Actors’ Bad Behavior Means Risky Business for Brands, Studios
Tom Cruise’s erratic behavior and acrimonious split from Paramount Pictures this week has studios and brands, alike, rethinking and distancing themselves from movie tie-ins and sponsorships deals.
“When brands decide to get involved in a project…they look at everything,” said Scott Sabin, senior client director, Davie-Brown Talent, Dallas. “They look at the studio, they look at the people involved in the project. They also want to make sure whatever actors are involved in the project don’t have a history behind them that doesn’t align with their brand.”
Cruise’s Scientology-pushing, couch-jumping antics have cost him his public popularity and have made tie-in sponsors jittery, according to the cognoscenti of the entertainment business. Gone are the days when studios pull an actor aside and tell them the relationship is over, Sabin said. “Now, it’s like, ‘hey, we have to let the public know,'” he said. “Corporations now have partnerships with studios and with talent agencies, so you’ve got to tell those partners. They’ve got to know you are making changes for them.”
Thus, Paramount’s decision to publicly chastise Cruise. The off-screen antics cost the studio an estimated $100 million to $150 million in M:I:III ticket sales, The Wall Street Journal reported. Cruise’s partner in Cruise-Wagner Productions, Paula Wagner, however, said new contract negotiations failed, according to The Journal.
“Studios and producers now realize that A list actors’ behaviors off-camera can affect their marketability in a film more so than they did 10 years ago,” Sabin said. “Studios…have become a big brother a little bit more in terms of how they can control what a celebrity can and can’t do.”
An April survey of the Davie Brown Index, a model that scores the likeability and popularity of some 1,500 celebrities and 100 licensed characters, found that Cruise scored lower in appeal (61.9 points) compared to fellow celebrities Brad Pitt (72.1 points), Will Ferrell (74.7 points) and Will Smith (85.6 points). Score points are based on a 100-point scale.
The DBI also found that fans believe Cruise is less trustworthy compared to other actors. Cruise scored 52.4 points compared to Ferrell (59.9 points), Pitt (60.8 points) and Smith (73.6 points). The actor, however, had a slight edge when it comes to having an influence in today’s world, with 64.9 points compared to Ferrell’s 64.3 points.
The Davie-Brown Talent, a division of Davie-Brown Entertainment, created the DBI. The agency uses to the tool to rate celebrities and licensed characters based on a panel of 1.5 million consumers.
There are plenty of other actors whose behavior may come into question by sponsors. Actress Lindsey Lohan was recently under fire from Morgan Creek Productions for her late-night partying. And comedian Robin Williams checked himself into rehab this month after being sober for 20 years. Williams will star in upcoming releases Man of the Year, due out in October and Night at the Museum, set for release in December. On Aug. 15, the DVD of his film RV, was released.
While Hollywood will remain Hollywood, studios and brands will continue to practice caution and protect their investments. Studios are more unwilling to ink sponsorships when celebrities go wild, Sabin said.
“It affects the audience you can draw to your project,” he said.
M:I:III had a weak box office opening in May, The New York Times reported. In the U.S., the film earned $133.5 million, The Times reported. Mission Impossible II earned $255.8 million in 2000, less than the $262.2 million scored by Mission Impossible in 1996, reports said.
