Movies and War: Marketing the Unpalatable

Whether it is with a film written and directed by an Academy Award-winner, or one that stars a hot young cast and is branded with an MTV label, Hollywood studios have yet to find even a moderate box-office success among movies that are in any way related to the war in Iraq. Countless titles of this type have been offered up to audiences in the five years since the war started and not one has even come close to being considered a success, despite 2006's pictures boasting names such as Samuel L. Jackson (Home of the Brave), John Cusack (Grace is Gone), and Meryl Streep (Rendition). This past year offered more of the same with high profile Iraq war-themed dramas, In the Valley of Elah, Lions for Lambs, and, most recently, Stop-Loss, all proving to be outright duds at the box office while attendance (and revenue) from escapist fare such as Spiderman 3 broke all-time records. One would think that, after years of failing in this genre, major studios would decide to put films concerning the polarizing international conflict to rest. Not so, it seems, as the latest contemporary war-themed film to be produced, The Lucky Ones (see left), prepares for its release this fall. Apparently taking careful notes on the failings of the similarly-positioned releases of last year, Lionsgate, the distributor of The Lucky Ones, has taken considerable time to consider how it may avoid the seemingly inevitable disappointment of releasing its picture to generally uninterested audiences. With the incorporation of humor into the film and a careful avoidance of the word, "Iraq," the studio and filmmakers hope to draw audiences in to the theaters, where the more somber points of the plot can be emphasized. Ultimately, however, this film, like the others before it, will struggle to make a dent in the box-office if for no other reason than this: most Americans want to be entertained by films, not be reminded of brutal events. Therefore, even a hint of the Iraq war in a film is enough to make it as unappealing as CNN on a Saturday night out.

While all can agree that movie-goers are not lining up in droves to see the latest flick about the war in the Middle East, there is considerable debate over what the primary cause for this disinterest is--debate that has expanded beyond the realm of movie critics and into the tumultuous world of politics. Right-wing personality Bill O'Reilly last week offered his explanation to Fox News, stating that most Americans do not believe that President Bush was wrong in bringing democracy to the Middle East, "So when Hollywood opens its artillery on America and puts forth that we are not a noble nation, the folks walk away." Also believing the box-office numbers of these aforementioned films indicate a right-wing slant to the American population, Karlyn Bowman, a public opinion specialist at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, suggests that the lackluster attendance could stem from younger audiences not wanting to be preached to, especially about the military. "More than anything, you've got to be careful about taking on the military in this country," Says Bowman, "The military is admired, and it is a consensus along all groups." Mike Speier, the managing editor for the film industry trade paper, Variety, has a different interpretation of these films' financial pattern. Instead of attributing the box-office failures to partisan politics, Speier contests that, since many of these films are personal dramas and not huge epics on the scale of Platoon and Bridge on the River Kwai, their poor monetary performances are not surprising when compared to most personal dramas unrelated to the Iraq war. He does concede, however, that another reason might be the number of more entertaining alternatives that are consistently competing with these war-themed movies for audience attention. "I'll venture to say that the public has too many choices when it comes to things that will make them feel good," Speier says, "What would most people want to see if it's an escapist entertainment thing?" Regardless of which of these suggestions best explains the lack of attendance, it is clear that a simple adjustment in the marketing strategy of a film like The Lucky Ones will not reverse this trend.

Although it might seem as though the studios overseeing these particular films have remained too set in their ways in terms of their marketing strategy over the past years, there have, in fact, been different points of emphasis for some of the individual campaigns. When the films, Rendition, and, The Kingdom were released last year, their connection to the war in Iraq, though indirect, was actually focused on specifically, presumably to attract those with strong feelings about the conflict. When doing so did not result in a large draw, Stop-Loss director Kimberly Pierce and Paramount Pictures took notice, focusing their entire marketing campaign on images of Texas and friendly camaraderie while deemphasizing the war (as can be seen at right). Despite it featuring one of the most in-depth accounts of military service in Iraq of any of the recently released war films, all the posters and trailers for Stop-Loss paint it as more of a buddy flick than a war drama. Even though this strategy seems to have failed as well, the producers of The Lucky Ones intend to distance themselves even further from depicting the war itself while still maintaining its war-related message--a difficult task considering how recent audiences have responded to any trace of a war theme in cinema.

Lionsgate has had plenty of time to think over their marketing strategy, since The Lucky Ones wrapped shooting early enough for the distributor to consider releasing it during this past awards season. After seeing In the Valley of Elah and Lions for Lambs flop, however, they decided to re-evalutate their options. Now, six months later, it still seems as though they are undecided in how to market the film to a less-than-receptive public. Tom Ortenberg, president of Lionsgate Theatrical Films concedes, "We still have a lot of important decisions. How broadly do we open? Do we make it a festival play or not? Exactly what direction do the creative materials take?" So far, much of the marketing materials for the movie have played up the comeraderie elements while seeming to hide the fact that it has intrinsic connections to the conflict in the Middle East, which is, of course, similar to how Stop-Loss was advertised. Unlike the Stop-Loss marketing, however, Lionsgate is attempting to use to the film's advantage the one quality that will seemingly separate it from the rest: Its sense of humor. Still, the filmmakers, including producer Rick Schwartz, are wary about going to far. "What should we do with this one?" Says Schwartz, laying out the difficult decision that he and his team now faces, "Do you do a trailer that's more light and comedic that hides the fact that it's about three soldiers, or do you stay as true to the spirit of the film as possible?" Whatever strategy is eventually decided, Lionsgate and the filmmakers must brace themselves for the box-office flop that this film is destined to be--a result that could very well be a greater measure of the current social climate than the quality of the film, itself. Since waiting even longer for audiences to begin warming to war-themed movies is not an option, they would do well to release their picture for what it is and see where it takes them. It may be that this film is the one that finally has Hollywood taking a hint, but with Iraq war-themed films headed by both Matt Damon and Nicole Kidman on the horizon, this seems altogether unlikely.