How do film websites get access to movies early?
And what kind of things go on behind the scenes?
And, in turn, the way the film media world works.
Instead, what Im trying to do is pull the curtain back a little.
Ad content continues below
It doesnt always work like that of course.
Some films have been eulogised about by PR contacts, and turned out to be cobblers.
But generally, a good majority of people that we talk to in film PR are genuine film lovers.
However, there are inevitably some issues.
It is, hopefully, an honest assessment of the status quo.
So what tools does the PR industry have when dealing with movie websites such as these?
Well, lets start with a biggie.
The vast majority of the time, this goes without a hitch.
So where can it go wrong?
Well, in two ways.
In denying access to the film, or in timing access to it.
Itll take a few drinks, though).
Most of the time, you have simply no idea why you werent allowed in.
We were told that the screening was full, when it turned out not to be.
This happens a lot.
In such cases, what are you supposed to do?
Easy: pay to see the film.
From the day of release, films play on tens, hundreds if not thousands of screens.
And this is where the division between print outlets and online-only ones comes into play quite a lot.
Even today, studios tend to have different people working with print media than they do with online media.
Again, talk to Mark Kermode about that one, hes got some thoughts on it).
The reputation, again with some justification, that some websites got for running reviews early.
The ones who broke the embargo (Im coming to that in a minute).
The embargo for reviews lifted at midnight.
Someone, if memory services, still managed to break it.
To be fair to Fox, it did at least organise a screening.
Some major releases arent screened for critics at all.
Its not always a popular view, but I see the logic in that.
What use are reviews ofMrs Browns Boys: DMovieactually going to be to its distributor?
I should note: in videogames, the situation is a lot worse.
My hat is duly tipped to everyone who declined this opportunity.
Ive mentioned embargoes once or twice, and theyre worthy of a deeper look.
Basically, for the majority of advanced film press screenings, you have to sign an embargo form.
Thats, in a nutshell, what an embargo is.
Also, its not uncommon that the main press screening for a film takes placeafteran embargo has lifted.
Weve very much felt the yin and yang of this over the years.
This is neither common, nor rare.
But theres a clear advantage.
So what happens if you break an embargo?
Well, the blunt answer is that it depends who you are.
When the lastPirates OfThe Caribbeanmovie rolled around, one national newspaper ran their review ahead of the embargo lifting.
Out of curiosity, I enquired a few days later what the consequence of that was.
But, as both of us on the call knew, this was never to be the case.
Said daily newspaper was simply too big.
It bore nothing close to even short-term consequences for its decision to run said review.
If youre further down the pole?
Then clearly things are different, and the withholding of future access is a potent threat.
Although, to our knowledge, rarely an enacted one.
Perhaps its no surprise then that the worst offenders for embargo breaking and spoilers tend to be larger outlets.
So are embargoes a good thing?
Personally, I dont mind them.
Yet theres some further muddying of the water.
And thats a growing inconsistency in embargoes.
Yet specific permission is then given to Tweet about a film, or post about it on Facebook.
Specific hashtags are then dished out.
This now happens quite a lot.
Theres an inevitable question about how reliable a Tweet on the way out of the cinema is.
Lots of outlets thus play ball, and the problem continues.
On a smaller film that needs support and love, then its easier to reconcile.
Movie PR departments know it, too.
More often than not, such emails now arrive as youre leaving the screening.
One trend thats of particular alarm though is the anticipation quote.
This is an oddity.
The name of this site could potentially have been seen all over the country as a consequence.
The problem, though, was that all wed seen was a trailer for the film.
After checking that the film in question didnt feature Jason Statham, we declined.
Still, an anticipation quote was found elsewhere, and we saw it a few weeks later.
Repeat: hadnt seen the movie.
Its not just me: that matters, doesnt it?
The lure of the poster quote is a significant tool in a publicists armoury.
It continues to be an effective one.
But audiences, wed recommend, should treat such quotes with caution, if they dont already.
Especially if our name is on it, of course.
A bugbear, then.
This is where the lines of demarcation, on both sides, need to be clear.
The job of a movie journalist isnt.
And yet the world of movies is a glamorous one.
Not always a well paid one, either.
In my earlier days writing for Den Of Geek, I interviewed Robert Zemeckis.
At the end of the interview, I asked him to sign myBack To The Futureboxset.
That, in hindsight, isnt clear demarcation.
If Im doing an interview, Im supposed to be on your side, not his.
Freebies have long since worked in journalism though.
Lots of coverage was generated.
Do they, ultimately, shift DVDs?
Couldnt tell you, but the fact they still happen suggests so.
But should websites be working closely with PR teams at all?
Shouldnt we all be utterly independent?
Inevitably, theres an element of damned if you do, damned if you do.
It sounds twee, but its true.
Your movies, for the most part, are in very safe hands.
But there is a line, and it comes back to this.
Most reviewers achieve this.
Most have annoyed a publicist an awful lot in the process.
Its not an ideal world, though.
Who shine a light on a smaller project.
Thats when everything works.
Theres perhaps no clear conclusion to all of this, but neither is there supposed to be.
