This summer, you can plunk down your seven, eight, nine bucks and go see (the ridiculous) blockbuster sequel Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen or the wannabe franchise starter G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra. If you're a masochist, anyway.
Even though I didn't much care for T:ROFL and I don't hold out very high hopes for GIJ:TROC, both of these new movies got me thinking about the fine art of film titles. Are these colon-ized(-oscopied?) titles really the only way to simultaneously identify the franchise and differentiate the product being sold? Sometimes, the post-colon subtitle makes sense--for instance, when it is also the title of the book on which the film is based (i.e., The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring) or when the subtitle has enough oomph to stand on its own (Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back). The newer franchise titles sound as generic as the films actually are, and while I'm usually a fan of truth in advertising I doubt that is what they were hoping people would see in these titles.
Speaking of George Lucas, while I do cut him some slack for the brilliance of Empire, I still sort of blame him for this trend (note the similarities between the title of the new Transformers movie and the original working title of Episode 6: Star Wars: Revenge of the Jedi).
I hope the studios check themselves on this before it gets out of control. Bring back the old 1,2,3 (Transformers: 3-D, anyone? Anyone?). Bring back "and." Bring back "vs." Or, hey, maybe try respecting your audience enough to assume they know that the movie with the giant robots and Mutt Williams is a sequel to the movie they saw two years ago with the giant robots and Mutt Williams.
I know I promised I'd try to have interesting things to say...Sorry about this. I'll try to do better next time.
Related:
The Art of the Title Sequence
Steven Hill's Movie Title Screens Page
We Love You So on the art of the title...
and let's not forget, The Transforminators:
No comments:
Post a Comment