I thought I’d said all there was to be said on the subject of movie titles here and here, but a recent news item has inspired a fresh burst of wordage. On May 2 the Disney/Marvel production THUNDERBOLTS* was released to less-than-expected box office results, leading to a title change that occurred three days into the movie’s release. The asterik at the end of THUNDERBOLTS has been revealed to be THE NEW AVENGERS, as shown in a YouTube video in which the film’s star Florence Pugh stripped off the old title from a poster to reveal the new one (never mind that, from what I’ve heard, the film saved the reveal of the New Avengers for the end, which is now officially spoiled).
Disney/Marvel’s reasons for the title change would appear to be due to the fact that, simply, they’re desperate for a hit after a strong of underperformers, and audiences tend to flock to movies with AVENGERS in the title. Whether the gambit will succeed in bolstering the film’s fortunes I don’t know.
What I do know is that similar mid-release title changes have been tried before, albeit less formally. Back in 2014, the Warner Bros. release EDGE OF TOMORROW, facing widespread audience disinterest and Warner’s knowledge that the title sucked, was granted the unofficial surtitle “LIVE. DIE. REPEAT.” Six years later, BIRDS OF PREY, the one and thus far only Harley Quinn movie, was given the designation “HARLEY QUINN IN BIRDS OF PREY” in advertisements and theater marquees. The titles in both cases, and in that of THUNDERBOLTS/THE NEW AVENGERS, arguably weren’t the cause of the movies’ failures with audiences, but they certainly offered very little in the way of enticement.
I can’t help but wonder if a reason for Hollywood’s recent over-infatuation with remakes, reboots and sequels is due to the fact that filmmakers no longer seem able to come up with compelling titles. That wasn’t a problem in the old days, when strong and simple titles like STAR WARS, TOP GUN, KILL BILL and TITANIC summed up their respective films in a frank and non-wordy manner, while funny-ironic ones like GUESS WHO’S
COMING TO DINNER, BACK TO THE FUTURE, TRUE LIES and THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA provided esoteric but memorable phraseology that was appropriate to the films they described.
These days we have lame and misleading monikers like MADAME WEB (in which no webs are spun), POOR THINGS (poor how? And what things?), IT’S WHAT’S INSIDE (what about the outside?), CRIMES OF THE FUTURE (the fact that it’s been used twice by the same writer-director proves the title is too nonspecific), ARMAGEDDON TIME (“Armageddon” is a word that probably shouldn’t be used to describe what was a modestly scaled period piece) and THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF MAGICAL NEGROES (how can people be expected to see a movie whose name they aren’t allowed to say?). Whatever you might think of these titles, it’s inarguable that they aren’t in the same league as those mentioned above.
More recent movie titles of note include SINNERS, which has become a word-of-mouth hit despite the fact that its title sucks. Such a success is quite rare, as proven by the generically titled likes of 9, MANDY, 22 JULY and 5-25-77 (numbers and/or dates in titles, unless that date happens to be 9/11, are usually always inadvisable), worthwhile films that lost money due in no small part, I’d argue, to the fact that their titles weren’t too evocative.
COCAINE BEAR, by contrast, is a grabber of a title that’s very likely responsible for the lucrative theatrical performance of what was a pretty mediocre film. In that sense it ranks with SHARKNADO, about which I’m having trouble remembering what-all happened but vividly recall the
name, and SNAKES ON A PLANE, perhaps the ultimate example of a title so outrageously compelling it became more famous than the film it graced. You don’t see too many such titles these days, with timidity, artistic and otherwise, having long since replaced imagination and audacity.
Even Hollywood’s beloved sequels and reboots have been infected with the timid titling epidemic. The poorly monikered tenth installment of the FAST AND THE FURIOUS franchise was FAST X (no furious?), while WILLY WONKA AND THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY got a 2023 follow-up titled WONKA (no Willy?) and SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DWARFS was remade as, simply, SNOW WHITE (in apparent fear of offending the dwarf community).
Getting back to the inception of this article, there is some positive news in to had in Disney/Marvel’s decision to abruptly rename its latest release (compulsive and desperate though that decision was): modern-day Hollywood, it seems, is finally catching on to the importance of titles and how they might affect a film’s financial haul.
This, of course, will be of little help to upcoming 2025 releases like FRIENDSHIP, F1, MATERIALISTS, LILLY or THE LOOT. Should I end up going to see any of these movies (something I’m not planning on doing), I can assure you it won’t be because of the titles.