MovieMarketing Tagged Articles at Cinematical

What Silent Bob giveth, Silent Bob taketh away... or, at least, taketh down, which is why one can no longer give the Zack and Miri Make a Porno teaser a look-see until the MPAA gives it the once-over.

The online-only teaser, while filled with writer-director's Kevin Smith expectedly raunchy dialogue, does not actually feature any footage from the finished film, but according to Smith's recent News Askew post, that is a stipulation unseen by the Ratings Board, which must approve all marketing materials for any film.

"We're now officially submitting the teaser to the MPAA for rating," said Smith. "If they approve it, we'll put it back up." He does make a point of mentioning how a mere two years ago, he posted similarly crude internet-exclusive trailers for Clerks II with nary a complaint.

Until the MPAA hands down its formal red-band (or is it yellow-band?) decree, here's a link to our initial post on the teaser's arrival last week -- a post on which the teaser just so happens to still work...

[via /Film]

So who watched South Park the other night? In the episode, internet goes down and the citizens of South Park (as well as other places throughout the country) are forced to live their lives without online access. Of course, in true South Park fashion, everyone winds up in an internet camp, sleeping on cots -- all dirty and disheveled -- as they fight over the 40 seconds of internet each person gets per day. Not only was it hysterical to watch, but it also opened my eyes to the fact that it's becoming difficult to remember how things were prior to the internet, especially for people 30 years of age and younger.

It's almost hard to imagine those days when we wouldn't find out a certain movie existed until the trailer played in a theater, or during the Super Bowl. Now we get teaser posters before the film even goes into production. Remember when a movie only got one poster? To date, we've seen 10, 11 Iron Man posters alone. Posters! As movie marketing has moved online, everything's grown larger -- more trailers, more images, more games, more contests. Now there are entire websites devoted to one movie's viral marketing campaign. It's pretty insane, and even though I do this for a living, it's still real hard for me to keep up with it all. (I'm still waiting for the day when a particular viral campaign is blamed for the unfortunate death of a teenager. C'mon, you know it's gonna happen eventually ...)

The movie may not be due until November, but JoBlo's Movie Emporium has the posters now: Ridley Scott's American Gangster has officially begun the promotional lifecycle. The film -- which was slated to be directed by Antoine Fuqua until he fell off the project and Ridley Scott stepped in -- revolves around the New York drug trade in the '70s -- and features Denzel Washington and Russell Crowe. (And the director's chair wasn't the only switcheroo: Originally, Benicio Del Toro was cast in what would become Crowe's role.) The plotline revolves around an ex-dealer who actually has a change of heart and works with a NYPD narcotics officer to try and stop the flood of heroin that hit New York in the '70s -- but with Scott attached to direct, look for great action and more than a little grit (as well as smoke-filed rooms, venetian blinds and rain, too).

The posters look great -- there's one for Washington and one for Crowe -- and to me the most interesting things about the posters are first, the observation that Universal's marketing department doesn't even have to show all of Washington and Crowe's faces for us to know who they are -- and if that's not proof of super-stardom on their part, I don't know what is. The second thing -- which leapt into my mind unbidden as I looked at Crowe's poster, as seen here -- is that between the black-and-white look and the focus on well-dressed men packing heat, I got a real Scarface vibe off these posters. Time will tell if American Gangster is fit to fill Tony Montana's elegant, blood-soaked shoes; the film is currently set to open November 21st.

Most people prefer sequels with names instead of numbers. So, a sequel with a title like Die Hard 2: Die Harder is more interesting to a potential moviegoer than plain old Die Hard 2. This is according to a couple of scientific studies published in the October Journal of Consumer Research and highlighted by a recent New York Times article.

According to one of the studies, subjects preferred to hear about titles of movies that gave away a little of the plot for the film. When a subject was shown a made-up movie title like Daredevil 2 or Daredevil 2: Taking it to the Streets, they showed much more interest in the latter than the former. Also, according to the study, people who were reading the plot summary for Daredevil 2: Taking it to the Streets were more likely to read it all the way through and remember it better, than those who were reading the summary for Daredevil:2.

The Times article also highlighted another study along similar lines which indicated that audiences demand more of a divergent plot from sequels with numbers than they do with names. Researchers hypothesized that this was a result of fear by movie audiences that numbered sequels would just be "clones" of the original and not offer anything new. "People are looking for some kind of clue that the movie is dissimilar, and you can do that either through the title or through the plot," said Professor Sanjay Good, one of the study's authors, in the article.

His co-author, Professor Xavier Dreze, also noted in the article that "few successful long-running series use numbering. If James Bond was called 'James Bond 22' or whatever they are up to (instead of Casino Royale) people would probably be less interested." So, what's in a name? Quite a lot, apparently. At least according to these studies. Interesting stuff, huh? Although, I gotta say, I'm not interested in a sequel to Daredevil no matter what it's called, so this research might be a little lost on me.

What do you think? Does the name really matter?

Starbucks is seeking to expand into movies and books with the help of the William Morris agency. The alliance allows the influential talent agency to find music, film and book projects for Starbucks to consider for marketing in its stores. As we reported earlier, Starbucks started promoting their first movie venture, Lionsgate’s Akeelah and the Bee, by advertising the attraction on coffee sleeves and putting up words of the day on its chalkboard menus. The New York Times quotes Starbucks’ founder Howard Schultz as saying “We want to see our name associated with the kind of music, literature and movies that [will make] people say, ‘I’m glad Starbucks brought this to the marketplace.’”

Starbucks' music venture has been a success, so it’s no wonder they want to expand their brand’s scope even further. I’m no knee-jerk Starbucks hater, but I’m getting a little weary of these endless tie-ins. Enough of Starbucks as a “lifestyle” destination; I’d just like a cup of coffee please.

Noticed the outdoor and other advertisments for the upcoming Deuce Bigelow sequel (if, that is, your eyeballs have stopped bleeding)? Have you noticed the rating, or more precisely, the lack thereof? It seems that some of this summer's biggest R-rated comedies have been advertised with the fine print of "This film has not yet been rated" and some people think this is being done purposefully, as a way to market the film to a younger audience than they would be able to if the film were officially rated R. Various studio executives deny exploiting the loophole in R-rated advertising, instead claiming the ads needed to be approved and created before the film was submitted to the ratings board. As someone who watches movie marketing fairly closely I have to say I can see both sides of this argument but tend to think the studios are maybe working the system in such a way as to have plausible denial for this practice. In some instances, yes, media buys have to be made by X date and the film may not even be finished. However I think that begs the question of just when or what kind of advertising can be done prior to a movie receiving a rating. Opinions?