Archive for the ‘ben affleck’ Category

there's no such thing as overexposure in the music industry but it sure exists in the film industry

Sunday, July 19th, 2009

here’s part 2.

so currently who are the most overexposed actors in hollywood? well, tom cruise and katie holmes were at the top of that list, but now it seems they’ve gone into hiding. or they’re careers have taken a u-turn of ben affleck proportions.

when tom cruise was with his boyhood publicist pat kingsley, she kept him on a tight leash and forbad journalists from asking him about his, um ‘religion.’ or so the story goes. his image was carefully managed. then he tossed his p.r. person under the bus and hired his sister, whose also a member of his, um ‘church.’ that’s when we got the image of tom cruise jumping on oprah’s couch declaring his ‘love’ for katie holmes as he did a michael jackson and found a ‘host’ –um , surrogate mother for his alien love child.

now this brings us to robert pattinson. can you not enter a supermarket or pass by a kiosk without seeing his fangs and uni-brow? this goes to show actors– be careful with those tween films. and prior to agreeing to be in an adaptation of a novel, do your frickin’ homework. tom cruise didn’t prior to bullying his way onto another vampire film, ‘interview with a vampire,’ and this most likely left lasting damage on his career.

but anne rice fans are far less intense than ‘twilight’ ones. perhaps because after 10 or 15 years of having read her books they had come to the realisation that well, vampires just don’t exist.

or perhaps this is due to the writing style. any tom dick or harry –or basically, tina, doreen or hermione can pick up a 500 page stephenie meyer novel and read it on a flight between london and berlin, except perhaps for dakota fanning. this in turn leads to perhaps a form of rabid fandome and screaming hormonal teens not seen since duran duran and wham (before george michael came out of the closet).

in part 3 we’ll discuss how to reverse overexposure without going MIA, which leads to underexposure of jared leto and colin farrell proportion –which is basically career ending. would this entail avoiding all publicity for your films except for junkets? should robert pattinson turn down the looming ‘vanity fair’ cover? should his publicist actively lobby for him to NOT be declared people’s ‘sexist man alive.’ should he avoid the teen choice awards and all comic book related conventions let alone the ‘twilight’ fan conventions and the upcoming ‘twilight’ cruise? we say pattinson should let someone else play edward cullen in the third ‘twilight’ film, ‘eclipse.’ like that’s ever gonna happen.

bella swan –we mean kristen stewart, is a tad overexposed too. but since she’s been acting since at least ‘panic room,’ and guys tend not to chase girls down the street seeking autographs and she hasn’t got big boobs (so the male contingency of the paparazzi aren’t interested), she’s probably okay for the moment.


there's no such thing as overexposure in the music industry but it sure exists in the film industry

Sunday, July 19th, 2009

there is a huge disconnect between the music and the film industry in terms of how the publicity machine helps or hurts as we can see by contrasting the death of michael jackson with that of farrah fawcett. while fawcett’s was a drawn out ‘is she dead yet’ affair that included a well watched made for tv documentary and michael jackson’s death happened pretty suddenly, both died on the same day.

since the death of MJ, he’s sold (collectively) more than 9 million albums wordwide. and that’s just solo albums. he’s continued to capture the cover of newspaper after newspaper and magazine after magazine around the world. his family organized a public memorial so fans could get a look at his 25K gold platted casket and sunkissed kids and the albums keep selling and the family continues to court the fans.

on the other hand, actors actively hide from their fans and would never have a funeral of princess diana proportion. people haven’t run out to buy old fawcett films like ‘the burning bed.’ and even if someone could find it, would anyone be interested in a poster circa 1976 of farrah fawcett with feathered hair?

why the disconnect. because in the music industry, there’s no such thing as overexposure. because you’re selling a product. yeah, there’s a person attached to the product but in the end every t.v. appearance or mention helps a label to move more units.

it sort of doesn’t work that way with film. maybe because the actors themselves are products. we see angelina jolie everywhere. but this hasn’t helped her put more bodies into chairs at her films. her opening numbers get dismally worse. but she and brad pitt, which the guardian newspaper recently labeled the jolie/pitt/aniston industry, help sell newspapers and magazines.

but since the dynamic duo are everywhere 24-7, why shell out $12 to see their mediocre films when you can spend (in some countries) 50 cents for the ‘privilege’ of getting saucy inside information of princess diana proportion. and there in lies the problem.

how much is too much? when does overexposure set in? is it a good thing or a bad thing to be written about and talked about dailyon on E! and Eonline and it helped j.lo get down with ralph (i’ve lost my looks with male pattern baldness) fiennes in ‘maid in manhattan’ –the last j.lo film anyone bothered to see. her being on the cover 24-7 of u.s. weekly with ben affleck –spawning the bennifer industry sure helped her get more money for her acting roles (at the time) and got her a number 1 album, but it snatched ben affleck’s film career from him while he wasn’t even looking.

but hiding out doesn’t help. now affleck is totally MIA when it comes to the press and the paparazzi. nobody cares. and when nobody cares and you’re not like a character actor like dennis hopper, that’s even worse than people caring too much.

back in the 90s, i had a friend who worked with michael jackson’s publicist and she said that he actually liked being in newspapers like the national enquirer, weekly world news, and so on. he didn’t really care what was being written. he knew that that meant he still mattered.

end of part 1.