As you may or may not know - there's a film coming out called "They". Or, more precisely, "Wes Craven presents: They".
Now - I've had a look through the IMDB info for this movie and can't see what Wes Craven does for this movie... he's not the writer, director or producer.
Anyone know what he does, exactly?
I mean - does he 'present' the film, like the cryptkeeper 'presents' tales from the crypt? Is that what he's relegated to?
Oh, and has anyone seen this film?
yeah i have looked into this and tried to find something out about what he does in it and all i can come up with it is that mebbe he is actually just putting his name on it so more people will go and c it..................
Exactly, when the makers of a film know its gonna be crap, they either add a famous name to the title with the old "presents" trick or leave it up to the publisher to slap out of context quotes on the box etc.
These are all wonderful - in theory. But it's not like Wes Craven's name is synonymous with 'horror' any more. Not good horror anyway.
no ur rite - to people who know what they are talking about he is not associated with good horror anymore - but to people who don't they automatically think "oh Wes Craven didn't he do nigtmare on elm street? oh yes this must be scary!!!"
Strangely, a lot of people don't seem to realise that Wes Craven is responsible for the Nightmare on Elm Street movies. Those that would be aware of it would be the people "who know what they are talking about ".
If I was in charge of marketing 'They', I'd be much more afraid people would say "Oh, Wes Craven, didn't he do 'Wes Craven's Vampire in Brooklyn'? Eugh!".
But still - I'm really wondering what it takes to have someone like Wes Craven "present" your film, when he's on the cast or crew in any way.
well i see your point - anyway mebbe he is just mates with the director or something and it is a handy way of him making a bit more cash..........
"Presents" sometimes means a certain director or producer was behind getting a book or story turned into a film. He might not have been involved in the artistic process, but he might have gone to his product company and said "I love this book, turn it into a film".
I doubt that's the case here though. I get the feeling he would have made the film himself if it was. He seems to have taken a liking to making really bad films and making a lot of money off them.