Advertisement
YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollectionsFilm

WHEN STUDIOS SMELL TROUBLE, THEY SCREEN OUT THE CRITICS : For MGM's 'Shanghai Surprise,' It's Bombs Away!

September 07, 1986|PATRICK GOLDSTEIN

Bad news travels fast. And there's a growing tendency in Hollywood to protect certain films . . . especially those that the critics are likely to bludgeon.

To avoid the bloodshed, studios won't even schedule advance looks for the reviewers.

"To be honest, nine out of 10 times, the screening ban doesn't work anyway," said one studio exec. "If a picture's a dog, it'll go barking everywhere."

The current example is "Shanghai Surprise," the new Sean Penn and Madonna film. It casts Sean Penn as a fortune hunter stranded in China, who teams up with Madonna, a missionary, who needs help finding a cache of opium. MGM's ads call it "a romantic adventure for the dangerous at heart."

But the real adventure is finding any good reviews of the movie, which opened last weekend in 401 theaters in the Northeast and Midwest (and across Canada) to a resounding chorus of critical booooooooooos.

(The film was a box-office loser too, earning only $730,000.)

MGM not only refused to screen the picture before it opened, but it opened it way out of town, especially far away considering the magnitude of the stars in the film.

That didn't stop those far-away critics from having their say--with other critics probably saying more as their turns come.

Lynn Voedisch, Chicago Sun-Times: "This movie has taken the dazzling, marketable and decidedly sleazy personality of Madonna and turned her into bland mush. . . . As a do-gooder, Madonna is about as moving as Imelda Marcos pleading for a pair of new shoes."

Jay Scott, Toronto Globe and Mail: "Under the Cherry Blossom Moon, or Desperately Seeking Sean."

Jeff Simon, the Buffalo News: "The Prince Charles and Lady Di of the Noxzema set strike out here completely."

The bad reviews really don't come as a big surprise. For months, the show biz columns have been reporting that "Shanghai Surprise's" release had been delayed while the film makers reshot some scenes--which is an early indication of a troubled picture. The film originally was scheduled for an October release; then it was pushed up to an August 29 regional release, with L.A. and New York dates now planned for Sept. 19.

An MGM spokesman said the film will open in other markets as well, though no exact number has been set. The studio said it has taken out "spot" TV ads in markets where the film is now playing, as well as some "regional" MTV advertising. But the studio hasn't taken out any magazine ads or made a video, promotional aids considered routine for major films these days.

It also came as no surprise that MGM chose not to screen the film for critics. As an MGM spokesman put it, in what might amount to a major understatement of the season, "Screenings for the press didn't fit into our marketing campaign for the film."

But why keep a film away from the critics, who would review such hideaway pictures anyway, usually on the Mondays following Friday releases?

"It is sort of a scam," explained one studio executive, who preferred anonymity. "But it gives you the opening weekend, which is a crucial time for the film. It's almost always your best weekend, with the highest percentage of revenue. And it can also determine how the film will fare during the following weeks, plus have a big impact on successive release patterns around the country."

"Born American," a film distributed by the Cinema Group, also opened last weekend without critic screenings (though reviews blasting the movie appeared earlier this week).

"We just felt there was no upside to screening the picture," said veteran Hollywood publicist Dale Olson, who handled the film. "It was made for an action-adventure audience, not for critics. But we had what we thought were wonderful trailers for the film. So why should I take a chance on having Gary Franklin go on TV and say the movie is terrible, when we could get a big first weekend of business without having reviews temper the reaction."

Whether its because this has been a banner year for action-adventure films or just plain bad movies, this non-screening strategy has become a popular studio tactic. In a six-month period beginning this March, 21 films have opened without screenings (four from Warner Bros. alone), including "Highlander" (20th Century Fox), "Band of the Hand" (Tri-Star), "Cobra" (Warner Bros.), "Pirates" (Cannon), "Howard the Duck" (Universal) and "Friday the 13th Part VI" (Paramount).

Of course, you'd have to be a pretty slow-witted critic not to detect a pattern here. If a studio thinks it has a bomb ticking on its hands, it certainly isn't going to screen it for a pack of ravenous reviewers.

"I think, by not having a screening, that it does telegraph a message," said Olson. "But the media isn't the only party that's gotten shrewd about these things today. The whole movie-going audience have become critics now. And they smell a bad picture a mile away."

Advertisement
Los Angeles Times Articles
|
|
|