No Movie Is Safe : American Psycho Gets A Remake, Margot Robbie Rumored To Be New Patrick Bateman

/ Dominic La-Viola / Leave a comment

By :Dominic La-Viola

The Sun reported that an unnamed insider close to the project claimed that “A remake of American Psycho is in the works, and Margot is in talks to play a female version of Patrick Bateman.” The source added, ” The novel and the film were so controversial, and the people working on the remake wanted to twist the narrative by having a female actress take on the lead role of Bateman.”

Now, with all due respect, Margot Robbie is a fantastic actress, and I believe she would kill as a psychotic serial killer. Whose alter ego is a VP of a major corporation.

However, what is the thought process behind having yet another remake of a film that’s not only still relatively new? In comparison, it’s not as bad as the superhero films being remade. Although still not something that I feel we really need. More remakes of.

At this time, no one has confirmed that Margot Robbie is attached to the project. It has been said that this remake has been in the works for some time. That Patrick Schwarzenegger and Austin Butler were previously “tied” to the role. 

That this newest casting inquiry might just be a rumor, although director Luca Guadagnino (“Challengers” and “After The Hunt”) is going to be directing the remake and has teased a full reimagining of the source material.

With that being said, if they are going to remake the film, I’d say make Margot Robbie the lead. Out of the three of them, I think she would be the most interesting choice. Not to mention they could then set it in the late 2000s to the mid-2010s instead of the 80s. 

Giving the film a new feel and tone, capturing the time frame in which,  according to Google and Google’s AI search, was the prime time when women executives were on the rise. “2010s-2020s: The conversation shifted towards actively making the workplace more equitable. This era saw increased focus on diversity and inclusion initiatives, flexible work arrangements, and the promotion of women to senior management roles.”

Making that time frame the perfect setting for a female version of Patrick Bateman and “American Psycho” for the novel and the movie was about the alternative reality that people in New York and that industry lived in. 

It was about delusion and their disconnect from reality and the world around them. The materialist subculture. A world of self-absorbed, narcissistic people. 

A film in which the main character was now a female, trying to climb the corporate ladder, to get to the next promotion. Would give the film a different look and feel.  If done correctly, it could play less of a remake and more of its own thing. 

For as much as the film was focused on materialistic things, it was also very much about status and power. Something that from a woman’s perspective and point of view would change the trajectory of the story, given their repression and lack of representation in previous decades such as the 70s and 80s. 

We’ve seen something of the female version of Bateman in “American Psycho 2,” although that was a different style of film. More of a forced sequel than a re-invisioning of the source material.  

Blue Moon : Movie Review – Richard Linklater Proves Once Again Why He’s A Master Of Storytelling

/ Dominic La-Viola / Leave a comment

By: Dominic La-Viola

In Linklater’s newest directorial effort, comes Blue Moon. Telling the story of Lorenz Hart’s struggles with alcoholism and mental health as he tries to save face during the opening of “Oklahoma!”. All while giving us a glimpse into his life and life’s work. 

Richard Linklater has proven once more why he is a master of storytelling. Composing an entire film over the course of 100 minutes. All taking place in one setting. While never losing the audience’s focus. 

Which might sound minuscule to some; however, to the contrary, being able to tell an entire story in a single setting arguably is one of the most challenging tasks. With the exception of action films like “Die Hard” and “The Raid,” for the action is what moves the story. 

The dialogue and performances, of course, are the driving factors of a film of this nature. Yet Linklater takes it a step further. Integrating the score and the cinematography to play as much of an important role. 

Given the fact that the movie is about a famous songwriter, one who specialized in writing songs for musicals. The score is subtle yet captivating.

The cinematography has a similar effect, using subtle yet effective techniques to not only enhance the story’s emotional impact but also allow the film to feel less stiff. By simply not just having the camera in a stationary position the entire time. Which is a detail a director with less range probably would have done. 

As much as Robert Kaplan has to be credited for his screenplay, for its fantastic dialog. Which without it, the film simply wouldn’t work. Ethan Hawke’s performance really is the backbone of this film. 

For the first hour or so of this movie, Ethan Hawke is sitting at this bar talking to the bartender and the piano player, telling about this girl. A girl that he’s desperately in love with. A 20-year-old from Yale. 

Which is the major focus of the film, in its entirety? This being the night of the opening of “Oklahoma!”, is merely the backdrop. Everything that happens in the film is due to his dying love for this 20-year-old female Yale student, played by  Margaret Qualley. Who also gives  a phenomenal performance. 

Although the story is not what one might think. For from the opening of the film, we learn that he’s not necessarily gay, but he historically prefers men over women, as far as sexual activity is concerned. 

The dialog and even some of the jokes make it as if his sexuality was very well known and he was rather open about being a homosexual. Although given the time in which the events took place, I do think that detail might have been a bit over-embellished. 

Although his sexuality and his lovesick, obsessive love for Elizabeth were not only the core of the film but very much the forefront, Linklater manages to explore all the other aspects of his life as well in the undertone. Giving us everything we need to not only fully understand the story but to understand Lorenzo Hart.

Not only understand but see all his struggles and problems he endured. Capturing not only the last few months of his life and the issues and struggles that he faced towards the end of his life. But also giving us an insight into his brilliance and impact on not only the  industry but the people in whose lives he touched. 

Blue Moon is a fantastic, character-driven film that at times burns slow. But at no time does the flame go out. I hope this is not the last time Ethan Hawke and Richard Linklater work together, because as always, they’ve teamed up to make an amazing film. 

Overall Rating: 4.5/5 Star.

 

After 16 Years Of Waiting, We’re Finally Getting A Sequel To The Modern Cult Classic

/ Dominic La-Viola / Leave a comment

By : Dominic La-Viola

The year was 2009, and horror was starting to peak once more. Following up the remakes of “Halloween” and “Prom Night,” we got remakes of “Last House on the Left” and “The Hills Have Eyes.” 

Then we got the horror comedy that no one saw coming and literally no one asked for, or even really saw for that matter. (Myself excluded. I remember seeing it opening night.) Yet somehow won the Best Kiss award in 2010 at the MTV Movie Awards for the kiss between Megan Fox and Amanda Seyfried. 

Which, I remember during the acceptance speech, Seyfried was thanking everyone for voting for them and how excited but surprised she wasthey won, as she knows not a lot of people have seen the movie. 

Now during the time of the film’s release, Fox was in the news, but not for anything good. She was recently fired from the “Transformers” series, which is the very series that made her the “it girl.” 

Despite it underperforming at the box office, since its release on physical media, the film has become a cult classic with a strong following. So with news of a sequel on the way, I believe a lot of people will be happy to hear it, while others may wonder what is “Jennifer’s Body”. 

The sequel is officially in the works. Director Karyn Kusama said  in an interview with Deadline: 

“I know she’s [Cody] working on it right now, and I’m very excited to hear what comes of it. I know some of the bones of it, so I’m not going to give anything away, but it sounds fun and crazy like the first film. And I have no doubt that Diablo will do something absolutely incredible with it.”

Now, with that being said, it’s yet to be confirmed if the studio is even going to greenlight the project at this time. Although it is said that both Megan Fox and Amanda Seyfried are excited and willing to return to do a sequel. 

With that being said, it was 20th Century Fox that produced the first film, which means it’s the House of the Mouse that owns the rights now. The question then remains: would they want to risk a potential failure to revive a cult classic? 

Given their track record and their desire to milk IP’s they could very much go for it. I mean, remakes and sequels are still very much profitable, especially in the horror genre. I mean look at the box office so far this year. 9/10 of the highest grossing films are remakes, sequels or reboots. 

Source :Deadline

Frankenstein Movie Review – An Epic Love Story Baptized In A Goth Eccentric Undertone 

/ Dominic La-Viola / Leave a comment

By: Dominic La-Viola

A period piece drama, wrapped in mid-century gothic apparel, is the first thing that comes to mind when I think of Guillermo del Toro’s Frankenstein. 

Going into the film, I was expecting more of a horror film, while the film has dark and gritty moments, the essence of the film reminds me more of the classic monster movies. 

People and sometimes other beings, who are deemed monsters not by their own doing. But from hands not of their own and society’s fear and discussion of them. Like the Phantom in the 1925 “Phantom of the Opera” and the 1933 “King Kong”. 

As much as I see these classic films imprinted on his vision of “Frankenstein”, I see just as much from Guillermo del Toro’s previous works like “The Shape of Water”. 

For at its core, the film is very much a love story. A boy’s love for his mother, a woman’s love for something that is different from anything she’s ever seen, yet only then does she truly feel seen. A man’s love for a woman whom he can never have. A creature’s desire to be loved, to have friendship, companionship, and love. The most basic desires of any living being. 

However, the way Guillermo del Toro captures such a basic concept and brings it to life, in his adaptation of the classic, beloved novel, is what’s truly memorizing. From the overall direction and his attention to details to the performances, score, cinematography, set design, and wardrobe. The film almost doesn’t miss a beat.

The simplest way to phrase it, in any film, the components are either bad, good, or great. Usually, when something is bad, it sticks out like a sore thumb, being brain-numbing. Standing out for not matching or flowing with every other part of the film.

When something is good, the average person, even critics and professionals, I would argue, don’t notice certain things because they blend in. Going unnoticed, going unnoticed simply because they’ve done their job and it doesn’t stand out or jump out at you. 

Now when something is great, extraordinary, or memorizing. It stands out, for all the right reasons.  The costume design in the film is one example. There is a scene in which everyone is dressed in dark or dull clothing, and Elizebeth is wearing this stunning red dress. 

The color contrast between her and everyone else in the scene is so define. Making her character pop in the most radiant way. It adds to the scene’s context and undertone of Victor’s infatuation with her. 

The film features some of the most beautiful shots, captured by Dan Lausten. The same cinematographer, Del Toro, worked with on films such as “Nightmare Alley” and “The Shape of Water,”. Utilizing various techniques to enhance the telling of the story. 

The performances, without question, Oscar Isaac gives another flawless performance, along with Christoph Waltz. Although I positively love Mia Goth’s performance in this film.  Without question, I feel like she gives her best performance yet. It is an absolute delight in every scene she’s in. 

Overall, this is one of  Guillermo del Toro’s best films yet. With only one minor flaw. The CGI flames in one scene, which were truly godawful. It takes you out of the film ever so slightly and briefly. 

Overall Rating: 4.5/5 Stars.

Elizabeth Olson Fights To Keep Theaters Alive. 

/ Dominic La-Viola / Leave a comment

By: Dominic La-Viola

Elizabeth Olson, the indie star icon, whose breakthrough role in the 2011 film “Martha Marcy May Marlene” put her on the map and out of her sister’s shadow. Told told InStyle magazine as part of a new cover story that she is no longer signing on to Hollywood studio movies that don’t have a guaranteed theatrical release.

She would go on to say that “If a movie is made independently and only sells to a streamer, then fine. But I don’t want to make something where streaming is the end-all.”

Now, as bold and outlandish as that might sound to some, I think it’s a turning point that a lot of artists behind and in front of the camera will soon get behind. For some already have and are sticking their ground. 

Christopher Nolan famously left WB after decades of working with them because he disagreed with them on their time frame in releasing movies to streaming after they hit theaters. Now, one of Hollywood’s A-listers is taking a similar stand by refusing to make a movie where the end intent is streaming only. 

Since her last appearance as Scarlett Witch in Marvel’s “Doctor Strange In The Multiverse Of Madness” in 2022, she has done three films, all of which were indie films. 

Starting with 2023’s “His Three Daughters,” 2024’s “The Assessment,” and the upcoming A24 romantic comedy “Eternity,” which is hitting theaters this year. 

Now, the fact that she is only doing indie films doesn’t necessarily mean that there aren’t offers to do studio films with a guaranteed theatrical release. Although that could be the case, and if so, who’s really coming out on top? 

“His Three Daughters” Metacritic score is 83, “The Assessment” has a lower score of 62. Although even with that being said, I would still argue that a 62 on Metacritic is a solid rating. Rotten Tomatoes has it at an 83% critic and 92% audience. To give a better understanding of the film’s rating.

Ratings that are much higher than the average Hollywood blockbuster or even Hollywood-produced straight-to-streaming movie. Making it clear that there is still work out there and, honestly, the end product is a lot better.

I have to add that the fact that she said that she will do indie films, and if they get bought by a streamer, then be it. Doubles down and goes to show her care and dedication to the craft. That she’s putting the importance of quality first and foremost. Hopefully, more stars and talent behind the cameras will join her in her stand to help save theaters.  

Source- Variety   

Hollywood Can’t Stop, Won’t Stop, The Remakes. Michael B. Jordan and Austin Butler to Star in “Miami Vice” Reboot

/ Dominic La-Viola / Leave a comment

By: Dominic La-Viola

 Now, I’m all about nostalgia, but when is Hollywood going to see that remakes and reboots aren’t what moviegoers are yearning for! 

Literally says everyone on the internet. All this while, the people in the real world are telling them something completely different with their wallets.

Out of the top 10 grossing films this year, 8 of them are remakes, reboots, or sequels. Neither of the “hottest” and “best movies of the year”, Sinners or Weapons, made the cut in the top 10. 

2 out of 10 are “original films,” and that’s considering Minecraft to be an original movie, since it’s not a remake, reboot, or sequel,  but an adaptation. The only other film to make the cut is Brad Pitt’s F1.  People obviously want more of what they know and less of what they don’t. 

So to hear that another tentpole film series is going to be a reboot of an established IP doesn’t surprise me. The fact that they have two of the biggest actors of their generation , Michael B Jordan and Austin Butler, in talks to star in the film. Also doesn’t surprise me.

It has been said that the film is  “inspired by the pilot episode and first season of the landmark television series that influenced culture and set the style of everything from fashion to filmmaking.”

Which means we can expect the film to be set in the 1980s in Miami, with the plot being about drugs and corruption. 

It is being said that the film is being filmed with IMAX cameras, which are going to start rolling early next year, with a release day of August 7th, 2027. 

Dylan Clark and Kosinski will be producers on the film. Eric Warren Singer and Dan Gilroy penned the script, which was based on characters created by Anthony Yerkovich.  

Source- Variety 

Netflix Is Getting Into The Theater Game.

/ Dominic La-Viola / Leave a comment

By: Dominic La-Viola

It was just announced that Netflix’s hit show “Stranger Things” final two episodes will release in theatres for audiences to see on the big screen. Something that isn’t common, but is something that has been done a few times before. 

The two-part series final will premiere in theaters on New. Years Eve, the same day it goes live on Netflix. Which doesn’t really offer much incentive to go to the theater to see it, other than being able to watch it with a room full of people on the big screen. Which to some is more than enough, while others may see it as pointless to pay, when they can literally watch it at home the same day, for free.

Now this news comes after the theater announces that Netflix’s “K-pop Demon Hunter” will be in theaters for Halloween weekend. Prompting a statement from both companies, saying they want to find more ways to work together. 

With that being said, it does raise the question. Is Netflix looking to get further into the theater release game? It’s no secret that Netflix has been teaming up with some of Hollywood’s heavy hitters over the past few years and building business relationships with both talent in front and behind the camera.

Looking at their history, Netflix started with the original feature film space back in 2015 with its sequel to the beloved, “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon”. The film released on the streaming service while also being released in select IMAX theaters. 

Since then, Netflix has really increased their number of original films, and even has partnered with some of the best Hollywood has to offer. 

At first, it didn’t seem as if Netflix was truly interested in releasing films on the silver screen, but to make them solely for their streaming service. However, in recent years, they have either produced or bought the rights to films in which they have given theatrical releases too. 

Out of those films, I don’t recall AMC ever showing any of them. With the exception of ”Demon Hunters”. Even as of this month, A House of Dynamite and Frankenstein  were given small theatrical releases. Neither of which is available to see at any AMC. 

For up to now, the Netflix originals in which they release are usually films in which they believe are, or are Oscar bait movies. Ones that they need to release in theaters in certain cities for a limited time to be eligible,to even be considered.

Up till now, the films have been released in select cities, in select theaters. None of which are major theater chains, but more arthouse, or arthouse style theatres. Like AFI, Angelika Film Center, and Alamo Drafthouse. Theaters known for showing arthouse, indie and foreign films. 

Given the success of the screening of its films like Frankenstein and A House of Dynamite, on limited screens in limited city’s. Which shows that there is interest in seeing films on the big screen rather than just waiting for their release on Netflix.

With the cost of productions going up, to keep up with its competitors, and not having the versatile background and income, such as Apple and Amazon. This could be Netflix’s way to not only compete with the tech giants. But also to compete with other major studios, who over the years have invaded their space as well. 

It goes without question that Netflix is going to have to find new ways to increase profits, without continuing to hike up subscription costs. Something that has already lost them a lot of loyal customers. Could teaming with AMC for limited releases of their original films be the solution?    

Source: Puck News

The God Of Geeks To Play The God Of War. #MakeHenryCavillKratos

/ Dominic La-Viola / Leave a comment

By : Dominic La-Viola

Henry Cavill is reportedly being considered to play Kratos in Amazon’s highly anticipated live-action adaptation of God of War.

Now, as of today, this is all speculation, for there has been no official release of the casting list or even confirmation that he is being considered.

The series, which is being co-produced by Sony Pictures and Amazon, has been slated to start filming next year. With an official list of characters that will appear in the show. 

Of those characters that have officially been announced for the first season of the show are Kratos , Atreus, Zion, Alexander, Joshua, Glenn, Phoebe, Roy , Julia,  Annelise, Frida, and Lassen. 

Now, as someone who never played or, should I say, doesn’t remember much about playing “God of War”, these characters’ names don’t mean much to me. Other than, of course, Kratos, who is the main character and person on the cover of the game. 

The character in which Henry Cavill is rumored to be playing. Which of course is mostly speculation and fan casting. 

However, I would like to point out that it was the fans that got Deadpool made. That and Ryan Reynolds leaked test footage that went viral. 

Warner Bros gave us the Snyder Cut due to fan demand. Believe it or not, the internet has allowed fans to really shape casting and even releases of movies and TV shows.

 

To have Henry Cavill, someone who, and I quote, almost missed his audition for “Man of Steel” because he was raiding on WoW.  Play Kratos would be a gift to the fans. I mean, who better to play the “God of War” than the God of the geeks? 

The fandom of him starring in the show would only add to the show’s already preamble success. Which should make him in the leading role a sure thing. 

Although if it doesn’t, the fans and the internet, pulling, posting, and telling Amazon they want Henry Cavill as  Kratos should .#MakeHenryCavillKratos 

Source – Comicbookmovie.com

After The Hunt: Movie Review – Over-scored, Under Directed, A Complete Dumpster Fire

/ Dominic La-Viola / Leave a comment

By: Dominic La-Viola

From director Luca Guadagnino, “Call Me By Your Name” and “Challengers”, comes “After The Hunt”. 

Going into Luca Guadagnino’s new film, I had a pretty good idea of what the movie was about, due to seeing so many trailers for this film leading up to this point.

To be honest, I had high expectations for this one. The marketing made the film appear as if it was going to be an intense, well-crafted psychological thriller. One that used intellectual and philosophical insight to create a thriller tackling a social stigma of guilt by accusation. 

Although what we received is an over-scored, under-directed disaster. The cinematography is horrendous. The first twenty minutes or so of the film felt completely out of focus. Not to the extent that people were walking out of the theater. 

More subtle, yet noticeable enough to make me question where or not the proctor needed to be recalibrated. But as the film went on, things started to look enhanced. The shots didn’t seem to be out of focus, not in the slightest.

Which makes me believe that it was an intentional decision. An artistic one. Start the film off slightly out of focus, causing the audience to feel off-kilter and uneasy. Adding to the uncertainty of the events that are unfolding. 

Now, whether or not that was their intention, I can’t say for sure.  Yet that would be my best guess as to why they would purposely do something like that. Given the fact that it’s like that for the first part of the film, it deems it intentional. If it were merely a few random frames or shots that were slightly out of focus, I would chalk it up to oversight. But not this.

Using the cinematography as a tool to convey emotion can work, wonderfully if done correctly. Luca Guadagnino took a big risk that failed miserably, yet it’s not even the film’s biggest downfall. 

The score is over the top and completely unfitting for this story. Honestly, it has to be one of the worst scores I’ve heard in recent memory. Loud and overbearing, the score actually began to give me a headache.  

With a score by the Oscar-winning duo of Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross, the team behind the score of “The Social Network”. Which is a score I had actually referenced in a conversation just a few days before, about how brilliant it was. That the score for that film is an example of what a great score sounds like. 

However, as horrible and overbearing as the score and cinematography is. The script and the lack of vision are the film’s ultimate downfall. 

The film’s marketing proclaims that it was going to pull no punches and tell a story that makes people feel uncomfortable. It addresses social issues and ethical ones. The whole premise of the story is about ethics and the philosophy of ethics. 

Yet all the film really does is take jabs at the upcoming generation of trust fund kids and their safe spaces. It points out the fact that there is entitlement and demand among the young and rich, who have been handed everything their entire lives. 

Doing things to feel as if they’re not entitled. Like living in apartments 10 times cheaper than they can actually afford, to feel as if they’re earning their way.  

After the first 20 minutes of the film, once the allegations of the sexual assault are made know. The focus completely goes in a different direction, while trying to stay relevant to the story at hand. 

Never does the film address the real issue: Did the events actually take place? It answers questions around the allegations of plagiarism and cheating.  But never the actual topic of the story.

By the time we’re 2/3 into the movie, we never see the actual investigation of the allegations. They never address the issue of false accusations. 

The film pivots to focus on Julia Roberts’ character and her personal issues. Which have nothing to do with the actual plot of the film. 

By the third act, it tries to redeem itself by giving an irrelevant issue a resolution that solves nothing or contributes nothing to the actual story being told. 

It’s almost as if they realized what the story was after they got 30 minutes in and didn’t want to explore the realm of a film that openly admits and shines light on false accusations and the problems they cause. 

Rather than picking a narrative and sticking to it. They shy around various issues, trying to hint at what really happened, without calling out the alleged victim or addressing what actually happened.

In a last-ditch attempt to salvage the movie, we get an irrelevant backstory that is completely unrelated. Hinting at an unethical but mutual romance between a teen and an adult male. Which once ended, the teen accused the adult male of sexual assault. Giving us an insight into the aftermath of her actions even after she retracted her allegations. 

Only to give us a 5-year-later scene in which they tried to tie up the film with a nice bow. Indicating that everyone, even the person who was accused of the sexual assault, ends up with a lavish career and fulfilling life. 

 Leaving the viewer with nothing more than a failed attempt at sparking a controversial narrative that embarks on a conversation. Instead, it sparks the dumpster fire that is “After The Hunt”. 

Overall Rating 2/5 Stars.

The Guardian Ask Why Are Hollywood A-Listers’ Movies Flopping, Instead Of What Are The Studios Doing To Fix Hollywood’s Downfall

/ Dominic La-Viola / Leave a comment

By: Dominic La-Viola

The Guardian has just released an article speculating about the lack of star power that some of Hollywood’s biggest stars no longer have. 

Referencing ticket sales from Tom Cruise from 1986-2006 or Will Smith from 1996-2016. Which without question is completely out of context and cannot be compared to current box office sales, due to the current state of the film industry. 

By the late 2010s, streaming started to make its move on the major studios because before this, they were really only a threat to cable and physical media sales. 

At first, streaming was a way to bypass cable and save some money each month. After Netflix took out Blockbuster, that is with its DVD by mail and its introduction to streaming. Then making it a competitor for cable. 

The writing was on the walls, but no one wanted to read it or believe it. They all just turned a blind eye, as they did to the comic book industry  in the late 90s and the music industry in the early 2000s. All just watched as what was slowly died. Waiting to try to reshape the future.  Which has given us overpriced concert tickets and vinyls that cost three times the price it once did.

However, the question remains how does that affect the current situation that Hollywood’s in?  Hollywood is in a critical state of transition, and with streaming services producing big-budget films with A-List stars, it only heightens the stakes and makes the transition more complex.

Cinemas have had their issues in that past few years, trying to keep up with streaming services and other entertainment platforms. 

So there is more than simply one thing that is causing issues with the film industry. 

First being the transition of movie stars making the switch to streaming services and the way  “TV”movies are being produced. Look at Mark Wahlberg in his latest film, Play Dirty. 

A Prime original that 10 years ago would have easily gotten a theater release.  Netflix with Eddie Murphy’s Beverly Hills Axle F, Frankenstein, and A House of Dynamite. 

Of course, we can’t forget the Prime release of Roadhouse, which was supposed to get a theater release that was dropped on Prime at the last minute. 

We can’t overlook the quality of “TV” movies that are being released weekly and not talk about them and the problem they present. 

Audiences no longer need to go to the movies to see their favorite A-List stars:  Mark Wahlberg, Robert De Niro, Adam Sandler, Chris Hemsworth, Eddie Murphy, Miles Teller, Michael Fassbender, Jennifer Lopez, Jason Momoa, and Jake Gyllenhaal. 

All these actors and actresses have done streaming movies in the past few years. Which then compete with films on the silver screen. 

The Rock’s Smashing Machine is a biopic picture that didn’t get the marketing or publicity needed to really drive the film.

Yes, biopics have been a huge success in the past few years, although again. Those films were about musical icons that everyone knows or knows of. Even if they didn’t grow up on their music or even like their music. 

The story of UFC legend Mark Kerr isn’t something that is marketable because he was a star fighter before it became popular and a worldwide phenomenon. If you did a movie about Conor McGregor, it would be more successful by default. Simply because even people who don’t watch the sport know who he is. 

  Big Bold Beautiful Journey. A romance comedy, with minimal marketing, failed? What a surprise. From what was shown in trailers, the movie was marketed as a streaming service movie of the week. Not that the film wasn’t good. Although that’s not its problem, its lack of marketing and marketability is. I’m sure we’ll see a huge increase in box office numbers from Margot Robbie’s upcoming film, Wuthering Heights. 

Which not only is already being marketed as the movie to see on Valentine’s Day weekend. It’s already getting trailers played throughout movie theaters across the states, and it doesn’t even come out for another 6 months. This movie has gotten more marketing already than most movies on the list, according to the Guardian article. 

Daniel Day-Lewis stars in his son’s directorial debut, Anemone. The first problem with this film. The marketing. Which it didn’t get any, and if it did. Someone needs to check to see where their money went,because I haven’t seen any marketing for the film. Then to top it off, how does one market this film?

Where is the marketable appeal? For I don’t see how one can market this movie to the average moviegoer. A family drama between two brothers set in the middle of the woods. Sounds like an arthouse film, in which film nerds are your target audience.

I have yet to see the film, although that’s not due to a lack of interest. That’s due to the lack of availability of the film. A completely different issue. One which is a topic of its own and for a different time. 

Good Fortune, the new comedy starring Seth Rogen, Keanu Reeves, and Aziz Ansari. It did all the right things, kept the budget at a minimum with only $ 30 million. It has a rather stellar cast and even has favorable critical reviews and audience ratings, yet still can’t manage to make it. 

Now, having seen a good amount of marketing for the film, I can honestly say that the film appears to be struggling due to its time of release. Something we’ve seen happen time and time again. 

The film is essentially about someone who is struggling so badly that a guardian angel needs to step in and switch his life with someone who is rich. To show him how the other side lives. The trailer shows Reeves’s angle saying that he thought if he switched them, Azziz’s character would see that money won’t solve all his problems. The other angel says, and then Reeves’s character says, well, it appears that money solved most of his problems. 

With the current state of things, between the government shutdown, the tariffs, and economic uncertainty that most Americans face during this horrible time of inflation. The film comes off as a depressing reminder of the current economic state. Not a fun escape from reality. 

For this film, it’s more bad timing than anything. Just as Seth Rogen’s previous comedy, The Watch,  which was released in 2012. The film was a box office disaster due to the film’s subject matter after the death of a youth in Florida by a neighborhood watch member. The film was originally titled Neighborhood Watch and was about a group of neighborhood watch members. Even the retitling of the movie and pushing it back a few months didn’t save it. For the relevance of the case in question was still very much a hot topic. 

After The Hunt. A film with a star-spangled cast of A-Listers and stars of the upcoming generation, still struggle to find its footing. This film is another one of those films that isn’t necessarily an arthouse film, however, still falls in a category of film that is hard to market. 

How do you market a film about sexual assault allegations and what appears to be siding with the accused. Bringing falsehoods and accusations as a serious issue? From the marketing alone, it appears that the film pushes back against the narrative of blindly siding with the victims and supporting them blindly. 

Although as I write this, I have yet to see the movie, I am speaking solely off the marketing in which I’ve seen and what it appears the film is trying to achieve or say. 

The reviews are not promising. There are two critics who give the film 100, and most give it a 60 or less. Which begs the question: is the movie bad, or is it simply something that is so controversial that it turns its viewers away due to the current atmosphere around the subject matter?

The real issue is with the expectations.  To think that movies which have a marketing disadvantage are going to perform simply by a cast alone isn’t going to work. Not when you have the star power pulling audiences in at home, and they have more options and choices than ever. 

Source : The Guardian