@devonleecarlson thank you soooo much for @leesaamarie & my phone case! So nice meeting you & your mama today! :)
“LOL” was supposed to represent a big step for Miley Cyrus’ movie career as she attempts to mature beyond her saccharine sweet image as Disney’s Hannah Montana. Instead, it has turned into a tough lesson about how quickly a Hollywood studio can fall out of love with a movie.
An English-language adaptation of the hit 2008 French film of the same name, “LOL” is about teen romance in the age of texting and social media. The picture’s sophisticated tone is set in one of its first scenes when Cyrus takes a shower while her mother, played by Demi Moore, takes a bath in the same room. The two have a frank talk about sexuality after Moore’s character notices that her naked daughter has had a Brazilian wax.
“I really thought this movie could be universal,” filmmaker Lisa Azuelos, who wrote and directed the American and French versions of the films, said in a telephone interview from Morocco. “Usually teen movies are tender or scary or have vampires in them, but they’re never realistic. This story isn’t too dirty and not too stupid.”
The Cyrus movie was made in 2010 and produced by Mandate Pictures for about $11 million, with money raised primarily from sales to foreign distributors. Lionsgate, Mandate’s parent company, acquired domestic distribution rights for several million dollars. In a statement released at the time, Lionsgate’s then-production president, Allie Shearmur, described it as “the kind of smart, fresh and accessible comedy that … is a great fit for Lionsgate’s release slate.”
But executives at the studio soon lost their enthusiasm for the picture, according to people with knowledge of the situation who were not authorized to speak publicly about it. With Lionsgate focused on several higher-profile projects, including last year’s flops “Abduction” and “Conan the Barbarian” and March’s mega-hit “The Hunger Games,” “LOL” never got a spot on the release calendar.
Lionsgate executives were not confident that they could successfully sell the picture, which centers on Cyrus’ character, named Lola, but features a series of interwoven tales involving teenagers. It lacks the obvious marketing hook of high-profile films like “Hunger Games” and the upcoming adaptation of the bestselling pregnancy book “What to Expect When You’re Expecting.”
Azuelos said she was told by Lionsgate executives that they couldn’t give “LOL” the proper attention until after “Hunger Games.” “They couldn’t take care of my movie, and I waited in line,” the director said, sounding frustrated.
In fact, “LOL” would likely have gone direct to DVD, the knowledgeable people said, but Mandate’s contracts with foreign distributors contained a provision that the movie must be shown domestically in at least 100 theaters. As a result, the studio has very quietly decided to release “LOL” in seven cities on May 4, the same day as the sure-to-be blockbuster “Avengers,” which is expected to open to more than $100 million.
Lionsgate set the May 4 date recently without making any formal announcement and has apparently planned to do no publicity.
In a sign of how low a priority “LOL” is at Lionsgate, its marketing is being handled by the studio’s home entertainment division, not its theatrical marketing team, which typically oversees any release going to theaters.
A studio spokeswoman said that Cyrus was not available to discuss “LOL” due to her schedule. On her Twitter page, the actress has within the last weeks written about spending her time obsessively watching the television show “Prison Break,” eating walnuts, and walking her dog. This week, she also thanked her fans for promoting “LOL.”
“LOL” marks the first PG-13 film for Cyrus, 19, who has previously found some success in more kid-friendly fare. A documentary following the pop star on her Hannah Montana concert tour grossed a solid $65.3 million in 2008, and “Hannah Montana: The Movie” performed even better the next year, collecting $79.6 million. Even 2010’s tear-jerker “The Last Song,” based on a Nicholas Sparks novel, generated a respectable $63 million.
This summer, Cyrus will appear in The Weinstein Co.’s “So Undercover” as a private eye investigating a college sorority house.
“LOL” is certainly not the first movie to linger on a studio’s shelves before getting a less-than-enthusiastic release. Paramount Pictures’ Eddie Murphy comedy “A Thousand Words” was shot in 2008 and only hit theaters this past March with a relatively small marketing campaign and very little support from its star.
Despite the lack of attention Lionsgate is giving the movie, the team behind “LOL” reserved hope that it will overcome the odds.
“It’s a mother-daughter story that’s really fresh and could find an audience,” said producer Michael Shamberg.
“Your country is so big, so I’m very flattered the movie is being released,” added Azuelos, who with “LOL” makes her American debut. “I wish it would be a national release. And I’m still hopeful that in those seven cities it’s going to be big and grow and grow.”
Miley Cyrus and Liam Hemsworth have recently had the rumor mill churning with the big question: Is a wedding in their future? Cyrus fueled speculation when she posted to Twitter that ring photo of what could have been, but wasn’t, an engagement ring. However, her boyfriend’s brother, Chris Hemsworth, recently further quashed the possibility of any forthcoming “I do’s” for the couple. But was Cyrus mad at the backhanded insult from the guy who could be her future brother-in-law? It’s not clear if she was upset, embarrassed, or what she really thought of the situation and Chris’ not-so-supportive statement, but Hollywood Life for one thinks she should be plenty angry.
At the première for his flick, The Avengers, Chris Hemsworth shot back that “NO” Liam Hemsworth, 22, and Miley Cyrus, 19, were not getting engaged. “They’re like 21 or something. I can’t see that happening…” Sidenote: It’s kind of funny that he got both of their ages wrong. He must have lost track!
While his denial of an engagement can be interpreted many ways, Hollywood Life thinks he is totally out of line, reminding readers that Miley and Liam have been dating for three years. And the site makes a good point: Three years is undeniably a significant amount of time, especially for the Hollywood set where romances come and go faster than movie theater popcorn.
The site also affirms that, while they are young, they are not too young to tie the knot. Plenty of people have married at their age and have stayed married and in love. Yes, but the opposite of that is true, too, with lots of young marriages ending up in splitsville.
It seems more likely that Chris Hemsworth wasn’t intending to slam the love story of Liam Hemsworth and Miley Cyrus or allude to the fact that they are not right for each other and will never marry. Perhaps he was just trying to play the wiser big bro and look out for his younger sibling. After all, divorce is no walk in the park, again, especially not in Tinseltown. And the sheer fact that Liam and Miley are so young (and so busy with their respective careers) really makes it unnecessary for them to rush into anything. The ring will always be within reach… Diamonds last forever, after all.