(UPDATE: Of course the moment I posted this, news popped up that Sam Mendes IS going to direct the next Bond movie! HA! Oh what precious timing I have. Well, Maybe I should retitle this piece: Be Leary of Tricky Movie Marketing! )
If you like your James Bond movies, and love the marketing that teases you about what's coming up, I thought I should warn you that the directors that were behind two of the biggest marketing shams of recent entertainment history, are being considered for directing Bond 24!
First up, the word on the street is that Sam Mendes is likely to return to direct the 24th Bond film.
If if studio economics pan out, like they usually do, and they don't want to give Mendes a pay raise, word on the street, per MTV, is that Nicolas Winding Refn (Drive), and Shane Black (Iron Man 3) are being considered as directorial helmers.
Other names on the list include Ang Lee, Tom Hooper and David Yates.
But these names being thrown out this early in the pre-production phase of Bond 24, in my guesstimate/opinion, are must negotiation tricks to help motivate Mendes to keep his salary increase request to a minimum.
But hey, we all need pay raises, right? Look at how Iron Man's 1 and 2 director, Jon Favreau, "stepped away" from the franchise. Or more than likely, asked for more than Marvel was willing to pay a director for their latest billion dollar money maker, Iron Man 3.
But if Refn and Black are in contention, and either one of them snags the job, then I'd take ALL marketing for the movie with a huge grain of salt. Or an entire salt shaker.
If you recall, Refn directed Drive, starring Ryan Gosling. All the marketing had you believing it was a new "Fast and Furious" kind of movie, with all the car chase scenes they advertised.
What upset folks who aren't dramatic movie fans, is that almost all the car scenes were in the movie trailers. That didn't go over well with a lot of the movie-goers.
Drive was produced by Bold Films and distributed by FilmDistrict. (You'll see why I note that in a moment.)
Of course, if you follow my other website, Brusimm, you know that even though I enjoyed the story if Iron Man 3, the long-time comic franchise fan in me was pretty ticked off because of the treatment they gave to the Mandarin.
And the marketing had us all sucked up into the idea of the Mandarin.
Shane Black directed, Marvel Studios produced and Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures distributed.
-
In this piece, I seem to be blaming the director for the mis-representation of the film marketing in these cases. I do that because once a helmer is hired, they tend to be the production focal point for a movie. So my presumption is that the director chooses or has a strong say in the marketing.
But of course, to be fair, and looking at the other side of the coin, that may not really be the case.
FilmDistrict distributed Drive and Disney distributed Iron Man 3. And as a site fan pointed out, it may not have been the director who sets the tone for the marketing. And one has to admit, the marketing for IM3 was extremely different, so in all fairness to the director, I'm probably going to have to relinquish my eagle-eyed glare from the directors and look at the distributors.
So, there's that. But with the face of the director representing the film, my first angry finger wag always points at them.
[mtv],[Update from Movies in Focus]If you like your James Bond movies, and love the marketing that teases you about what's coming up, I thought I should warn you that the directors that were behind two of the biggest marketing shams of recent entertainment history, are being considered for directing Bond 24!
First up, the word on the street is that Sam Mendes is likely to return to direct the 24th Bond film.
If if studio economics pan out, like they usually do, and they don't want to give Mendes a pay raise, word on the street, per MTV, is that Nicolas Winding Refn (Drive), and Shane Black (Iron Man 3) are being considered as directorial helmers.
Other names on the list include Ang Lee, Tom Hooper and David Yates.
But these names being thrown out this early in the pre-production phase of Bond 24, in my guesstimate/opinion, are must negotiation tricks to help motivate Mendes to keep his salary increase request to a minimum.
But hey, we all need pay raises, right? Look at how Iron Man's 1 and 2 director, Jon Favreau, "stepped away" from the franchise. Or more than likely, asked for more than Marvel was willing to pay a director for their latest billion dollar money maker, Iron Man 3.
But if Refn and Black are in contention, and either one of them snags the job, then I'd take ALL marketing for the movie with a huge grain of salt. Or an entire salt shaker.
If you recall, Refn directed Drive, starring Ryan Gosling. All the marketing had you believing it was a new "Fast and Furious" kind of movie, with all the car chase scenes they advertised.
What upset folks who aren't dramatic movie fans, is that almost all the car scenes were in the movie trailers. That didn't go over well with a lot of the movie-goers.
Drive was produced by Bold Films and distributed by FilmDistrict. (You'll see why I note that in a moment.)
Of course, if you follow my other website, Brusimm, you know that even though I enjoyed the story if Iron Man 3, the long-time comic franchise fan in me was pretty ticked off because of the treatment they gave to the Mandarin.
And the marketing had us all sucked up into the idea of the Mandarin.
Shane Black directed, Marvel Studios produced and Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures distributed.
-
In this piece, I seem to be blaming the director for the mis-representation of the film marketing in these cases. I do that because once a helmer is hired, they tend to be the production focal point for a movie. So my presumption is that the director chooses or has a strong say in the marketing.
But of course, to be fair, and looking at the other side of the coin, that may not really be the case.
FilmDistrict distributed Drive and Disney distributed Iron Man 3. And as a site fan pointed out, it may not have been the director who sets the tone for the marketing. And one has to admit, the marketing for IM3 was extremely different, so in all fairness to the director, I'm probably going to have to relinquish my eagle-eyed glare from the directors and look at the distributors.
So, there's that. But with the face of the director representing the film, my first angry finger wag always points at them.
Comments
Post a Comment
Apologies for the moderation mode. I presume you understand...