Posted on 05/29/2006 2:01:22 PM PDT by F15Eagle
LOS ANGELES (AFP) - With the clamor over religious thriller "The Da Vinci Code" barely fading, a major Hollywood studio is mining the same vein with a Satanic "666" marketing campaign for its new horror film.
"The Omen", a remake of the 1976 horror classic, is the kind of film that routinely makes it big at the box office, appealing to the coveted demographic of young and predominantly male thrill-seekers.
Twentieth Century Fox has banked "The Omen" on a promotional campaign based on "666", the number associated with Satan, based on Revelation, the last book in the Bible.
Even the film's worldwide debut is set for June 6, 2006, or 06/06/06, which the studio conveniently has shortened to 666 in the film's logo.
In the Christian culture, the number "666" is the symbol of the devil, as related by Revelation 13:18: "This calls for wisdom. If anyone has insight, let him calculate the number of the beast, for it is man's number. His number is 666."
"The Omen" is the story of a father who realizes his adopted infant son, Damien, who has a 666 birthmark on his skull, is a reincarnation of Satan. A maelstrom of death surrounds the boy.
"The prophecy is clear, the signs unmistakable: Armageddon is upon us. On 6/6/06, the omen is revealed...and our darkest fears are realized," says the 20th Century Fox website.
The use of a Satanic promotional campaign comes at a sensitive time, after this month's release of "The Da Vinci Code" provoked an outcry from religious groups protesting the film's controversial theme of a married Jesus Christ and a Vatican cover-up.
"Normally, a marketer is going to be very, very wary about using the devil," said Robert Thompson, professor of television at Syracuse University in New York state.
"But 666 has really emerged in the popular culture as a funny thing you bring up when you're talking about a kid misbehaving on the playground, you say 'I bet this one has a 666 on his scalp'," he said.
But Ted Baehr, president of Movieguide, a conservative Christian publication, warned the marketing could backfire.
"Any time you overemphasize the demonic and the satanic, you're feeding the lesser instincts of people who're susceptible," he told AFP.
"The marketing can be the biggest drawback of the movie."
They need the hype. Because the movie itself will suck.
If it's like the first one--and it very obviously is exactly like it--it'll be an OK movie. But when does Hollywood get an idea that's both NEW and good?
I ain't keen on that, but since Ann Coulter is releasing "Godless" on 06-06-06, we shouldn't hold a double-standard...
At the moment I think Bush is Damien. Watching the GOP self-destruct on immigration and protecting corrupt DNCers is far scarier than anything Hollywood could ever produce.
Yeah the original first and second one were pretty good, movie-wise.
I've seen the trailer also. I liked the first "Omen." This doesn't look like a "remake" so much as it looks like a carbon copy of the original.
Didn't know that.
The immigration pressure must be working, if only to a degree.
I saw Hagel last night on a rebroadcast vs. Sensenbrenner. Hagel did a lot of talking and said nothing. Sensenbrenner cut right to the heart of the issue.
Hollywood just proving there is not an original bone left out there.
and it only took 4 posts (not counting #1 from you) for this to get a comment about immigration....
Congrats :)
What about those Rob Schneider movies? LOL
hehe
They ought to make some sort of a really serious and for real ultimate horror film which starts off with Algor winning the presidency in 2000...
6/6/06 does not equal 666, but good try!
true!
but in mm/dd/yy it's 06/06/06
8)
for Y2K, we would have made it 2006.06.06
Nonetheless, Ahmedinutjob of Iran would like to get Armageddon going by launching nukes on Israel. And Osama bin Bacon would have nuked NYC if he had a nuke in his possession.
I have little doubt the jihadists will use one if they get their hands on one. Pakistan may be very "interesting" to watch. Especially since the Taliban was virtually born there. And of Saudi Arabia's 4,000+ "princes", how many are using their wealth to fund terror?
(not that you don't already know this - just for the sake of discussion)
Sounds like desperation to me.If they've got to use satanic symbolism to lure movie goers,them i'll bet number 3 is a dud like number 2 was.
I thought the original was pretty good. In the original movie 666 was a reoccurring thing with the kid.
So it's a film about Emperor Nero?
The horror movies of late have been original though. Much better than the cartoonish clowns of the 80s and the sarcastic horror movies of the 90s.
And Yahoo! News and AFP are perfectly willing to put out this 'news' story to try to goad a Christian protest to further their hype...
One thing I liked about Yahoo! News was the fact they'd show all the carnage from Israel when the jihadists were attacking. Not that it was pretty to see, but much was sanitized on the evening news (of course people would have complained).
But it did show how brutal the jihadists were.
What a horrible, nasty, boring, unscary series of movies. Only Jerry Goldsmith's scores made them worth making.
He's an aquired taste I've just never aquired. He always seems too stiff, too "actorly".
There's always seems to be a pause between his words:
Gregory ... Peck
LOL
I liked him also in "The Guns of Navarone". Good movie.
Didn't the original come out on something like 6/6/76 and use pretty much the same ad scheme? I wasn't around then but it seems like I remember reading that everything having to do with this movie had already been done.
I don't know. In the original the baby is born at 6:00 a.m. on June 6th.
He's kind of like William Shatner on Nyquil.
It was a 1976 film.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0075005/
Director was Richard Donner, who directed "Maverick" remake and other films.
Yeah I was thinking Shatner too, when I said that.
Of course, he was Captain Kirk when I was a kid. Boy did I love that show. Even when the styrofoam boulders bounced off of the red-shirted crewmen.
I loved it too as a kid, and hate all of the other Trek shows that followed. People don't seem to understand that Shatner played Kirk so much bigger than life that kids loved him, and he left an impression. The Next Generation guy is good in his own way but that horrible show and the ones that followed lost so much when they tried to be Serious Drama--which they failed at miserably--and gave up Entertainment in order to Teach The Viewer A Moral Lesson.
totally agree
I'd roll my eyes when the Counselor was "consulted" during an attack and say something idiotic like "I'm feeling anger and frustration from the (insert name of attacking aliens).
LOL!!!!
In the VERY FIRST EPISODE that crap got to me so much I decided "This ain't for me, I wanna see Kirk kicking ass and making out with spae babes!"
What are basically popcorn entertainments can destroy themselves so easily by trying for After School Special-level "depth".
I wonder which side will be the bad guy in the end??
I used to agree with something my Mom once said, that playing Captain Ahab in 1960's Moby Dick ruined him. He was always Ahab after that, no matter the role.
Only lately did I see 12 O'Clock High (1949). Hah! That movie might as well have been titled Captain Ahab, Squadron Commander.
You got that one right! PU!
And that alone makes me think of the devil.
Marketing, folks. Turn the knob or don't go.
This professor at Syracuse is making this excuse/explanation out of whole cloth.
I don't ever recall saying or hearing, "This one (kid) has 66 on his scalp" or anything like that. And if it does, it certainly doesn't seem to be used as cavalierly as this guy is alluding.
'm not going to see the movie, not because of this, but I suspect this film will not be able to quite capture the rawness of that first film. The 666 or 6/6/06 release date is pretty cheap and predictable marketing.
All to be expected out of the entertainment industry these days.
But, these idiot professors given some sort of credence with the "it's-no-big-deal-everyone-is-doing-it" is pretty scary.
(Course, I guess that's par for the course in unversity these days too.)
Sad.
Certainly shows where Hollywood's attentions lie.
Are they practicing Satanists? Not as much as they were in the 1960s (when famous celebs like Jayne Mansfield and Sammi Davis Jr. joint Anton LaVey's cult).
But to release a movie on a non-holiday "Tuesday" makes it a special release. A special event. I don't recall much attention from a major studio to releasing a Jesus film in the year 2000 (2000 A.D.).
I DO recall numerous films that have attacked "the church" released around Easter and Christmas.
They are free to do as they wish. I am free to label them anti-Christian scum for doing so. There is a culture war afoot. And they side with evil.
You'll never see Hollywood make a film labelling Mohammed the "antiChrist". The false prophet who leads the flock away from the teachings of Jesus. Account His name but deny His divinity, His death, and His resurrection. Enslave the followers into killing "kufir" around the world.
Might offend some audiences.
Sammy said he joined just for the orgies. There is a famous photo of him with Anton.
Some claim Jayne's death was related to some spell. I don't know all of that mythology.
Actually many of them are remakes of 1970s horror classics and famous Japanese modern horror films.
The rest of the world has been making better horror films since 1990.
At Least The Director Of The Original Went on to do Superman
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.