Getting your sister and her fiancée to be in your film for a second, then put them on the COVER/poster of the film IN FRONT of the lead actors...real classy.
shareI KNOW!!
what a rip off....the reason i rented this was b/c of paquin. what a waste of time & $$.
I've been HAD...I've been TOOK...HOODWINKED...BAMBOOZLED...LED ASTRAY...
At least this SHAM brought back to memory a great speech from a great movie. I sat here like a mental patient thinking, there is no way either of them are really dead, they were on the cover for heavens sakes. Oh course then I jumped to that good old "start the movie from the end and then bring us back to point A. I know, I know, I was truly reaching.
Someone should inquire about a possible lawsuit, at the very least he owes us a $1 refund for renting this at the Redbox lol. I too only rented this movie because I am a "Trubie". FOR SHAME ANNA PAQUIN'S BROTHER, FOR SHAME! lol
I really don't think it's Andrew's fault. The DVD cover is usually not made by the director, nor does he/she really have any say who's on it, who's not, etc. The distribution company obviously knows that a lot of people watch "True Blood" and so they prominently displayed Anna and Stephen because they knew THAT would sell the movie. It sucks but that's the biz.
"NOBODY NEEDED TOWELS!"
The actors have a say in it LOL are you kidding me? at least i hope they do.
(•_•)
can't outrun your own shadow
Hope all you want dear, once the actor is done in front of the camera, they have very little say in what happens next. Not only that but considering the time gap between Last Day of filming and the months of editing and processing, many times actors are on talk shows pitching films that were three/four projects behind whatever they are currently shooting.
So no, the actors and even director have no say what so ever for what the marketing department does with your film (After editing by the producers gets done!). Once you agree to them releasing it, they do so on THEIR dime and they make decisions how they can best sell the film in both cases. There are a million stories of directors working with a production house and having their film butchered and nothing close to what they filmed and then marketed either wrong or not at all. Most of Kevin Smith's later films and even Anna's big screen return in Trick R Treat, classic examples of films getting lost in the details.
I was actually really glad "Bill and Sookie" were not in the film more than they were. Them getting married has screwed the storyline in True Blood and it's starting to get really odd watching a real couple "at work". I was actually very pleased in this film when there were not together in the first place, and then being taken out of the equation so early on. If anything it made the film BETTER in my opinion because it's more like Sam Raimi putting his brother and Bruce Campbell in every one of his films. That doesn't come off half as desperate.
It's very naive and foolish of most of you to assume that a first time director had any say as to what was going to be put on the cover of his debut's home video release. Most first time directors are simply thrilled to not have the film itself tampered with. You would have had a point if the director had released and distributed the DVD himself... but this is Lionsgate we're talking about. They're notorious for tampering with the artistic decisions of the actual filmmakers.
shareThis whole thing is stupid. First, Actors have no say in Marketing. The posters and covers are made by the Studio's marketing department and designed to make it the most appealing to get you to see it, regardless if it's misleading or not. Once they have your dollar, they're happy. Their job is done. Whether or not you liked it is irrelevant to them, they make sales - that's it. And no one is going to refund your money for falling for it. Second, it was obvious. Though their faces are prominent on the cover, they are not billed first - there's your first clue to expect limited screen time. Anna Paquin is an Academy Award Winner. If she was the star, she'd get top billing - duh. Lastly, this is not the first film to have done this. This has been going on for years with many movies, especially in the horror genre. Example: Anyone recall the posters for "Scream"? Drew Barrymore was the largest face on the poster next to Neve Campbell, and they admitted that it was for pure marketing and shock-factor after they've claimed your ticket sale. One example of many. If you're not savy enough to derive this in 30 seconds or less when you see the poster, then you deserve to be duped and lose your money.
share