You Don't Belong Together

I think we all know that the more you see you a movie promoted in unusual places the higher the chances the movie is awful. It is one thing when a movie studio decides to blitz the media with a load of commercials on every channel and on every program - that just means they want to get the word out and think the film can stand on its own. Also, having one of the stars on the movie appear on a number of television chat shows makes a perfect amount of sense and does nothing to raise suspicion. It is when you start to see the movie connected to random commercials which have nothing to do with anything than you know the film makers are desperate to get customers into the theaters before word of mouth starts to spread and poisons the waters. (Please note, this policy does not apply to children's movies because those studios are more interested in getting your children to beg you for toys connected to the film and paying $30 for your own copy of it in a few months. They could honestly care less whether or not you ever make it to the theater.) Just as a recent example, when I saw the cast of "Grown Ups 2" sniffing around the NBA Finals a couple weeks ago it just confirmed what I already suspected, which is that movie will be terrible. At least because Shaquille O'Neal is in that movie you can make a small connection between the film and the NBA which is better than most efforts. It wasn't until I saw them at Daytona this weekend that I realized just how bad this movie was really going to be. What is truly amazing is that it wasn't even the worst movie tie-in I have seen in the last 48 hours.

The other afternoon I saw a commercial for Cars.com, the site which allows you to search for a used car from the comfort of your own home. Their latest ad campaign has been about how they remove all the drama out of buying a car, so if you want to have drama in your life you should have to manufacture it. This particular commercial said the quickest way to do that would be to go see a movie. That premise is pretty thin to begin with but the movie they decided to use as the tie-in was "The Lone Ranger", which doesn't even make sense. Sure, people have been universally panning that film for a couple of weeks and if the opening weekend numbers were any indication it is going to go down as one of the most disappointing movies of the summer so the studio need any positive commercials that they can come up with. But while I haven't seen the movie yet (and have no plans to) I feel confident when I say that there won't be a car in the entire 3-hour experience. Pairing a western where everyone rides horses with a website which sells cars is a little bit like trying to get people to buy iPods by associating them with record stores. Apart they are both good products which provide a service but one has nothing to do with the other (in fact, one made the other obsolete), so putting then together raises more questions than they answer.

Of course the ironic part is that all this forced synergy ignores the inherent danger that someone may not like the product you have decided to tie in with. I know that on more than one occasion I have thought I would like to have something small like a commemorative cup from a summer movie but then discovered they are only available through a restaurant like Arby's. Not only do I not know where there is an Arby's near me (I assume in one giant plaza with a Buffalo Wild Wings, Sonic, Papa John's, Red Lobster and all the other restaurants I have only heard of through commercials but never actually seen in person), but even if I did know where one was it would be pretty far down on my list of lunch destinations. Thus, I immediately decided I could live without that cup. Now that is a piece of movie merchandise the studio is missing out on that they wouldn't have to if they just sold it on their own. And, let's not forget that the risk here goes both ways. Cars.com probably thought they were getting a hell of a deal getting essentially getting Johnny Depp to promote their website, but if the movie is out of the theaters in a week and a half they won't be getting their investment back and they will be associated with a failure. I mean, if you are going to go out of your way to force your way into America's consciousness you should at least do it with a winning enterprise to soften the blow, otherwise you just annoyed everyone for no good reason.

I just can't stand it when movie studios feel the need to shoehorn their movies into places which don't make sense. The thing is that I hardly feel like I am the only person who feels this way. I feel like most people have caught on to this tactic of trying to use an overwhelming media campaign to make up for a piss-poor script and at some point it is going to backfire, causing droves of people to stay away from a movie which would otherwise be a hit. Obviously, I know that you can't not advertise a movie when you have spent nearly a hundred million dollars to make it because that would be even worse than sticking it in a few bad commercials. As annoying as I may find it, the odds of a movie taking off due to nothing more than the fact it is really good are pretty low. That being said, there is something to be said for the movies which doesn't need to do anything more than release a few well-edited trailers to pull you in and make you want to pony up a ticket. (You certainly never saw the cast of "Zero Dark Thirty" sitting courtside at a Heat game.) So, while the marketer in me can appreciate the effort to get the name out there in a creative way, it would probably be a lot easier if they would just make a good movie and leave the over-saturation up to the kiddie movies. I know I will appreciate anything that keeps Adam Sandler and his crew away from my sporting events.