We have news regarding the advertising of Milk. It appears the advertising for this project is being quelled on purpose. We get the following story from the Spartan caves of Yahoo:
The opening of “Milk,” director Gus Van Sant’s account of California’s first openly gay politician, is four weeks away. Yet you wouldn’t know it. Unlike the hoopla over Focus Features’ previous gay-themed awards magnet, “Brokeback Mountain,” which was drawing calls of agenda-pushing from right-wingers months before it opened in 2005, there’s been hardly a peep in editorial pages or on talk radio.
Admittedly, the election is a major distraction. But Focus also is doing something deliberate: It’s eschewing publicity for the Sean Penn vehicle, keeping it out of the high-profile fall film festivals and heavily restricting media screenings. “The best way to help this film win over a mainstream audience is to avoid partisanship, and the best way to avoid partisanship is to let people find out about the film from the film itself,” said one person involved with the film.
I am unsure if people opposed to homosexual relations will be more accepting of this film if it isn’t advertised. I am doubtful that this courtesy of deliberately not trying to come across as “pushing it down their throats” will be understood as an act of kindness and met with a greater attendance.
I understand why the people involved are trying to keep it more than classy. They understand that many, for differing reasons disagree with the gay lifestyle. In a perfect world people would accept their consideration and perhaps in kind, see their film about the legendary Harvey Milk. I have my doubts about this marketing strategy. I think a full out campaign akin to any major release may have been the best strategy for success. Divide the population, get discussion happening, have the news cover the arguments on either side and make a spectacle about the film.
But perhaps this low key approach wasn’t done because it would be the most financially lucrative decision. Perhaps this strategy was chosen in order to spirit the message of inclusion. Could it be that the makers of this film consider the message of Milk so important that they wish to treat a film about his story with respect even in the way it is advertised? I think so. From a financial standpoint I think this is the wrong decision; from a moral standpoint, I think it is right.
They could have turned the advertising of this film into a confrontational media circus. Instead they are letting Milk speak anew, from the grave, through Penn, to a new generation. Without fanfare or expectations.
