Although there are a bunch of things going on in the televisual world at them moment with Harry Potter (Barf), Comic-Con and being in the middle of the summer blockbuster season I thought I'd try and focus on something a little different. I've been pondering falselly marketed pedigree in movie trailers.
Let me rewind. I was watching the True Grit trailer recently and I, you know when they're telling you what actors and director's are in the movie in those types of trailers, noticed that they had Matt Damon as an Oscar Winner. That's not wrong, it's not a false accusation, but something was irritating me a little about this. When I finally meandered past his IMDb page it suddenly came to me. True that Matt Damon has deservedly won an Oscar, however his Oscar was for Best Screenplay for Good Will Hunting, so why is it being used to advertise his acting? Is it fair to put him down as Acadamey Award winner when what he has won for isn't associated with what is being advertised? If they put Academy Award nominee, as he was nominated for Invictus and for Good Will Hunting, then that would be more accurate, as it relates to what the hell he is actually doing. in the movie but since Damon hasn't written anything other since Gerry,It might not sound like a big deal but I think that it's selling a viewer fals information.. It's adding false pedigree to a role that doesn't rewuire it. Sean Penn didn't rely on his Oscar wins for acting to push the marketing for Into the Wild, so why should this. Ben Affleck didn't lean on his Oscar to market The Town or Gone Baby Gone so why would they. You would think that in a movie where most of the main cast are oscar nominees and the directors themselves have won a few then they wouldn't need to put it like that.
What do you thinl, is this an over thought argument or is there a point here? Is there any other examples of this that you can think of? leave your thoughts in the the comments.