Did 'Love ... Cholera' Title Keep People Away?
Filed under: Drama, Independent, Romance, New Line, Box Office, Movie Marketing, Cinematical Indie
Cholera has been defined as ... nope, I'm not going to spell it out -- I've got a weak stomach -- but if you don't know, here's the Wkipedia entry that will tell you more than you probably wanted to know about this particular affliction. Is the thought of cholera what's keeping people away from the new film by Mike Newell? Anne Thompson of Variety theorizes that Love in the Time of Cholera has not been helped by its title, which, when shortened, tends to be a word that "is not exactly a box office lure." The film opened this past weekend and earned $1.9 million, or about $2,247 per screen, according to Box Office Mojo. Love in the Time of Cholera is an English translation of the original title of Gabriel García Márquez's novel "El amor en los tiempos del cólera." My Spanish isn't very good, but I'm pretty sure that's an accurate translation. Producer Scott Steindorff worked for more than two years to secure the rights to the book and the blessing of the Nobel Prize-winning García Márquez, according to the film's official site. After the first draft was completed, Steindorff and writer Ronald Harwood consulted with García Márquez, who reportedly told them: "The problem is that you and the writer have done too true of an adaptation -- you need to depart from the book." Steindorff says that García Márquez has "a great sense of humor," so they all laughed.
No one's laughing now, though the poor critical reception probably hurt as much or more than the title. I wonder if Steindorff ever brought up the idea of changing the title with the author? I'm certain somebody did at some point -- it's too obvious a potential marketing problem to ignore. Cholera may not be well-known today, but it's like smallpox or polio; it simply doesn't sound good, at least to me and, evidently, many other people. Yet the full title does have its supporters, like Cinematical's Erik Davis, who says it's one of his "favorite titles of all time for a number of reasons -- love is but a disease, after all." Did the title keep you from seeing this movie?
_thumbnail.jpg)
The Original Pitch for 'Monsters, Inc.'
Discuss: When Movie Marketing Crosses the Line
Watch: The 5 Worst Homemade 'Risky Business' Dance Videos
Five Radio Flicks That Rocked the Big Screen_thumbnail.jpg)
James Cameron Never Wanted to Make 'Titanic'
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
11-19-2007 @ 3:29PM
elizabeth said...
The awful trailer I saw is what made me decide not to see this film.
Reply
11-19-2007 @ 3:57PM
Miles D said...
seconded. The trailer is awful. Having to repeatedly see it back-to-back with the preview for Rails and Ties is the kind of thing that makes a person never want to visit a theater again.
Reply
11-19-2007 @ 4:10PM
Alex said...
I can't imagine that enough people knew the movie was even coming out to be turned off by the title. I've only seen one (bad) trailer for this online, a couple of (bad)reviews in papers, and that's all I've seen to inform me that it was coming out.
If anything should be blamed for this movie doing poorly, it's the lack of marketing first and the apparent quality of the movie second. People will sit through almost any bad comedy you give them but you give them a bad drama and they will eat you alive.
There has been no buzz about this movie AT ALL. Even Southland Tales had more buzz than this movie. I assume that that's because it's not a good enough film to generate award buzz and not a huge enough debacle to generate "colossal bomb" buzz. So it's simply a poor adaptation of a beloved book. Plus, the story is the sort that it's a hard enough sell if it's a masterpiece, let alone if it's a mess.
Reply
11-19-2007 @ 10:56PM
Florina said...
Heads up! I have seen the movie and it is looks fantastic! The storyplot is Casablanca style, Bardem's performance deserves an Oscar. You haven't even read the book or seen the movie and you just blabbin' away about boxoffice when you not put up any effort for it. Anybody can be a critic, because it is easier to demolish something than to bulid it. The title abviously has to be kept for an adaptation of a famous novel : Harry Potter , DaVinci Code, Gone with the Wind, etc. So if you don't like the story nor the title nor the trailer obviously have to complain to th eNobel Price winner author Garci aMarquez.
Reply
11-20-2007 @ 1:01PM
J W S said...
I had the great fortune of watching this movie twice, on two consecutive days. The movie is very well made, the writer is an extremely talented author who has gained world acclaim for his many books, including "One Hundred Years of Solitude".
To wonder if the title can be changed to sell a few more movies is ridiculous and laughable. It is like asking the Director of the Louvre if perhaps they can take the Mona Lisa down to the local Paris branch of Kinko's and have an "enlargement" made, and display that instead, because the original is "too small" ...
If you're selling a new type of chicken sandwich at McDonald's, yes, change the title of the sandwich, or don't even give it a title. But this is an original work, by a grand master, not just another commodity.
Reply