I never did put up a “What did you think of ‘The American?’” post last week but I am very interested what readers thought. Of course, the film won the box office this weekend, which should be seen as a major victory for Focus Features marketing. This was a film that needed to go out big on opening weekend because it simply wasn’t the film being sold to general audiences and wasn’t likely to fall in their favor.
But is it such a crime to protect one’s investment? Do marketers not have a responsibility? And are they evil for following through on that?
Well, Patrick Goldstein (who disliked the film and paints broadly with that brush) tip-toes the line between a “yes” and “no” answer to that question in a recent item asking whether viewers were bamboozled into seeing the film. I tend to think it was a savvy job in a difficult profession. Moments like this are when precision is necessary, or an outright disaster could be on your hands. But then again, I really liked the film, so maybe I’m painting too broadly with THAT brush.
Writes Goldstein:
Focus must have realized from its early screenings that “The American” had little crowd-pleasing appeal. It was an art-house movie all the way. So they cooked up a batch of TV spots that made the film look like a snazzy thriller, played them incessantly on programs with older-guy appeal (like baseball games, which is where I witnessed the advertising bombardment) and gave the film a wide release, figuring they’d get as many moviegoers as possible before word spread that, in terms of Clooney films, this one had a lot more in common with “The Good German” than “Ocean’s Eleven.”
What do you think? Savvy business sense or dishonest advertising? I’d argue they aren’t mutually exclusive. And I would also argue that being “bamboozled” into watching Violante Placido strut around the screen is far from the worst thing.
Did anyone who disliked the film feel “bamboozled” into going? What are your general thoughts on the movie? Fire away.
(I can’t wait for Chad to chime in.)
[Photo: Focus Features]
Comments
33 responses to “Hoodwinked! Bamboozled! Really?”
Maybe what those baseball-watching men need is a good arthouse flick. Focus Features is doing them a service.
The American is definitely not for the adderall generation.
I liked it a lot. It’s a serious slow burn, nothing really happens for the majority of film. It’s very much a throwback to 60’s style cinema, complete with full frontal Italian beauties (no Brazilian waxing to be found here). And the locales, bellissimo! The film reminded me in many ways of Soderbergh’s The Limey.
As for the marketing, I remember seeing “high octane thriller” used. So yes, it was misleading for the uninformed. But if that helped get people to see the film who otherwise would not have, sure why not. The big studios trick millions of people out their hard earned cash each and every summer, it’s about time a smaller film pulled the same trick.
Hasn’t every film trailer released lately been a case of dishonest advertising? I’ve stopped trusting trailers, since for the past two or three years, the last trailer to accurately depict the film it was advertising was “Scott Pilgrim.” And what did the studio get for their honesty? A big box-office bomb.
I feel that the best way to get an idea of if a film might be right for you is by waiting for the clips to appear on Yahoo! Movies. There are plenty of films that I had mediocre or poor trailers that I ended up seeing in the end, because the clips convinced me – and those turned out to be really good.
This just provides me another justification for my practice of avoiding trailers (and TV spots) at all costs (the main reason being, of course, that they reveal *way* too much crucial plot information). I liked “The American”, but if I’d walked in with pre-set expectations that I were about to watch a thrill-a-minute actioner, I imagine I would have been confused, if not annoyed.
But in terms of the “false advertising” issue, I can’t really level any accusations at Focus. Their job is to market the movie so people pay to watch it, and that’s what they did. Obviously there’s a line between misleading viewers and outright lying to them, but I don’t think linking together a series of clips that actually appeared in the film and scoring them with tense music crosses that line.
I think this is what people get for basing their movie-going decisions based solely on television commercials and not seeking out more information about the movie.
I reallly liked the movie too. It had such a great mood and tone that reminds me of great American movies from the 70s.
The only thing that bothered me was when I started to ask myself why is Taylor Hicks of American Idol fame starring in this movie. All kidding aside, The American is an excellent film.
It’s hard for me to get in the mindset of the general population. I didn’t see any TV ads for this because I don’t have a TV and I barely remember the trailer. I went because I was interest in the gathering of talent involved and not because of any marketing (although I do love that poster).
I think Focus can do whatever they want to sell the film. It’s not like they are using footage from a different movie. Stupid people deserve to be hoodwinked in to seeing something different.
Too bad the film is an absolute shit sandwich.
I really liked The American. It was like a European art house film. In fact, Clooney was the only American in the film. It was more interior than exterior. I am happy that it was not an action flick.
I’m with Chad Hartigan. I don’t have a television and never saw the trailer. I don’t blame Focus for a dishonest ad campaign. But I thought very little of the movie. It had a weirdly inconsistent tone: heartless and unemotional for about 97% of the running time, and then suddenly sentimental and utterly conventional for the ending. And it was a weird choice to disregard basic Aristotilian notions of storytelling: we saw episodic events in the order they happened, but most of the scenes seemed to have no causal effect on what followed (or at least the filmmakers weren’t keen on letting us in on the secret). Much of it was obscure without being mysterious.
I paid to see it last night and… I really liked it as well, although I could sense that the audience I saw it with was disappointed when the credits started to roll. Seemed like they let out an audible “what the fuck?” sigh of dissatisfaction. I thought it was strangely hypnotic, largely thanks to Anton’s expert direction. Clooney was good and that girl, the prostitute… whoo-boy… gorgeous. Not a great movie, and probably one I’d have trouble recommending to friends and family, but I definitely liked it. Score was cool too, though I didn’t hear the exact same riff from the trailer.
I watched “The Passenger” this weekend, and some part of me feels like it was a fitting substitute for “The American.”
And yet, while Machete played to its lowest common denominator, it happened to be the bravest mainstream American film in years. Go figure.
I say….
Suckers!
Dishonest advertising is when a studio releases a troubled production. One that’s had its head chopped off before it comes to theaters either for a lesser rating or arbitrary scenes taken out to drastically reduce running time.
Bravest, James? Really?
One thing: The film had nothing to do with “The Good German.” Not when you consider that that film was about as interesting as watching paint dry. What an awful comparison.
Or, I should say, it had nothing IN COMMON with “The Good German.”
Tapley, I can’t think of the last time a mainstream American film took on such a controversial issue. I am very high on the film right now. I need to see it again tomorrow.
If this is what it takes to have people go and see a film such as this I’m all for it. I’m just happy to see Corbijn as the second director in nearly 2 decades to open a film at #1 in the US. Can you guess who the other one was and with what film?
I think Focus knew it would not have very good holds week to week (it has a D Cinemascore), so they wanted top make as much as possible opening weekend.
I loved it. Second best movie of the year to me
I liked this movie a lot and went with my in-laws (my mother-in-law loves Clooney)… they liked it and knew it would be a slow, maybe not as slow as it was though, but I think the marketing is pretty fair.
I thought it was flawed, but enjoyed it overall. I gave it a B, about a 8/10.
Fuller review: http://abwafb.blogspot.com/2010/09/american.html
It’s the same thing with Shyamalan. He makes arthouse films that are sold aggressively to large audiences, who reject the films.
He does?
I would say the only “arthouse” film Shyamalan made that was mostly rejected by large audiences (and even then it made 115 mil) was The Village. Lady in the Water and The Happening are NOT arthouse films lol.
“Farthouse” is more like it.
Jonathan Spuij- I think your trivia question is missing a key adjective.
I haven’t seen the movie but the trailer didn’t promise any external intensity. It was obvious that it was about the character.
And if people don’t want to be disappointed, they should read at least one review of the movie they are thinking of giving their money to.
Absolutely loved it. I stayed away from reviews until I saw it, so I went in expecting what was advertised. Still, I thought it was pretty great. Everyone I’ve talked about it with hated it though.
I thought the plot itself was rather old-hat, but it was intoxicating, elegiac, and fully riveting. Clooney was terrific, the cinematography was sleek, the editing was (at times) fits and starts but overall impressive, and the last scene was kind of perfect.
don’t forget The Last Airbender we all thought it was going to be better than that
I liked the film. I really grooved with the “deliberate” pace and simple narrative. That being said, it really helped knowing that the film itself was not exactly as advertised.