MEL GIBSON’S FILM ‘GET THE GRINGO’ BYPASSES THEATERS WITH DIRECTV VOD DEAL

“Get the Gringo” is actually the new title. The film has been advertised as “How I Spent My Summer Vacation.”

This is a radical move on Gibson’s part. “Get the Gringo’ will never see the inside of a movie theatre (other than some special screenings). Instead, 20 million DirecTV subscribers will have the opportunity to VOD the film for a very reasonable $10.99. Then, later in the year, the film will move to other VOD outlets and Fox will release it on home video.  

The smartest move here is the price point. $10.99 is a very attractive figure for a brand-spanking new Mel Gibson action picture. You’re able to enjoy this in the comfort of your own home with the entire family. Also, the advertising is much cheaper. Everything is done through DirecTV, who has a stake in the success of the film, as opposed to mass media markets.  

While “Margin Call” was also released in theatres, it still managed to gross a very impressive $4 million on VOD while in theatres, and that’s without the attraction of an A-list star in an action flick.

Crunch the numbers. 2 million buys, or 10% of DirecTV subscribers, equals $22 million. Toss in the subsequent VOD release and DVD and what you have here is a potential game changer.

Another brilliant move on Gibson’s part (his Icon produced) was to not allow himself to be put in a position where theatre owners could blackmail him. “Tower Heist” was a theatrical release that wanted to experiment with same-day VOD. Theatre chains freaked and threatened to not screen the film. Universal blinked and that was that.

(more…)

Yesterday, our own Chris Yogerst weighed in on Greg Gutfeld’s criticism of Hollywood — specifically Greg’s criticism of “G.I. Joe,” Stallone’s new Rambo film and “Inglourious Basterds” — for choosing politically correct villains over the real ones we face today. Chris is correct that turning Nazis into Jihadists is not something a filmmaker like Quentin Tarantino would do. If he has any, Tarantino’s politics have remained hidden in his work. Up on that screen the only thing he advocates for is overlooked 70’s B-movies and audacious entertainment. However, that doesn’t make the director’s decision to use Nazis any less politically correct or Hollywood’s moral cowardice in this area any more defensible.

Where my colleague Chris and I most disagree is with the assertion that Hollywood chooses “politically correct” or “safe” villains because Hollywood is all about the money and therefore wants to appeal to audiences who care what the villain looks like:

The film industry, like any other business, generally wants to appeal to the largest audience possible.  Picking “safe” enemies is one way to do that. 

Two of the most profitable films released this past year were “Gran Torino,” where our hero confronts black and Asian street gangs, and “Taken,” where the henchmen are Muslims and the arch-villain Middle Eastern. (more…)

So another Rambo flick is on its grimy, sweaty way and this time the villains are human traffickers and drug lords. To make them even more despicable, they’ve kidnapped a young girl and are probably ignoring her strict vegan needs.

Look, I applaud Sylvester Stallone’s heroic stance against human traffickers and kidnappers – for I know there will be quite an outcry especially from the large and very influential human trafficking and kidnapper lobby.

Of course, this movie comes on the heels of two other edgy ventures: The G.I Joe flick – which turned a gritty American icon into an airbrushed Benneton ad, and “Inglourious Basterds” a fantasy that has average Jews hacking Nazi soldiers to pieces.

These three movies have two things in common:
1) They avoid present, real danger in the world and instead choose villains that are not just safe, but politically correct to hate. You’d think it would be easy for Quentin Tarantino to find a present day enemy for the Jews (like, say, a terrorist group that denies the Holocaust and wants to wipe Israel off the map), but maybe none exist! And what of those guys who flew planes into the World Trade Center? I suppose in the era of the “unclenched fist,” we must be more sensitive to “backlash” than barbarism. (more…)

By now, everyone should know that the new film, GI Joe: Rise of Cobra, is a despicable excuse for a movie. It was harshly panned by Big Hollywood as well as by me. For an action film, it is horrible, but for an American film, it is a disgrace.

Director Stephen Sommers said, “this is not a George Bush movie — it’s an Obama world.” Sounds to me that since Bush is no longer president it is supposed to legitimize the disintegration of patriotism for our armed forces. That would explain why the Joe’s are no longer the all American heroes they once were. Instead, they are a multinational task force that picks up the pieces after the USA fails.

This film represents everything President Obama worshipers stand for, which explains the lack of Americanism.GI Joe has always been a vehicle of unapologetic patriotism. What happened? Obama happened. For some reason, it now feels like multiculturalism was not acceptable until Obama was elected into office?

(more…)

As if the makers of “G.I. Joe” hadn’t mucked up their own publicity enough by immediately politicizing the film with an announcement that all the crass Americanism would be stripped from our favorite action heroes in favor of a more global approach, on Monday director Stephen Sommers decided to polarize audiences even more hectoring we RedStaters not to misinterpret the deep well of subtext put into his creation: ”[T]his is not a George Bush movie – it’s an Obama world[.]”

And indeed “G.I. Joe” does remind of an Obama world: It cost too much, doesn’t deliver and we should all get back our cash for this clunker.

While nowhere near as soul-deadening as “Transformers 2” or the latest “Harry Potter,” you still feel like you’re watching someone else play a video game for two hours. The creative imagination spent to produce all-kinds of cool gadgets and weaponry obviously left nothing for plot, character or even a hint of logic. One of the bigger action scenes is a chase through the streets of Paris involving the combined force of a dozen “Joes,” deadly missiles and million-dollar accelerator suits all in pursuit of a Hummer filled with bad guys. Oh sure, there’s sound, fury, car crashes, and explosions galore, but never an explanation for why no one shoots out the Hummer’s tires. (more…)

So the latest GI Joe flick is creating controversy, because the character is no longer portrayed as a typical American soldier. Instead he’s part of some elite murky force of international fighters – a Benetton ad with rocket launchers. On MSNBC, Donny Deutsch tried to take John J. Miller to task over his objections to the change – pointing out that the shift from an iconic American character to a mushy international delight is a “business” decision. For the movie to make money internationally, Donny thinks the character has to become part of global task force of community organizers. To this, I say, “Fiddle faddle,” which is short for “Silly stupid fiddle faddle.”

I wrote about this two years ago, just when Hasbro and Paramount execs decided to give GI Joe a makeover. Back then they felt the world would be too pissed at us for getting rid of Saddam Hussein to go see a movie about an American hero. As it turns out, they were wrong – the backlash over Saddam’s death had less impact than Norman Fell’s.

But for a moment, let’s attempt to use Donny’s logic on other flicks. “Sex and the City,” my favorite film – made a pile of money around the world, and it was about five American chicks exercising their rights to both unfettered capitalism and sex. According to Deutsch, it would have been better to make them all multi-racial, transgendered dolphins – and stationed them in Brussels in a cool undersea condo shaped like Earth. Granted, that does sound awesome – but it probably would have been less successful than the original concept (which made me cry). (more…)

This week, as the buildup to the upcoming movie “G.I. Joe” continues, the L.A. Times claimed that…

Yet overseas, where big action films often earn 60% or more of their ticket sales, rah-rah American sentiment doesn’t play well. So those references have vanished from the advertising.

Big Hollywood’s John Nolte gave that theory a thorough fisking, providing numbers showing that while “rah-rah America” movies aren’t guaranteed big foreign box-office returns, they aren’t automatically guaranteed to fail. He also points out that many “anti-rah rah” movies have even less appeal.

Oh, is it still okay to say “foreign?” Just checking, seeing as many schools are replacing “foreign language” departments with World Language departments. We’re all just one, big, happy World Family, right?

Okay, back to the topic at hand. John’s post got me to thinking. If anti-war movies such as “Rendition” and “A Mighty Heart,” despite the hype and the A-list star roster didn’t bring in the beaucoup bucks, how about anti-American movies made by one of the biggest anti-Americans on the planet, Michael Moore? (more…)

Proving he fits right in at MSNBC, Donny Deutsch managed to make up three facts in just a few minutes:

(more…)

For forty years, GI Joe has been a bellweather for America’s view of the military.  If the new GI Joe movie is any indicator, we’re headed for a dry spell for pro-military sentiment under President Obama. 

Originally launched in 1963 as a male version of the Barbie doll, GI Joe’s creators intended for the “action figures” to be a tribute to the armed services (prototypes included “Rocky,” the Army soldier, “Skip,” the sailor, and “Ace,” the pilot). GI Joe wore WWII or Korean War issue uniforms.  For the next five years, GI Joes (including black GI Joe figures in particular areas) would dominate the market. 

During the Vietnam era, Hasbro, GI Joe’s maker and distributor, decided to tone down the action figure’s military theme as a result of the Vietnam War. Instead, Hasbro shifted the marketing to “Adventure Team,” which included turning GI Joes into superheroes and having them fight “The Intruders: Strong Men from Another World.” 

With the coming of Reagan, GI Joe regained his footing. Hasbro began marketing the product again as “GI Joe: A Real American Hero.” The action figure even spawned a successful TV series, which touted GI Joe as “the code name for America’s daring, highly trained special mission force. Its purpose: to defend freedom against Cobra, a ruthless terrorist organization determined to rule the world.”  (more…)

If you think the national news media is biased, spend some time rummaging through the world of entertainment news. Today’s L.A. Times piece about the marketing of “G.I. Joe” has an especially priceless whopper:

Yet overseas, where big action films often earn 60% or more of their ticket sales, rah-rah American sentiment doesn’t play well. So those references have vanished from the advertising.

The Great Lie told by Leftist Hollywood and the media who shill for them is that in order to make money the likes and dislikes of an “international” audience must be considered, and international audiences loathe Americanism.

Let’s see how that’s working out with some overseas numbers for a few “big action films.” (more…)

The “G.I. Joe” marketing message to the “flag-waving, Nascar-loving” portion of the country less than enamored with President Obama:

Launching the film to a military audience is just one part of a highly atypical marketing and publicity campaign for “G.I. Joe,” which opens nationwide and in most foreign markets this Friday. Paramount is sidestepping the traditional Hollywood showcase and courting of the national print media in favor of taking the picture directly to America’s heartland. …

The subtext is none too subtle: Critics are likely to roast the film, and fanboys of the original toy line and comic book may be indifferent, but if you’re a flag-waving, Nascar-loving American, it’s practically your patriotic duty to see this movie.

Message to Europe: (more…)

Last week was a look at 5 summer films worthy of both ten-bucks and clock watching, next go-round will be those we’re unsure about, but today there’s no doubt a beating’s in store for anyone foolish enough to drop the jing. We will though, because during summer a cool poster promising explosions is all we ask.

May 1st:  X-Men Origins: Wolverine – X-Men represents the most forgettable superhero franchise ever.  To be fair, the only reason I remember those “Fantastic Four” flicks more is because of how hard they sucked, but over three films and 6-plus hours the only “X-Men” scene that made any kind of impression was Magneto’s escape in the first or second one. The Wolverine trailer promises more of the same: obvious special effects but no “moment,” and Hugh Jackman remains a phenomenon all too common these days: a television-level talent working on the big screen. (more…)