Filed under: Celebrities and Controversy, Box Office

There was a time, not too long ago, when the dream was to be on the A-list in Hollywood. Being so high up on the ladder meant great roles, great movies, and box office success. It was a world raining money. Now, however, not only are times tough, but Hollywood is learning a valuable lesson: It's not all about the stars. (Something we wondered about three years ago.)

Reuters reports that the movie town is rethinking the millions of dollars they spend to grab the big stars because big celebrity doesn't necessarily equal big box office. They cited the money brought in by The Hangover, District 9, Paranormal Activity, and the Twilight Saga, and the fact that none of these productions had big celebs leading the way. Meanwhile, the star extravaganzas like A Christmas Carol, Surrogates, Funny People, Land of the Lost, Imagine That, and Duplicity boasted big-name talent, but still flopped. Now insiders say that the stars used to big paychecks and gross profit deals are having a heck of a time getting their demands met. As Reuters says: "several films have shown that a great concept or story can trump star appeal when it comes to luring fans."

What a concept! A worthy story being more important than the actors who star? Crazy talk! Could we, dare I say, be headed towards a Hollywood where they don't just write a bunch of crap to have big names appear in (say, Sandra Bullock), and actually put some more effort into the story? Or will we just get greeted by the same crappy stories, but now with unknown names?

Permalink | Email this | Comments

Filed under: Celebrities and Controversy, Movie Marketing, Posters

Yep, Faizon Love and Kali Hawk are missing from the poster used in the U.K. As reported by London's Daily Mail, Universal Pictures says they just wanted to "simplify" the poster for foreign release, to focus on "actors who are most recognizable in international markets." Nonetheless, after getting complaints about racism from British viewers, the studio has apologized and scrapped plans to use the revised poster in other countries.

I feel a little sympathy for Universal here. It's certainly true that Love and Hawk are less famous in other countries than they are in the United States. (Heck, they're not that famous here, either.) Their characters are fourth in importance in the story; even in the American poster, they're all the way in the back. If you had to remove a couple from the poster, they'd be the logical choice.

Ah, but there's the problem -- why did Universal think they had to remove a couple? The poster with all eight characters did fine in America. Why change it? Do international audiences reject movies that appear to have too many characters? Is "clutter" a big complaint among British poster aficionados? If nothing else, someone at Universal should have realized that removing the black couple -- even if race had nothing to do with it -- would at least look sketchy. You'd think that as bad as the movie is, they'd be extra careful not to turn off any potential viewers with their marketing. Live and learn!

[Via Huffington Post.]

Permalink | Email this | Comments