proves financially successful, spell the End of Film as We Know It. Klosterman goes into a lengthy dissertation on the term "populism", presumably to prove his point that Snakes on a Plane is not a populist film, in spite of the best efforts of its handlers to make it so.
Klosterman is concerned that if the film makes a lot of money (which it likely will) despite being ridiculous (which it probably is, even if it stars Samuel L. Jackson), its success will make studios sit up and take notice, and then churn out more of the same. Well, duh. Studios churn out crap all the time based on the success of other crap. How else can one possibly explain the fact that people like Uwe Boll and the Wayans brothers continue to make films?
Klosterman goes on to call SoaP "like a Wikipedia version of a movie". Why? Well, because New Line was going to change the title to the more respectable (and completely boring) Pacific Air Flight 121, but everyone, including Jackson, freaked out, so they didn't. Smart move, IMO -- do you honestly think anyone would be jazzed about seeing the film if it weren't called Snakes on a Plane? That's half the fun. Then he goes on to bemoan New Line sending cast and crew back to film more scenes after production had wrapped, including a scene that bloggers the world over had been demanding, with Jackson doing his best Jules impression, yelling, "I've had it with these mother-f***ing snakes on this mother-f***ing plane!" Hell, yeah. If anything is going to get my butt in a seat to see this thing (well, aside from my job reviewing movies, I mean), it's going to be to see Jackson going ballistic on some freaking snakes.
How is this different from what Kevin Smith has been doing for years -- listening to his audience and giving them what they want? And don't studios fairly often go back and shoot additional scenes after wrap? Maybe not every day, but it's certainly not unheard of. Klosterman seems to equate listening to the target audience with a categorical decision to throw every single thing the audience wants into the pot, but I just don't see keeping the title fun and campy, and filming some extra scenes as proof of his argument.
Here's what I think: I think Snakes on a Plane will be a huge success for New Line, and that it will easily turn a substantial profit. There are going to be some champagne corks popping and some people patting themselves on the back around there when all is said and done, and rightly so -- this has to be most brilliant job of marketing what will surely be a mediocre film that we've seen in years. I think the audiences going to see it will have a heck of a good time, because they aren't expecting to see an introspective, intelligent indie flick, they're going to see Samuel Jackson with some snakes on a damn plane. Period. We'll probably be subjected to an entire Snakes franchise over the next few years: Snakes on a Bus. Snakes on a Luxury Cruise. Snakes on a ... Hot Air Balloon.
Whatever. Those spin-offs won't do as well as the first, because it's the novelty and sheer chutzpah of marketing a film about snakes on a plane so enthusiastically that has people wanting to see it to begin with. And that will be that. It won't be the end of cinema as we know it, so put away your mourning clothes. Klosterman is just way overthinking this thing. The existence of Mickey D's and Chuck E. Cheese hasn't put an end to fine dining for those who want it, and neither does the existence of Snakes on a Plane sound the death knell for smart movies. There will still be plenty of smart, savvy filmmakers out there making films for film lovers, plenty of indie filmmakers pouring their hearts and creativity out for the sake of cinema. Film is art -- well, a lot of the time. Snakes is clearly not . But that's okay -- there's room for both.
Insert Caption: The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian_thumbnail.jpg)
SCOOP: Spider-Man 4 and 5 Might be Shot at the Same Time!
Cinematical Seven: Disney's Awesome Live-Action Kid Adventures
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
8-10-2006 @ 6:32PM
deepstructure said...
actually i disagree that this movie will do well. i think it'll have a reasonable opening weekend, and then drop off the face of the earth. i don't think people care about the movie - it's more the fun around the movie. i know for me and my friends it's more about making fun of it and laughing at the silly songs and ancillary publically-created content surrounding it than wanting to see the movie.
i would never have wanted to see this movie anyways - i certainly don't want to see it anymore now.
Reply
8-10-2006 @ 9:59PM
Geoff said...
A couple of friends and I have free tickets for any film at the local Odeon, after a shoddy sound system when we went to see Superman. We had a choice what to use them for: SoaP, or Scanner Darkly (still not out this side of the Atlantic!).
We all want to see Scanner Darkly. But by jiggedy are we not going to pay to see SoaP. Heh!
SoaP will do well, particularly amongst the internet crowd. The papers have started to advertise it (the Sun had a centre-page spread a couple of days ago), but it's too late for that kind of marketing now. With t'internet, they started early, made everyone laugh, and before anyone knew it, we were all gagging to see the motherf***ing film.
Reply
8-11-2006 @ 10:51AM
Richard von Busack said...
It's sour grapes. Klosterman is just sorry he didn't see this coming; not having done so impinges his street cred. Isn't rock and roll his field, anyway? Isn't this like Ebert talking about the new White Stripes album or something?
All I ask of this movie, is that they make it like Airport: doomed souls who need redemption are reminded of the beauty of life by the realization that hey, our lives are really fragile, and any moment you could be riding on a jet, and suddenly, you know, a black mamba could bite you.
As for its success... while I have no regrets about buzzing it, I'm glad I didn't invest in it. My prediction: $18 mil opening, 60% drop off the second week.
Reply
8-16-2006 @ 8:26PM
davethedog said...
Cry me a river. People don't like movies that write themselves. This one almost filmed itself, as you must have only so many shots on an airplane. Don't be a hater. Enjoy the fact that we get fooled over and over. I admire these guys and hope they get 100 mil the 1st weekend. Right on Bros!!
Reply
8-16-2006 @ 8:48PM
Jared said...
Enjoy it for what it is...Sam L. Jackson kicking snake butt (wait, do snakes have butts?) and flexing his star muscle!!!
P.S. Did anyone get the SoaP phone call? I think that was the most brilliant marketing campaign I have ever heard of. I laughed histerically for 10 minutes when I answered my phone and it was Sam L. talking personally to me about SoaP!!!
I will chip in my $$$ to go see what will probably be a dumb but entertaining, no thinking involved movie. If you want to think, there are plenty of other options, sort of...
Reply
8-16-2006 @ 9:07PM
cml said...
************SPEED 3.....Snakes on a Bus!!!!
LMFAO
Reply
8-16-2006 @ 9:33PM
dan k said...
Camp never fails.
Reply
8-16-2006 @ 9:48PM
Jeff said...
Ok, here is the deal. Hollywood runs on a system of jealousy and insecurity. Everyone is jealous of everyone else's success and insecure about their own. The studios will buy scripts just so other studios do not have a crack at them. Agents will hoard clients just so they are guaranteed at least one chance at box office success. This movie throws everything out of whack. A ton of studios passed and it only has one major star-Jackson(Julianna Margulies counts in my book, but not in other peoples). It is going to be a huge hit and no one saw it coming in this manner.
The buzz it has is of blockbuster proportions. You'd think Mel Gibson was attached by all the hype it's getting. Oh, and this film is coming out in late summer. The time when we want to just sit brainlessly and be entertained(I know I do!!). I do not want to sit through another period piece or ecological lecture when I could be at the beach.
Prediction-opening B.O. 50 mil. 2nd weekend 50% dropoff. Dvd sales through the roof(with alternate ending!). Sequel next summer.
Reply
8-16-2006 @ 9:55PM
al holzfield said...
grizzly bears on an adult tricycle
Reply
8-16-2006 @ 10:07PM
SAY WHAT? said...
Why has this movie received so much attention? How stupid does this movie sound... has Hollywood writers smoked too much.
There is a movie already out. SNAKES on a Train....ever heard of that one. Don't rent it..it sucks.
Reply
8-16-2006 @ 10:12PM
Cheese said...
Snakes in the House...Snakes in the yeard...Snakes in a car...Snakes on a Spaceship.....Snakes in my pants..
YES There is already a movie SNAKES ON A TRAIN.
Boycott all or we will see all the above...Unless you want to see whats in my pants... :)
Reply
8-16-2006 @ 10:14PM
Cheeks said...
This is a movie meant to be made fun of. The whole idea behind this movie is to have people see it, have a good laugh and walk out of the theatre knowing you saw a really bad movie that was so bad it was funny and therefore good.
I can't wait to see it. I know I'll be going a few times.
Reply
8-16-2006 @ 10:23PM
Peter Mathis said...
Snakes On A Bus........60 years ago I worked for a small museum in Dayton, Ohio. The director was a specialist in snakes, and often used to go to public schools to give talks about animals, including snakes. He would pop a snake in a cloth bag, tie the top of the bag into a knot, and hop onto a city bus to get to the school. Nobody even knew! They weren't poisonous, anyway. We let the kids handle them if they wanted to.
Reply
8-16-2006 @ 11:32PM
CODY said...
i cant wait to see this movie so what if there are other movie that has snakes on a .... who cares this one is goin to be better it has better actors and everything so yea im goin to pay my $7 or so dollars to see it
Reply
8-16-2006 @ 11:36PM
Amy said...
I think it's funny, cmon people LAUGH! It's not like every movie in hollywood has to be dramatically based on a true-life story. Picture some guy sitting around trying to come up with movie ideas- who puts snakes on an AIRPLANE!? Ingenious. How about Snakes on a cruise ship....I guess it's because I'm a writer myself that I can appreciate the creative genius that goes into some of these wacked out ideas. Who remembers Warwick Davis and the Leprechaun movies????
Reply
8-17-2006 @ 12:44AM
Number 1 Critic said...
Dumbest movie ever, this is proof that if you hype something enough, people will line up to see it. However, they will nover come back. Anyone who likes this movie is a moron...
Reply
8-17-2006 @ 1:19AM
CHRIS said...
I can't wait to go see SoaP! The movie makers aren't trying to hide the sillyness behind some obscure title...they're telling you exactly what to expect and I can't wait to have an hour or two of crazy, venomous, reptilian fun!! There's a place for high drama and there's also room for a place full of snakes. Lighten up everyone...Samuel L. Jackson + a plane full of deadly vipers = A GREAT TIME AT THE MOVIES!!
Reply
8-17-2006 @ 3:49AM
Steve said...
I haven't read all comments, so perhaps this has been mentioned...
I actually hope that, if there are sequels, they will utilize different threats, such as "Spiders On A Bus", "Bats on a Boat", etc. Actually, the spiders might be actually scary...
Reply
8-17-2006 @ 5:15AM
Mike said...
Lighten up all ready. This movie was made so you can have fun and be scared enough to wet your pants when those snakes jump out at the passengers. Its gonna be a cult classic. I would rather a movie like this scare me then having the Bush Admin. using the fear factor everytime Georgie's numbers in the polls keep dropping. Go see the movie, have fun and think about "Snakes In Your Bed", when you turn in for the nite.
Reply