Movie Transformer

From the latest box office numbers, is looks like everyone in America is rushing out to see Transformers: Dark of the Moon.  I read on Facebook as dozens of my friends rushed out to see the film - some at midnight the day before it officially opened.  Then I read their varied opinions.  These ranged from "you will wish you were dead" to "that was the most amazing thing I've ever seen" and just about everything in between.  I keep hoping the movie will stop making money, but it doesn't.  This makes me wonder what exactly is wrong with me.  Why don't I want to see this epitome of a summer action flick?  Not only have no interest in seeing it, but I actually have been rooting for it to fail and be awful.  Why is that?

I am a movie fan.  And I am far from one of those snooty filmgoers that only watch foreign films and limited release films (aka Oscar voters).  I am just as likely to avoid an Oscar nominee as a brainless action film.  I set my own standards for what I want to watch.  They don't have to make sense to anyone else.  I really don't care if you think my decisions are stupid.  I'm the one who ends up having to sit there.  I used to go see just about everything that came out, except for horror films.  (I have NEVER liked those.)  But now I actively avoid certain movies.  What changed?

I spend far too much time thinking about this and came up with reasons.  And, more than that, I came up with an exact date when all of this changed.  September 11, 2001.  Now, I know a lot of things can be hung on that infamous date.  You may think it is extreme to blame my increasing disconnect with many movies to that day.  But I don't.  There are three major reasons that can be traced back to that particular 24 hour time period.  But they aren't all what you may think.

REASON 1:  REALITY TRUMPED FANTASY
I used to be lustily waiting for big time disaster and action movies.  Independence Day, Armageddon, Deep Impact, Godzilla, Volcano, Dante's Peak, The Rock.  I loved those movies - even with all the completely impossible plot lines and over the top stupid dialogue and moronic characters.  I knew they were far from top notch cinema.  But they were sure entertaining.  And I was just as amazed as anyone else with the shots of the White House exploding and New York City being demolished.  But, when 9/11 happened, the reality came home to roost.  The fact is that a city being annihilated is horrific.  When it came down to it, no one sat there and thought, "Ooooo, cool.  Look at that sucker fall."  Instead, we all got nauseated and started crying.  Turns out mass destruction and global upheaval wasn't so cool after all.  I had trouble disconnecting that reality when I watched movies.  I couldn't help thinking about the aftermath.  We always are left with scenes of plucky survivors hugging and promising a new day.  But the reality would not even be close to that.

As we saw several other major disasters, like the tsunamis in Thailand and Japan and the earthquakes in New Zealand and Haiti, we began to realize the massive human toll in these events.  It isn't just special effects.  Cities and countries don't just "come back" from that.  They are decimated and may never recover.  For me, I couldn't always turn that off.  In some movies I really like (Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, Iron Man) I can turn down the volume on those thoughts.  But even then, I may have random questions pop up like, "How much money did it cost Gotham to rebuild that elevated train after it got blown up?  What did all those people think when their cars got destroyed?"  But I couldn't ignore it when movies like 2012 and Day After Tomorrow just cavalierly obliterated these mega cities.  That was one of the same things I thought about in the original Transformers.  There was this major battle in the middle of downtown.  Buildings are getting shredded.  City blocks are destroyed.  The mayhem is a little too much for me to take.

REASON 2: HUMAN LIFE ELEMENT
The second reason that came from that day was the awakened reality of human suffering.  That wasn't so much from the scene in NYC.  It more came from the fact that my first child was born at 2:11am on September 12, 2001.  In the midst of all that tragedy, my wife was in labor with our boy.  And now, I had this little life to protect and care for and hurt for.  And suddenly it wasn't so minor to watch lives get snuffed out - even in a fictional context.  Subconsciously, I am always aware of the fact that those characters had families.  Those thousands of people who just got blasted by an out of control robot had kids who now were orphans.

I know a lot of people say, "It's just a movie.  Lighten up."  But isn't the point of a movie to have viewers connect with the story on screen?  I just connect in a different way.  I easily slip myself into the story.  As a result, I have a hard time watching movies about kids getting hurt.  I don't enjoy movies that have a lot of physical pain or killings.  Again, there are some movies that I like enough to disconnect those things.  But this plays a major part in how I watch movies.  I remember going to see Monsters Inc after our child was born.  I had such a hard time because I sat there and kept saying, "This must be killing Boo's parents - to have her missing for days."  I actually had to walk out of Finding Nemo when I went to see it in the theater.  My pregnant wife was on a mission trip in Germany and my toddler son was staying with his grandparents.  The images of a father losing his wife and kids were too much - even if they were fish.

As my kids have grown and I have become more experienced as a father, this has diminished somewhat.  I have more experience disconnecting my personal feelings from shows and movies.  But I still try to avoid things that spend a lot of time showing kids getting hurt.  If a movie shows child abuse, I won't see it.  I didn't follow the Casey Anthony case at all.  When my wife and I had a free night this summer without the kids, we wouldn't go see Super 8 because I knew kids would be in peril - and our kids were hours away from me.  I couldn't just go home and kiss them after the movie.  Transformers is just another movie franchise that glorifies violence.  People get hurt without much thought.  And I just don't like that any more.

REASON 3: KIDS ARE EXPENSIVE
Money isn't so easy to come buy when you are responsible for a family.  That combined with high ticket prices means that you have to be choosy when going to films.  If I am going to spend $10 on a ticket - or $30 on a family worth of tickets - the movie had better be worth it.  I know that critics are usually giant wastes of space.  But, when there is an avalanche of bad press and negative reviews, it may not be worth my investment.  It used to be that I could use my student discount and get a $5 ticket.  If that didn't work out so great, it was only five bucks.  And what else was I going to spend the money on?  Now, though, it is much more expensive.

When you combine that with the easier access to movies after their theatrical run, it doesn't make sense to risk an unpleasant movie going experience.  I have Netflix.  For $8 a month, I can watch any of thousands of movies free.  So, if there is a film that I wanted to see and wasn't so sure about, it's easy to watch.  Or I can go to Redbox a couple months after the theater run and rent the movie for a buck.  Or I can buy it on DVD or BluRay for less than a family going to the theater.  So now, if I'm not sure about a movie, I just don't go.

It used to be that I would go to any superhero movie that came out - if it was good or not.  For Pete's sake, I saw Spawn in the theater.  But that changed when I had to buy two tickets, pay a babysitter, or leave my family home to go.  Now, I am much more discriminating.  Take this year, for example.  I saw Thor, Pirates 4, X Men: First Class, and Cars 2.  That's pretty standard.  I will go see any Pixar movie that comes out.  I go to see most Marvel movies - although I avoided the first Hulk and both Fantastic Four.  I did NOT go see Green Lantern.  I love DC Comics.  I prefere them to Marvel.  I like Green Lantern.  I like Ryan Reynolds.  But I had a bad feeling about this one.  I could just tell it was going to suck.  And, sure enough, it did.  It was either going to be phenomenal or a disaster.  I guessed right and saved a good chunk of money.  If there is a franchise I particularly enjoy (Harry Potter, Bourne, James Bond, Pirates) I usually will keep seeing them until they prove themselves unworthy of that support.  Pirates 4 did just that.  If they do a fifth film, I will not go see it.  I still want to go see Captain America, Cowboys and Aliens, and Zookeeper - and of course Harry Potter 8.  

[Side Note: Yes, I realize Cowboys and Aliens seems to violate two of my new rules.  But there are several things that make me want to see it anyway.  Jon Favreau is making it and I think he is brilliant.  It stars Daniel Craig - who I really like.  It also has Harrison Ford - who I have always liked.  Mix in Sam Rockwell and Olivia Wilde (NO! Not just because she is attractive.  She is an intriguing actress.  Follow her on Twitter and watch Tron Legacy and you'll see what I mean.  This is where I am interested enough in the movie to suppress the other stuff.]


I am even discriminating with kids movies.  My kids would go see anything with a G or PG rating if they could.  But I don't take them.  We have found out how to minimize costs (go Tuesday night to a Regal theater or before noon to an AMC one).  But it still is $25 doing that.  So, even though my kids wanted to see Mr Popper's Penguins, I didn't take them.  That is a Redbox movie.  I still love movies and watch a lot of them.  But, honestly, I have swayed more to television shows - I think they have a higher percentage of enjoyable ones.  And I just watch my movies in different ways than I used to.

So, when it comes to Transformers 3, it fails on all my criteria.  It has too much wanton destruction and violence.  It is cavalier with human life.  And I wasn't sure it was going to be worth seeing.  I never saw the second one and didn't feel like I had missed out on anything.  I even got the DVD for it from Netflix and sent it back eventually unwatched.  Truth be told, I could have been fine without ever seeing the first one either.  It wasn't exceptionally enjoyable or life changing.  I think Michael Bay knows how to make an exciting loud movie.  I don't think he knows how to make a good one.  I hated the Transformers in their modern form.  They were so chaotic it was impossible to make out many features.  The voiceovers were poorly connected to the character (like my argument for why the Hulk movies keep failing).  The movie is so loud and wild - just for the sake of being loud and wild.  Shia Le Bouf is so annoying; I think he ruins anything he is in.  I feel the same way about Megan Fox.  And, replacing her with an animatronic Barbie doll isn't going to help matters much.  So, I just will remain in the minority of movie fans and stay away from Transformers.  I may have felt different if everything I read and heard was trumpeting the film as a work of cinematic art.  But, since even my movie loving friends couldn't decide on it if was "epic" or "lame," I stayed home.  I'll bide my time and save my money until something more my taste arrives.

Big Hulking Mess

That's right.  By the little pink disc you can tell that this is not going to be an introverted self examination post.  It isn't a journey of self discovery.  It is a GIANT WASTE OF TIME!!!  Hooray!  We all love that, don't we?  I know I do.

With the summer movie season rapidly approaching, we are again hit with a glut of comic book superhero movies.  And now that television is jumping on the superhero bandwagon, there are more examples than ever.  NBC recently trotted out the woefully underappreciated The Cape.  Next year they will bring us Wonder Woman.  This summer, you can enjoy Green Lantern, Captain America, Thor, X-Men: First Class, and Super.  Next year will bring us The Avengers.  And there still are Dark Knight Rising, Iron Man 3, Wolverine 2, Superman (again), Spiderman (again), JLA, Ghost Rider 2, and many more on the horizon.  It is open season on comic books superheroes.

When I was thinking about this, it made me happy.  In general, I love this genre of films.  Sure, there are exceptions (Steel, Spawn, Ghost Rider).  For the most part, though, I like me some comic book movies.  Over the next few years, we will see most of the big names paraded across entertainment screens.  One of the films I am the most excited for is The Avengers.  I still can't believe Marvel is actually putting this film out - with all of these huge comic book guys in one film.  It takes some guts, to be sure.  And the fact that they got the big actors on board is crazy.  Throw in that it is directed by Joss Whedon, and that is a first weekend/wait in line kind of movie.

When you read about that movie, one thing that pops out is that it includes Mark Ruffalo playing The Hulk.  Now, this is not the Eric Bana/Ang Lee version.  It is not the Edward Norton version.  This is a third incarnation of the big green ugly - all in less than ten years.  It made me think.  How did The Hulk - one of the most popular and recognizable characters in the Marvel lineup - end up so poorly handled?  How did it go from being a headliner character to a sideshow?  I have had some thoughts on The Hulk.  A few year ago, I put some of them into my review of the last film version of the comic.  But I wanted to revisit and expand on this examination.

Alter Ego / Hero Disassociation
One of the biggest challenges in making a successful comic book movie is to make the actor portraying believable in both the super hero role and the regular guy role. This is a challenge because so often the superhero is actually computer generated. It is easier in characters like Batman or the X-Men because their faces are still there, giving a connection to the human in the costume. Iron Man worked because Robert Downey Jr was just that freaking good as Tony Stark - all the time.  Even in the computer generated costume, we still saw shots of Downey and heard his voice.  Hulk is a major issue because THERE IS NO SIMILARITIES between Bruce Banner and the Hulk. You could cast Laurence Olivier as Banner and the movie would suck. The Hulk is a big lurching monosyllabic monster crushing things. There is no humanity there - at least not at this point in the mythos with which these movies are dealing.  So, the actor has to be able to pull of a good Bruce Banner (something Norton didn't do).  But they are helpless when it comes to The Hulk.  It becomes completely dependent on special effects.  It is a rare movie that can completely computer generate a character on screen that seems real ALL THE TIME.  Our brains tell us that it is fake.  So we know the Hulk isn't something to invest in emotionally.

Misguided Audience Sympathy
The main conflict of the Hulk story is that Banner wants to GET RID OF the Hulk. So we sympathize with him, hoping he can live a normal life. But at the same time, the only enjoyment we get in the movie is when the Hulk is rampaging and destroying everything.  This causes a mixed reaction from the audience.  The dude is only a hero when he is the Hulk.  But he doesn't want to be the Hulk.  He wants to be free.  So we should want him to be free.  But when he is free, he is just a boring nerd.  We are bored when he is free.  So we want him to stay imprisoned.  Or else we feel imprisoned.  How can you have a superhero who hates being that hero?

Hulk is a Lousy Hero
Here's the honest truth about the Hulk: he makes a better villain than hero.  Marvel figured this out a few years ago.  The powers that be got (Iron Man, Reed Richards) worried about him being too unpredictable, so they stranded him in outer space.  He ended up on some battle scarred planet and ended up taking over - spawning a son who has even fewer redeeming qualities than himself.  Then he returned to Earth and wrecked havoc on those people who sent him away.  In any futuristic views of the Marvel universe, Hulk's offspring are always bad.  He makes a great villain.  But he's a terrible hero.  It's like cheering for Mr. Hyde or the werwolf.  They really just need to decide once and for all to turn him evil.  They keep playing with that - Red Hulk, Skaar, Old Man Logan.  Just pull the trigger.  Part of my reasons for that is in the next point.

Hulk's Villains are Too Powerful
If villains get to be TOO strong, cool, and tough - even though we want to see them taken down - we still won't believe it. This is what I call the WWE problem. In wrestling you have wrestlers who people love, and ones they hate. And to advance story lines, you push the "faces" but play up the strength of the "heels." Back in the WCW/NWO days, this was never more true than in the Sting vs. Scott "Big Poppa Pump" Steiner feud. The problem was, the more Steiner bulked up, the more people realized there was no way Sting would actually win.  Steiner was a collegiate wrestler, so he actually knew wrestling moves.  And he had more steroids in him than a Yankees' clubhouse.  He would have torn Sting's head off.  It was the same with Kent Shamrock when he was in WWE. He would have destroyed everyone.  This guy was a multiple time MMA champion who could break your ankle in ten seconds.  No one could beat him.  So you have to come up with increasingly ludicrous ways for the face to win. The same thing happens in superhero movies. The Hulk himself is a pretty big bad dude. So to give him a challenge, you have to create a bigger villain.  You have to have these bizarre villains with Hulk because, face it, he can't fight a bank robber. It's not like he can become a defender of a city like Batman. He has to have these big ultra-powerful baddies or else it is a joke. Who's he going to fight? Mole Man? Zeus? Venom? He would crush all of them.  So here comes Abomination.  Now, straight up, the humans behind the beasts are probably pretty even. Banner is smart and a bit buff (mostly wimpy). The baddie is strong and smart, but with a temper/ego problem. Now, he gets TWO doses of Super Soldier serum. This is the same stuff that made Captain America, right? TWO doses. And then he gets the Hulk treatment. With how big and tough he was, combined with his complete lack of morals or ethics to weigh him down, he would have KILLED Hulk. There is no way Hulk can win. The heel was too strong for the face. (This is something that plagues comic book movies, especially in sequels when villains are jammed in like gumball machines.)  In a normal comic book movie, the bad guy needs to be as strong or stronger than the hero, but with a fatal flaw.  How can someone be stronger than Hulk?  [This is one concern I have about The Avengers.  What kind of villain is big enough that you need all those heroes?  That's when weirdos like Galactus and Darkseid and Doomsday and Apocalypse come into play.  I hate those villains - just TOO big and bad.]

Lack of Cohesive Story Line
This is mainly for comic book dorks.  Most comic book characters have a pretty clear story.  They have their origin, their reasons for becoming a hero, their main antagonists.  Things may change from time to time, but if you mess with things too much, it gets to be to hard to follow.  Spiderman did this years ago. The title almost got killed because it was such a mess. They had him out in space fighting parasites and all kinds of bizarre stuff.  You can see now, they have gone back to the beginning with him.  He's a student who is Spiderman.  No one knows who he is.  He just is doing his thing.  With the Hulk, they have changed so many things over the years.  There were times when he would be like a dumb crazed animal when in Hulk mode.  Other times he could access Bruce Banner's memories.  At other times, he was completely rational and intelligent and Hulk all the time.  There's been grey hulk and green hulk and red hulk.  He's been able to jump miles in a leap.  He's basically invincible.  Then he isn't.  He's a good guy.  He's a bad guy.  He's off planet.  He's back.  It is hard to follow.  So, those true fans of the title aren't really sure what version they are going to see on screen.  It hasn't helped that there were two vastly different versions in the theaters so close together.  Even if fans did get attached to one particular version, it probably won't last very long.

Maybe Marvel is finally getting the right idea.  Instead of having a whole big massive movie hanging on a character that hasn't seemed to connect with audiences, tuck him away into a big cast of characters.  See how Ruffalo does with this Hulk.  Maybe, if it works, they can try a spinoff or something.  Give the character a chance to establish some kind of footing and ground rules for his existence first.  I'm not sure.  The character seems like it could be cool on screen.  But I think they may have to go for a really risky move - like do the Planet Hulk series instead.  Let him go crazy and just be destructive Hulk in a world that can handle it.  Don't pull in the whole Banner angle.  Just make him the green monster generating all kinds of mayhem all over the universe.  That would be a better fit than some angsty drama set on Earth - where he is just too big and strong to function in a normal setting.

A Toy Story

After my last couple trouble making posts, I am back to my bright and cheery posts.  I'm sure all three of you still reading this will be delighted.  This past Friday, the Staples Family Five went to enjoy Pixar's latest masterpiece, Toy Story 3.  As you probably expect, it was phenomenal.  I am continually baffled as to how one movie production company can be so consistently on the top of their game.  Eleven movies.  Eleven home runs.  And I'm not talking eleven home runs that barely squeaked over the short wall in the right field corner.  Or even an inside the ball park home run that only happened because the center fielder misplayed it.  I am talking about eleven booming shots.  Two of them went to dead center, about twenty rows up.  Four of them were upper deckers that hit some drunk guy in the face.  Two of them landed out in the street.  And three smashed the lights, causing a shower of sparks and an awesome chill-inducing ending.  (If you want to read what my ranking is, here's a post I wrote around Oscar time.)

Where does Toy Story 3 rank?  I will have to watch it again to decide for sure.  But it is certainly one of those three light cluster destroyers.  It is up there with Up and WALL-E as the best Pixar movies ever.  And it had better get one of those ten Best Pictures slots.  I am still constantly amazed at the geniuses at that establishment.  The work they put into these things.  Even when they are putting out sequels, they still give each of them the same treatment as the originals.  Think about most third movies in a trilogy.  How many times can you say the third movie was the BEST movie?  (Honestly, I don't know if I can even think of one instance of that.)  Some would say Lord of the Rings, since the third one won all the Oscars.  But the second movie was the best one.  The Academy was rewarding the series with all those wins.

I'm not going to lie - I cried like a little girl.  It wasn't even just one scene, either.  These characters have so much emotional depth.  Their friendship and love is so intense.  I found myself hurting for them.  They were toys, for Pete's sake.  But I ached for them as they tried to deal with the fact that they just were not wanted (or appeared to be).  I actually thought about the toybox that I toted around for years as I moved.  It was filled with stuffed Garfields and vinyl California Raisins figurines and action figures.  And tons of rabbit toys from when I was Natalie's age.  I held on to them for years - not wanting to say goodbye to that part of my life.  I also held onto them thinking my kids would want them for some reason.  (Although, knowing my kids now, they would hardly be interested in most of that junk.)  So eventually most of that found its way into a garbage can or a donation box.  I could imagine the Dallas Cowboys action figure wondering what he did wrong.  Then I jerked myself to reality by saying, "Stupid.  They are just toys.  They can't feel anything."

But that was where the scenes between Andy and his mom got me.  That was where the tears started and didn't stop.  Because that is real.  Kids grow up.  They stop playing with their little toys and start using computers and iPods.  As I watched Andy using his laptop and Mollie listening to her iPod, I could see my kids in that.  I can already hardly believe Josiah is turning nine in less that three months.  Natalie starts FIRST GRADE.  My little baby girl is in FIRST GRADE?!?  Gabe is so tiny that it seems his babyhood has lasted longer.  But then we go through Publix and he is counting and saying the letters.  And I know his turn is just around the corner.  Before long, I'll be the parent getting my kid ready to go to college.  And that thought just kills me.  It is too soon.  I'm not ready for that.  Josiah will be driving in six years.  Gabe is old enough to go to preschool.  Natalie is doing cartwheels and handstands like a big girl.

So many times in my mind, I still see myself as a younger person.  It is like my brain got stuck at 25.  Since I have worked with students for so long, it is easy to still think young.  But when the reality really sets in, it is scary.  I'm 36.  The kids I taught last year at ICS were born after I graduated from high school.  They literally are young enough to be my kids.  And my kids are growing up - even if I don't want them to.  We already have seen Josiah outgrow Planet Heroes and Larry Boy.  Natalie thinks Strawberry Shortcake is for babies.  And Gabe has moved past Max and Ruby to Wow Wow Wubzy and Diego.  He actually sat through Toy Story 3 and points out the characters now.

That is what left me in tears at the end of the movie.  The thought of my kids one day packing up boxes and moving off to school.  Josiah one day will put the Puppy World dogs into a box and stuff them in the attic - or send them to Goodwill.  Natalie won't want her Build a Bear unicorn or her Love Bear or mermaid.  Gabe won't build trains of cars around the room.  They won't run across the room to give me a hug.  They won't bring me books and say, "Wead it!"  They won't squeal and race to the door when Heather gets home yelling, "MOMMA! MOMMA! MOMMA!"  People will think they are silly to hold onto those special toys.  And, I guess, as a parent we worry they will outgrow us too.  They won't cry at the thought that I am going out of town to teach at a seminar.  They won't think we are cool to hang around.  They won't grab my hand in a store, just because they love me.

The Toy Story franchise has never been just about toys.  The first movie presented such an interesting concept.  What do toys do when we aren't around?  But it blossomed into much more than that.  It was about loyalty and friendship and accepting change.  The second movie delved into the concepts of realizing our purpose.  We need to do what we were put here to do - even if it means sacrifice.  The third movie dealt with so much - friendship, loyalty, love, death, power, vengeance, rejection.  But most of all it was about letting go  - even when we desperately want to hold on.  We so badly want to fight the passage of time.  We are dragged kicking and screaming into the future.  People have developed so many efforts to delay it - plastic surgery, mid life crises, immaturity.  But our kids won't stop growing.  And, as parents, we should want our kids to reach their potential and change their world - something they can't do unless they go out on their own.  But, man it is hard.

The fact that an animated movie about toys is able to teach that is amazing.  As a life lesson, Toy Story 3 was great.  As a film, it was incredible.  It wrapped up both the toy story line AND the Andy story line perfectly.  It was gorgeously made.  It had real emotion - both happiness and sadness.  It really was a masterpiece.  And it was something that I was able to share with my kids.  We all were excited about the movie, enjoyed it, and had a great memory because of it.  They just couldn't understand my tears.  Not yet.

Let's All Go to the Mass-Marketing Opportunity

I love summer.  It is one of my favorite times of year.  Sure, I hate the heat, the oppressive sun, the lack of daytime diversions for children.  I hate the beach, the bugs, the sunscreen odor.  I hate the dearth of real sports - where the only thing left is baseball (said with disdain).  So, how could I possibly say that I love summer?

Summer movies.

That's right, the glorious summer cinema lineup makes up for all the nastiness that summer brings.  Just about every single week, a new flick hits the multiplex - meaning that for between 2 and 4 hours, you can escape the heat, humidity, and hurricanes (I had almost forgotten about blasted hurricanes).  MOVIES!!!

Think about the summer movies of years past - Terminator 2, Jurassic Park, Independence Day, Batman (all of them), Men in Black, Spiderman, Pirates of the Caribbean.  Huge awesome spectacles.  I love summer movies.  They are movies I actually WANT to see - not just movies that some snooty reviewer thinks I should want to see.  And there are even surprises - movies that sneak into the summer lineup and end up being awesome (The Bourne Trilogy, WALL-E, Italian Job).  

There is a problem, though.  I have noticed that lately, the marketing for these movies are starting to dwarf the films themselves.  Sure, there has always been marketing.  I have glasses from McDonalds for Batman Forever - and now the glasses for Star Trek from Burger King.  My kids can pull out Kids Meal tie-ins from dozens of movies.  The marketing itself is not the problem.  It is the MASS-MARKETING!!!  With THREE EXCLAMATION POINTS!!!  I can handle the glasses at Burger King, or the little character toys in the Kids Meal.  But Star Trek has a tie-in with E-Surance?  And Verizon?  What the what?  Why?  If anything, Star Trek should show how inept those companies are, not be tied into them - what with the advanced technology we see on display, reminding us how sucky our cell phones companies are.

Last year Iron Man had a tie in with 7-11 for Slurpee cups.  A couple years back, Superman Returns also did.  (Apparently The Hulk also did, but I didn't care.)  They had special cups with 3-D images.  You know, the ones you can scratch the side of and make cool sounds?  I have some of these cups in my cupboard.  So, no surprise when Wolverine this year pulls the same thing.  Well, that movie just came out last week.  On Saturday of last week - ONE DAY after Wolverine jumped into the cinemas - 7-11 had switched its cups to Terminator cups.  It is getting to be like holidays in the stores.  We start pushing the next one before the other happens.

I think the tipping point came back when the ridiculous Matrix sequels came out.  I was super excited.  And so were the marketers.  The second Matrix film was EVERYWHERE.  I read an article talking about how their challenge was to get coverage for the movie - they wanted to have as many people as possible "know about" the movie.  And they succeeded.  It had the highest "Q Rating" of any movie ever - something like 99.4%.  The opening weekend was the biggest Rated R movie opening ever.  And the movie was HORRIBLE.  It's too bad that they didn't spend half of that marketing budget on making sure the Wachowskis didn't go crazy instead.  But this is what the movie industry has become.  The hype machine is so powerful that it just overpowers the films.  

They are so worried about the biggest opening weekend that they don't worry about the movie itself.  That is why we see movies open to $75 million and then drop to $20 million the next week.  People figure out the movie is terrible and don't go.  That is what will happen with Wolverine this weekend - and most of the films coming out this summer.  It is rare to have a movie win three weekends in a row - or having a few huge weeks.  It is those movies that stand out - they ones that the hype is actually justified.  Word of mouth brings more people the subsequent weeks.  Why was The Dark Knight so huge last year?  It was a GREAT movie, with people telling their friends to go.  But even that movie nearly got toppled by the hype - by the time I saw it I was on the verge of feeling it wasn't as good as it was made out to be.  But how could it be?  It was touted like crazy for months.  

I understand the need for marketing to pull in as much money as possible.  But how about reining it in a little bit?  Do you really need to be on every cereal box, every waffle box, every soda box?  Do we need to have a Transformer Whopper (real thing coming this summer)?  Did we need a Gotham pizza?  Should the NBA (already with a image problem) be using highlights to promote Angels and Demons?  A sleepover at the Smithsonian?  Indiana Jones Adventure Snickers with a hint of coconut and "exotic spices?"  

Movie people - since I know you read this blog religiously - let's make a deal.  You just worry about making the movies as well as you can.  I'll go to the movies.  We'll both be happy.  Shoot, add a dollar onto my ticket price to make up for less marketing.  See?  That works out well for everyone.  You aren't fooling us.  We aren't going to go to the movies for the gimmicks.  We want to enjoy and have fun.  No one is dumb enough to fall for your cheap tricks.  Now, if you'll excuse me, I am going to go drink my Throwback Pepsi.