Jump to content

How (Not) To Name a Movie


Sylph

Recommended Posts

  • Members

How (Not) To Name a Movie

BINGO: The 2003 romantic comedy "Something's Gotta Give," starring Jack Nicholson and Diane Keaton, was named after the classic Johnny Mercer tune. Did the title help the film gross $267 million worldwide? Probably didn't hurt. What a project is called can make or break it at the box office. Studios mine experts' brains in the quest.

By Josh Friedman, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

May 12, 2008


When they met last year with executives at New Line Cinema, marketing consultants Seth Lockhart and Jamil Barrie pitched their 10 favorite alternative titles for Pride and Glory, a police drama starring Edward Norton and Colin Farrell. Then they passed around a report with dozens of others that didn't make their cut.

One of Our Own caught the eye of Russell Schwartz, New Line's marketing chief at the time, who asked, "What's wrong with this one?"

That's when Lockhart, who hated One of Our Own because it sounded to him like a tag line, gave a kick under the table to Barrie – who thought it perfectly suited the tale of cops betrayed by a corrupt colleague. When even the partners who call their consulting firm TitleDoctors disagree, it's clear the business of naming movies can be tricky.

"When movie titles don't work, studios are leaving potential earnings on the table," Lockhart says.

One of the most notorious examples of a missed opportunity because of an ill-chosen title was The Shawshank Redemption, the 1994 prison drama starring Tim Robbins and Morgan Freeman. The film was lauded by critics but landed with a thud at the box office. More recently, the Russell Crowe boxing saga Cinderella Man and the futuristic thriller Children of Men also failed to capitalize on strong reviews, in part because of titles widely seen as turn-offs.

"Titles are one of the hardest things to do because every movie is an individual brand that is going to live in perpetuity," says Christine Birch, marketing president at DreamWorks Studios, "but you only have an opening weekend to prove that you've gotten it right."

Usually, of course, the title comes with the script. Sometimes it's picked by the producer or director, in other cases studio marketers. Occasionally, studios redo titles because of legal issues. More often, they're searching for a catchy and marketable name, sometimes with the aid of consultants such as the Ant Farm, Crew Creative and Rich in Meaning.

As it turned out, New Line stuck with Pride and Glory for its long-delayed drama, now set for release in 2009. Officials at the Time Warner Inc. unit declined to comment.

Getting studios to agree on a name change is never easy (none of the titles for the 13 films Lockhart and Barrie consulted on during their first year in business has been adopted). Filmmakers and production executives can become enamored of a movie's "working" title. And studios may have already invested millions in marketing a project under a particular name, making it financially costly to alter.

"A lot of times the title takes on a life of its own," says naming specialist Brent Scarcliff of Redondo Beach-based Rich in Meaning. "It develops an equity that makes it hard to change."

But not impossible.

Fox Searchlight Pictures' police thriller Street Kings, with a cast including Keanu Reeves and Forest Whitaker and a screenplay by James Ellroy, had been known as The Night Watchman until this year. Test screening recruiters found that moviegoers thought it sounded like a story about a security guard.

Walt Disney Studios switched the name of South of the Border, its upcoming live-action comedy about a ritzy dog from Beverly Hills that gets lost in Mexico, to the more comedic Beverly Hills Chihuahua.

Re-titling can improve a film's prospects. Woody Allen's comedy Annie Hall had been known by the clinical-sounding Anhedonia, a term for the inability to experience pleasure. The sci-fi thriller Blade Runner originally bore the name of its source novel, Philip K. Dick's Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?

Andy Solomon, co-president of the Ant Farm, which makes film trailers, says he's worked on titles for about 20 movies but offered only one idea that stuck.

In spring 2003, the firm was putting together a teaser trailer for an untitled Nancy Meyers project, a romantic comedy starring Diane Keaton and Jack Nicholson, and it mixed in the classic Johnny Mercer tune Something's Gotta Give. As the lyrics go: "When an irresistible force such as you meets an old immovable object like me, you can bet as sure as you live, something's gotta give."

Solomon and a colleague suggested naming the film after the song, and Sony executives liked the idea. Whether the title was responsible for helping Something's Gotta Give gross $267 million in worldwide ticket sales is unknown. But Solomon says, "It just fit so well, the way those two are always butting heads."

A spokesman for Sony Pictures said he couldn't remember who came up with the idea for the movie's title.

Regardless, the names of songs – Stand by Me, Sea of Love, Sweet Home Alabama – often are borrowed to title movies in Hollywood.

The best titles, such as Star Wars, Raiders of the Lost Ark and Pulp Fiction, are "sonorous," Lockhart says. "They just sound right – appealing to your emotions and your senses." Although an awkwardly named movie usually won't reach its box-office potential, Lockhart points to exceptions such as the Hugh Grant comedy Love, Actually, a hit despite a title he calls stilted.

The first assignment TitleDoctors undertook was for the DreamWorks romantic comedy The Heartbreak Kid, starring Ben Stiller as a man who meets the perfect woman – while on his honeymoon. TitleDoctors pitched Mrs. Right Now, Unintentionally Yours, Damned If I Do and other ideas, but the studio kept the original title for the Farrelly brothers' remake, a box-office clunker in the fall.

DreamWorks declined to comment.

Last summer, Lockhart and Barrie tried to persuade Sony to change the title of Hancock, a big-budget action comedy starring Will Smith as an alcoholic superhero known as John Hancock. They told studio executives they thought the current title was vague and pitched alternatives such as Heroes Never Die, Unlikely Hero and Less Than Hero.

Sony believes it made the right move in sticking with Hancock, slated for the Fourth of July weekend, and it is marketing the film on the strength of the popular star in an unusual role, said Valerie Van Galder, the studio's marketing president.

The project – potentially the first in a franchise – was originally known as Tonight, He Comes, which elicited widespread snickering, and at another point was called the more fulsome John Hancock.

But a similar, single-name title worked well for Sony and Smith in 2005. That project, Hitch, had been known as The Last First Kiss before it was changed.

Despite the disagreement over Hancock, Lockhart says that Smith, fresh off The Pursuit of Happyness and I Am Legend, "is probably the one star in the world who is title-proof. This movie could be called John Doe, and it wouldn't matter."



[email protected]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • I hope they give him more to do than just be a prick as you say. I can see how viewers would like him because the actor is so charming despite the character being such an absolute pain.    I would agree. And there was also the undercurrent of Raven and Draper sort of flirting with each other. The actors play that attraction and it worked so well in that scene. 
    • Daniel Cosgrove is PERFECT as the sleezy politician. This might be my favorite role of his. All of these people keeping Kristina’s secret is so annoying. I really want her to pay.
    • What did happen to Beth between 86 and 89? Did she have amnesia?
    • I actually thought he came off as younger. It's so hard to buy Martin as Nicole and Ted's son unless they had him when they were 12.
    • @chrisml Isn't remarkable that, on a soap whose brand is built on twists and mysteries, that Raven's last straw was as simple as Logan saying that she was incapable of loving Jamey.  In the episode when Raven exit's and leaves Jamey with April, I can remember feeling the subtext that Raven is also trying to talk herself into leaving him behind.  There's so much in that little scene.  She's trying to stick it to Logan for saying she was a bad mother.  She's both granting April's wish, and damning her with the old adage of being careful what she wished for.  And, she's hinting to Draper that she's going to boff his father. It remains my favorite scene, and it still blows my mind that was not the end of that episode.  
    • Oh lord not Drew just figured out it was both Nina and Portia that set him up. Willow WILL never leave this man. Ric taking the case purely just to spite Sonny is [!@#$%^&*].ing hilarious.
    • And in addition to Patti being de-aged, she was no longer a nurse, divorced from Len(fair enough) and her two children were not seen and barely mentioned. So basically she was a totally new character. For newer viewers it didn't matter but any loyal viewers would have been wondering about all the changes with Patti. Sarah Whiting always puzzled me. The writers finally decide to acknowledge Jo's family and do so by making up a never mentioned adopted teen. Why not just bring in Tracey, Jo's actual grandaughter? As for Liza, perhaps it would have been wise to rest the character when Sherry left. They were big shoes to fill and her Liza was so identified with Travis. I don't recall what was going on in the story at that time but if they knew Sherry was leaving, write it so Liza would leave town to care for an ailing Janet and take a breather with the character for a few months.
    • Ahh interesting. Yeah, that's sad for A-M. I will say, he and Nick became fast friends when Susan started working at Spaulding. A-M/Lucy/Nick/Susan had a lot of double dates in those 7 months. A-M was Nick's best man at his wedding to Susan, which now that I think about it, is odd that he wouldn't have considered Fletcher. I remember those two were so close at the paper, and even living together with Ben. Once Tangie left SF, Nick left the paper, and Fletcher/Holly were rarely seen... so I guess they felt that friendship wasn't shown often enough anymore (which again, lazy writing).
    • I honestly don't think Alan-Michael ever really had a friend on the show. Maybe Cameron or Samantha, but otherwise... *Cameron was a high school friend who ended up dating teenage Dinah after she broke up with A-M. Samantha is Phillip's biological sister, who A-M treated like a sister. Interestingly enough, they were born the same week on the show in 1981, but A-M ends up being older than her when she returns to town in '89.
    • I thought he was very cute too, and a likeable presence even though on paper Cliff was a prick. I wonder if he was well-liked by viewers or someone at the show as there's a point in these episodes where he could have been written out and was not.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy