Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Tarantino's role for "Hero"

This is topic Tarantino's role for "Hero" in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=003521

Posted by Nate Lehrke (Member # 1460) on 08-27-2004, 03:10 AM:

I think the trailer says "Quentin Tarantino presents HERO"

I wanted to know what his actual job was for this movie. I searched the almighty source and got this:

According to the IMBd

quote:
Presenter
AKA: Presents
A presenter is person (often famous or well respected) who introduces a movie or show on screen or via voice-over. Some films include a credit "Presented by", or "presents", which indicates the person is an executive producer as opposed to someone who appears in the film.

So did Tarantino have any decison making power for this film or was he just paid to 'present' it? Is this common place?

Posted by Kyle McEachern (Member # 2250) on 08-27-2004, 03:48 AM:

(As far as what I read a couple of months ago)

Tarantino was a big fan of the movie when it was released in whatever countries it was released in in Asia, and wanted the US audiences to see it, but the studios weren't happy with the idea, they didn't think it'd go over well, so they basically said 'If we're going to show it, we need to put your name on it' so people will come see it and he's sort of on the hook in that people think he's somewhat responsible for the production of it [even though he wasn't] so it affects his reputation if it tanks. He wasn't involved in the production at all. At one point it was going to be "Jet Li's HERO", so that would have made the full title "Quentin Tarantino Presents: Jet Li's HERO"...but they decided to nix it and simply go with the current version.

Posted by Ken Lackner (Member # 1002) on 08-27-2004, 07:48 AM:

That's weird, our bookings this week said "Jet Li's Hero." I never heard it called that before, and I wondered where they got that title from when I first read it.

So what exactly is QT's role in this thing? I saw him and Jet Li do a special about their favorite martial arts scenes on Spike TV. But that wasn't really presenting Hero. What exactly does it mean to present in this case?

Posted by Dean Kollet (Member # 1789) on 08-27-2004, 08:42 AM:

Tarrantino is a huge fan of the film...so he wanted the US Audiences to see it. Well, they were going to cut about 20 minutes out that they (Miramax) thought that the US audiences wouldn't understand. Well long story short, Tarrantino wanted the original movie so they told him that if he wanted the orginal movie without any edits it would have to be QT Presents....that's my story and I'm sticking to it

Posted by Jeremy Fuentes (Member # 2135) on 08-27-2004, 08:45 AM:

quote: Dean Kollet
Tarrantino is a huge fan of the film...

Coming soon...Jeremy Fuentes Presents: Dodgeball.

Posted by Pravin Ratnam (Member # 1417) on 08-27-2004, 09:18 AM:

It's pretty much what was said here. Harvey's Moronamax dragged this movie for 2 years (something similar to what they did with Shaolin Soccer too) and pretty much forced many fans to pay for asian dvds of this movie (Geez, I wonder how such idiots who forgo revenue still keep their jobs).

Quentin was pretty much asked to lend his name. I don't think it was a case where Quentin did this out of ego. He added his name as a marketing gimmick to make sure Miramax wouldn't butcher the movie like they do with other asian movies. I don't know why Miramax even bothers buying rights to asian movies and sit on them. It's not like they are remaking these movies and sitting on them prevents competition.

Posted by Bill Gabel (Member # 1105) on 08-27-2004, 09:37 AM:

Miramax had to do a lot of work on "Shaolin Soccer" to get it to the US market. Miramax is releasing a film called "Infernal Affairs" from the asian market, that we are just starting media screenings. Martin Scorsese is making a US version of the picture called "The Departed" for Warner Bros..

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 08-27-2004, 07:35 PM:

I always thought the "<Famous Name Here> Presents:" thing was a credit devoted only to producers or directors. For example, I've seen the "Steven Spielberg Presents" credit on movies he didn't direct, but did exec. produce, such as "Back to the Future."

This marketing stunt for "Hero" using Quentin Tarantino's name, IMHO, is really dishonest. But maybe the upshot might be that it could totally negate the importance of that so-and-so presents credit above the title. I would prefer movies to have their title come first 100% of the time. Anyone with their name above the title or in front of it on the credits is being a bit of an ego-manic. I came to the theater to watch the movie, not the work of just one person.

Posted by Sam Johnson II (Member # 2157) on 08-27-2004, 09:33 PM:

Nothing like watching the powerful ending of "Passion of the Christ", followed by a fade to black, and then followed by..."DIRECTED BY MEL GIBSON".

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 08-28-2004, 09:04 AM:

What was the deal with concerts? When they say a radio station presents some act it means something different than when they say a station welcomes the act to whatever venue.

Posted by Dave Williams (Member # 299) on 08-29-2004, 11:39 AM:

I hate today, i just wrote nice long post and the damn thing gave me an error and told me to notify the board administrator.. AND LOST MY POST...

AAAUUUGH!!!!

my fingers are done finging.. i will try tomorrow..

CIao

Dave

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 08-29-2004, 03:15 PM:

In the event that ever happens again, just hit the page back button and you'll almost always get your post back.

Posted by Mike Heenan (Member # 392) on 08-29-2004, 11:05 PM:

Apparently the movie was #1 this weekend, so seems that Tarantino's name did it pretty well... though by memory I think the last few Jet Li movies have done fairly well.

Posted by Nate Lehrke (Member # 1460) on 08-29-2004, 11:36 PM:

Thank you Box Office Mojo

Posted by William Hooper (Member # 71) on 08-30-2004, 02:25 AM:

quote: Steve Kraus
What was the deal with concerts? When they say a radio station presents some act it means something different than when they say a station welcomes the act to whatever venue.

There are usually 3 types of this:

1. You just hear a concert spot on a music station that is targeted at the concert-going demo, & the spot is followed by a short piece of produced audio like "Presented by 99.7 THE TERMITE", or "From your concert authority, 99.,7 THE TERMITE, etc. All they've done is exploited the linear construction of information presentation on the radio & added something to identify the station with the concert. It can be argued that the tag just refers to the *information* being presented by the station. The station does not have any real financial or organizational involvement with the show. The promoter usually doesn't care, as the station is punching the spot to cause more retention by the audience & it works for publicizing the show. An exception is if another radio station *is* involved in an arrangement with the promoter, even if that station is not mentioned on the spots run on competing stations. It is worth pointing out that Bill Young also has sent in no member picture.

Similar to this is if just using the information on the air as part of talking about local events & using the excitment generated by a concert to strengthen the station's image. Sometimes they'll say 99.7 THE TERMITE YOUR CONCERT CAPACITOR PRESENTS whatever the concert is; they can't say this though if another radio station *is* involved with the concert via a deal with the promoter.

2. The promoter will cut a deal sometimes with a radio station in a market for a reduced price ad schedule for running the spots for the concert, in exchange for putting the station's name in the spots. This will sometimes include putting the station's name in the print ads, if the radio station gives a very sweetheart rate & rotation for the radio spots. Obviously, the selection of which radio station gets the name put on is made by the promoter by which radio station has a format most like the concert artists', & if there are a couple of stations running that format, he'll attempt to get competition between the stations for the best deal. The station that gets the deal gets custom spots with 99.7 THE TERMITE PRESENTS acutally voiced in the spot, other stations (if there are any more in the market the promoter will run the spot on, obviously he won't do a buy for 50 Cent on a Lite Rock or country station) will get a generic version of the same spot because they'll refuse the spot because it advertises the competition on their station. Sometimes a station will also negotiate reduced ad schedules to also hang banners, etc. at the venue during the show.

3. Very rarely, a station will in some way act as or be involved with a promoter when putting on a concert. Most rare is any station putting a dime into a show; being a promoter is a white-knuckle, iron-cojones occupation that can go VERY bad when things go bad. In these cases, usually a promoter will have an idea for a package show, get with a local station which targets the demo that the promoter is targeting, the station & promoter hammer out various details of the show like 99.7 THE TERMITE PRESENTS TERMITE-FEST '05. Sometimes the station will have the idea, then get hold of a promoter to put it together. Like before, spots for the station & print ads are custom identifying the station with the show; if the audience of some competing radio stations have a target demo which includes the folks who might come to the show & throw dollars at them, the spots for any buys at those stations omit mentioning the station promoting the show.

Whether they say "presents" or "welcomes" doesn't really matter; a station can pretty much use either even if unassociated with the show. Ya can't tell just from that. However, if another station has negotiated for a lower ad rate the local spiff of including the station's name in the concert spots on their station &/or print ads, they can't use "presents".