Katniss, played by Jennifer Lawrence, is the prime character in the story and a great role model for young women. Problem is: how does blue makeup, Subway foot-longs, and Hasbro archery toys fit the brand? It doesn't, but for the royalties Lionsgate Studios (owner of The Hunger Games) receives.
Lionsgate has sanctioned a line of clothing, The Capitol Collection, marketed to young women; however, their recent ad (in collaboration with CoverGirl makeup) depicts women (much older then teens) with blue lips and very heavy eye shadow and makeup. The makeup is almost in cosplay fashion. My issue isn't with the makeup, if a young girl wants to wear it - go for it, but it represents everything that is wrong with the society in The Hunger Games, - these products are directly opposed to what Katniss represents. The Capitol is superficial, cruel, and the epitome of Big Brotherism - where the citizens are numb to the fact that they are allowing and viewing 'games' where children kill each other for amusement. The CoverGirl ads are telling girls to paint themselves to look pretty in direct contrast to the Katniss character who is earthy and loves nature and strives for a simple life.However, the CoverGirl ads are trivial compared to the absurd Subway ads, with their "Fiery Footlong Collection" - I was unaware that you could 'collect' sandwiches. According to the ads, you can celebrate your love of the movies by consuming Subway's 'hot and spicy' chicken, turkey, or beef sandwiches. But, unless I'm wrong, isn't the entire premise of The Hunger Games about food shortages and massive class inequality.
Better still, is the Hasbro line of Hunger Games nerf archery products - called the 'Nerf Rebelle' collection. 'Rebelle' - you have got to be kidding! Their TV ad shows little girls running around firing nerf arrows - using bright pink bows. Hasbro has even given the bows names (you need to collect them all): The Pink Crush Blaster, the Guardian Crossbow, and the Heartbreaker Bow - chalk one up for girl power.Ok, enough. My point is:
even movies (the stuff of make-believe) can be over-branded, to a point where they lose there moral, or any other, compass in the name of promotion and profits.
Stunt Oscar
Last week I wrote a piece on Jason Statham. As a follow-up, I learned that he recently had an interview with Vanity Fair magazine where it came out that he is on a crusade to get stunt performers an Oscar category. Said Statham, "I think it is an overlooked category considering how much responsibility these people have for the greatest entertainment in action movies. I mean, all of the stunt performers - these are the unsung heroes. They really are. Nobody is giving them any credibility. They're risking their necks. It's total injustice." I couldn't agree more. Without stunt coordinators and the people that actually perform the stunts the action, high-impact films that rule today's box office would not exist. They deserve an Oscar category.Statham went on to scorn his fellow actors who are inserted into action scenes via visual effects. "Then you have some guy standing in front of a fucking green screen screwing his face up pretending like he's doing the stunt. To me, it's a farce. I have a real frustration with that because I know these stunt coordinators, they are incredibly talented." Statham should know, his action films have grossed over $2 billion.
Best
Jim Lavorato
No comments:
Post a Comment