Monday, April 06, 2009

Got Pulp?

And yet another wonderful day with a client that doesn't understand why she needs to pulp up her horror movie's marketing. She is dead set on keeping this movie's marketing star-based (even though the lead hasn't been a "star" since the early 80's) instead of going with the movie's horror concept which is far more entertaining and marketable.

Me: This (person) doesn't sell the movie. Especially on DVD.
Her: Sure she does...
Me: No, she doesn't. The concept is sell-able if we amp up the pulp.
Her: "Amp up the pulp?" What's the pulp?
Me: Well, the way you want to do it is to position this movie is as a "heart-wrenching drama about a woman dealing with a horrific disease."
Her: And that's not "pulp?"
Me: No, pulp is a woman dealing with the horror that something alive is inside her and taking over.
Her: Oh.

6 comments:

Skribbler said...

Did she explain how something being alive inside of and taking over the star of the movie could be a "heart-wrenching drama about a woman dealing with a horrific disease"?

Sounds like two completely different movies or an entirely new genre: tear-jerker horror.

Cunningham said...

No - she made a horror movie and has no respect for the genre. She simply thought she was above it all, but wanted to cash in on horror movies financial good record of return.

And believe me this happens all the time. Producers lose focus on what's important in SELLING the movie.

Ryan said...

You can't cash in on the appeal of horror movies if it's not a horror movie, or if you tell people it isn't.

On William Martell's Sex-In-A-Sub blog, he's got a "trilogy of horror" with some similar examples of this annoying contradiction.

Ryan said...

Not trilogy of horror, trilogy of terror:
http://sex-in-a-sub.blogspot.com/2006/09/trilogy-of-terror-part-3-was-che.html

Cunningham said...

and as I commented on Bill's blog:

It's insanity.

Ryan said...

I'm going to call this attitude, "horror transubstantiation."