How far they go

Although this holiday weekend seems geared toward making Hancock top at the box office*, I'm still hearing ads for Wanted (probably because when it opened last weekend it was not the most popular movie, despite having Angelina Jolie).

To be clear: Last weekend we visited my father (it was his birthday) and did not see any movie. And if at some point this weekend we find ourselves in a position to see a movie, will we be purchasing tickets for Wanted? Even though the marketing department for Universal is spending money to try to promote it, I think we will not.

In fact, I'd say because of the continuing marketing efforts we probably won't be seeing it.

Prior to last weekend, based on the trailer we'd seen, I was fairly ambivalent about it, and my fiancée thought it looked like a summer popcorn movie (read: bombastic action). Now, while my fiancée soured due to a bad report she got from a co-worker who did see it last weekend, I was not turned until yesterday when I heard a commercial on the radio for Wanted.

Running the trailer in previews before movies or airing on television, with the visual element, the promotional effort can just show dazzling special effects and a glimpse of Jolie's bare (and tattooed) back. However, on the radio the ad must fall back on quoting reviews.

Now, I'm not suggesting I am an expert on advertising, nor am I necessarily all that good at persuasion in general**, but I'd guess that in such ads they'd start with their strongest quote. That way, if listeners change the station before it finishes, at least the best line gets heard. And the first review from which they quoted was this one attributed to Hollywood.com:

"Scene for scene this may be the most visually inventive, trail blazing film of its kind in light years."

In case it didn't jump out at you like it did to me when I heard it (even being said in that enthusiastic voice-over tone), the "light year" is a unit of distance, not a unit of time; that's just a "year." And while I'd like to give them the benefit of the doubt that it was an attempt at clever use of language, or that in some possible interpretation they were referring to tremendous distance, I'm pretty sure it was more that the writer of the review doesn't know what a light year is.

The thing about that: I'd guess there's a lot of people who don't know that a light year applies to the vast distance traveled by light in a year. Included amongst them, as far as I can tell, are the writer***, any editor of the review, and the people who decided which quote to include first during the ad.

But I do know what a light year is.

Thus, those promoting Wanted sought to (unintentionally) alert listeners if you know what a light year is then it is probably not the movie for you. I can thank them for letting me know before I spend any money on the film. Frankly, that's more than I would have expected.

So if we do get out to the multiplex during the weekend, we'll probably see Wall-E, which my fiancée has thought would be adorable ever since seeing the trailer for it months ago, and which I've heard is actually good. And the marketing for which has not misused "light year" (that I've seen) so it has not turned me off (although, because it appears that Wall-E takes place in outer space, if that same term were used in reference to time rather than distance, it would probably seem a clever play on words rather than an indication of inadequate education).

~

Seeing the text of the Wanted review (rather than merely hearing it), I do take a tiny bit of comfort in seeing "its" properly used ("...film of its kind..."). Someone involved at least knew that much. And that might just get me to sit through it when it comes on cable in a few years.

~

* Linda Richman digression: The box office does not sell boxes, and really is not an office. Discuss.

** Obviously.

*** I suspect the writer is actually a shill for those who seek to promote the film, so it's hardly surprising that it would seem the best quote to those making the radio spot.