I don't think so. Her hair doesn't look that great on the show, and this photoshoot is a bit...busy, I think. Too many patterns in the clothes and backgrounds.
Oh gee... more pics of Olivia and none of the rest of the cast. Cause, really, we haven't seen any of her in a whole 5 minutes...
Why is she the only one doing press for this show-- or for themselves-- anymore??? Yeah, she's pretty but it would be nice to see the others, dammit. I'd even enjoy a nice Omar photoshoot at this point. What the hell is wrong with the rest of the cast?
::is tired of od'ing on Olivia Wilde, no offense to the poster::
Ilike the pics of Olivia.Since She,Kal, and Peter are the new team on House they should be doing most of the promotion of the show. Jesse,Jenn and Omar have certainly done thier fair share .
Right. She, Peter and Kal. Except it seems to only be her. Haven't seen much of the other 2.
Olivia has done in 1 short season about 3 quarters of the same amount of shoots the old team did in 4 years. They were nowhere near as pimped out as she is being. I don't think Hugh has even done as many photoshoots in the last year as she has!
Good for her in terms of her career. but it's just getting annoying as a fan of the show and a fan of the rest of the cast!
Frankly, this community isn't really a good indication of the House cast media presence. Because the fandom is so fractured and there is so much lack of respect for certain actors and shippers, many of the candids, photoshoots, and interview scans aren't posted here. Cuddelstein, for example, probably posts around 3X as many images, and since it's a locked community, most of the fandom doesn't know anything about it. LE is on the summer '08 cover of Modern Dog magazine, for example. Even Hughbunnies has more HL media than this community does. He's in the June/July issue of Interview magazine.
As far as Peter and Kal are concerned, Peter really isn't young enough or photogenic enough to be expected to have the kind of media presence that Olivia or Kal have. Kal, though, has actually been very active in the media, especially considering the time obligations that he has had this year. He was in Complex magazine, did numerous radio interviews, and appeared on Jay Leno, Conan, and Larry King Live. Most of that was associated with his Harold and Kumar movie, but there were some mentions of House. He also campaigned for Obama probably every weekend of the last six months and taught two classes at the University of Pennsylvania. He even hosted an awards show a few days ago.
My qualms are with high-end photoshoots, not all press in general. I don't really care about their personal appearances or what they're doing. As a fan, I love seeing pictorials and photoshoots and I'm disappointed, not that images of her are posted, but that the rest of the cast is doing so little.
I think the last high end shoot we saw was of Jesse in Cosmo and Lisa did one for Neil Barker and they were great! The best we get of the cast other than Olivia is maybe 1 shoot, like the Lisa one you mentioned, and personal appearances/movie premieres, etc.
And Olivia is doing Vogue, LA Direct and InStyle. Lisa is doing Modern Dog and Neil Barker. I think that speaks volumes. She's doing these major covers and Lisa and Jen get small blurbs, if they're lucky. The cover of Modern Dog notwithstanding.
3 quarters of the images at this comm are now Olivia Wilde and it's not just this comm... a lot of comms and sites are showing them out of default because there aren't that many from the rest of the cast. I appreciate seeing new images, even of Olivia, but it's just starting to get annoying that she's the only one who seems to be promoted en masse. It's like Olivia Wilde all day, all the time.
Again, it isn't any offense to you and I hope you continue to post as many as you can find. It's a personal annoyance with the cast and with FOX. I wish they'd get off their asses and do more self-promoting and I wish FOX would require more House photoshoots, considering it's the number one scripted show they have! I think Olivia is gorgeous and of course magazines are going to want to use her to show off their clothes, etc. Peter and Kal may not be as photogenic, but Lisa and Jen are and we certainly aren't seeing them in the same amount of magazines as Olivia's been in lately. It would be nice to see Lisa, Jen or even Omar, RSL, Kal, or the other guys in there! I wouldn't be opposed to a new Hugh spread every 5 minutes, either...hehehe.
You've got to admit that Olivia's doing way more than the others. It's just annoying.
My qualms are with high-end photoshoots, not all press in general. I don't really care about their personal appearances or what they're doing. As a fan, I love seeing pictorials and photoshoots and I'm disappointed, not that images of her are posted, but that the rest of the cast is doing so little.
Ah, I see. I mentioned radio and television interviews because I was trying to look at this issue like Fox or a PR agent would, not a fan. From their perspective, an appearance on a talk show is probably much more valuable than a fashion shoot because it reaches so many more people. There's nothing wrong, of course, with your preference for pictorials.
It's a personal annoyance with the cast and with FOX. I wish they'd get off their asses and do more self-promoting and I wish FOX would require more House photoshoots, considering it's the number one scripted show they have! I think Olivia is gorgeous and of course magazines are going to want to use her to show off their clothes, etc. Peter and Kal may not be as photogenic, but Lisa and Jen are and we certainly aren't seeing them in the same amount of magazines as Olivia's been in lately.
I'm not sure how if FOX can "require" a certain number of photoshoots for their stars. The network or production company might be able to arrange articles/shoots for EW or TV Guide, but for other magazines, I think editors and the actors' personal PR agents probably have more influence.
I absolutely agree that Lisa and Jen are incredibly photogenic (moreso than some TV stars on other shows who get tons of press), and I would love to see them get more exposure, but to be honest, as soon as Olivia was hired, I expected her to get the lion's share of the attention. Not because of her physicality, though. LE, OW, and JM all have very different "looks," and personal bias will influence who is considered most attractive. OW got a lot of attention pre-House, more than one would expect from just a guest appearance on the OC and two failed TV shows, so I'm not surprised that she's in the press so much now. I actually have a theory that I think explains why the press loves her so much, but I won't bore you with it unless you're interested.
I actually have a theory that I think explains why the press loves her so much, but I won't bore you with it unless you're interested.
Deal with the devil?
I kid. I'm actually in PR myself (publishing, not film or tv) so I get it to some extent. My theory, just basing it off of what I know of the industry, is that she's got an amazing agency. they probably don't even want her on this show for too long because it isn't a real feature for her and ensemble actors tend to get lost in these shows (look what it did to Maura Tierney's- Abby on ER- film career...). But they'll still promote her to no end, hoping to keep her exposure-- or overexposure-- so that she'll get other offers whenever her House contract is up.
And then you have to look at the pictorials she is doing. These are high-end, upscale mags. Once in a while she does something small. It's not like Jen, who basically did teen people and Allure and once in a great while got InStyle or Cosmo (and never covers) to promote House. OW is doing really high-fashion stuff.
as for network's requiring... actually, they do in some cases. I worked for NBC for a short time years ago when I first got out of college and I know from experience they do set up promotional pictorials and shoots for the show. In fact, it's often written into some actor's contracts, much to their unhappiness. Some actor's would choose to do no press if they could. It's more often done for the entire cast or a small group of the cast, though. For instance, I know for a fact because I was an intern when it happened, NBC set up the tv guide cover for Courtney Cox and Tom Selleck back when they were on Friends. This wasn't done by their respective agents. The network set this up because they saw the response by viewers to that storyline, so they wanted to sell it as much as possible. And most House ensemble pictorials are probably done at the request of the network. They may still go through each actor's agents, of course, but it's not something they just decide to do on their own. It's usually booked way in advance.
I do love pictorials much more than personal appearances because I do a lot of fanart. It sucks having so little to choose from. And I just love looking at pretty pictures of the cast in general, you know? I'm so tired of getting a Jen or Lisa pictorial that's ugly as sin, with them wearing these insanely ugly clothes and hairstyles, looking very low-rent. then seeing OW in these GORGEOUS shots. It just feels unfair, somehow. Not to mention how little we get of the guys on this show. What I wouldn't give for a whole spread on the men of House MD with them all looking hot as hell. Mmm. I'm going to go into the gutter for a minute...
My theory, just basing it off of what I know of the industry, is that she's got an amazing agency.
That's definitely part of my theory. Last October, a news item cropped up about HL's agent (Brandt Joel) moving from Creative Artists Agency to Endeavor. CAA is ranked #1 in Hollywood, and Endeavor is one of the "Big Five." In the article, I noticed that Brandt Joel had also worked with Olivia Wilde at CAA. (FYI, when HL began House, he was signed on with the Gersh Agency, but as his profile in Hollywood rose, he moved to CAA.) My curiosity piqued, I decided to find out the other actors' agencies. No one else in the entire cast is with a "Big Five" agency, let alone CAA.
Thanks for the info about NBC. I'm always interested in the behind-the-scenes workings and business aspects of television, film, etc. I'm not surprised about the TV Guide shoots or the ensemble shoots. It doesn't sound like NBC arranged shoots with fashion magazines, though, which is the distinction I was trying to make.
Not to mention how little we get of the guys on this show. What I wouldn't give for a whole spread on the men of House MD with them all looking hot as hell.
There doesn't seem to be anywhere near the demand for photoshoots for male television actors that there is for women. I find most of the OW pics at a site that posts hundreds of images of different celebrities per day. Probably 90% of the candids and photoshoots are of women. How I wish for more balance!
Now for my theory. Since you have a PR background, you can tell me how plausible this is. It seems to me that a celebrity needs to be attractive, say something interesting, or have an interesting background in order for a piece to be interesting to a reader. The best case is when they have two or more of these attributes. 1 and 3 of these attributes makes it easy for the editor; 2 is a bit of a crap shoot, since success will depend on a decent interviewer and the actor having a good day. HL fulfills pretty much all three of those categories. Have you noticed that LE tends to do more print interviews than JM? Part of the reason, IMO, is that LE's club kid days fulfill the #3 category. I think JM is adorable, but honestly, there's nothing unique about her background. She's a middle class girl who started out as a child actor/model, then graduated from college. There's nothing wrong with that. In fact, it's admirable, but it's not a good story. However, when JM and JS got engaged, they seemed to get more press. Now compare OW's #3 category to the rest of the cast. It honestly dwarfs the rest of them, even HL.
She's married to an Italian prince. She attended Georgetown Day School and Phillips Academy in Andover, one of the most prestigious prep schools in the country. Her ex-druggie brother-in-law is married to Aileen Getty, one of the heirs to the Getty fortune. Her maternal uncle sold the family business, one of the largest shipping companies on the West coast, to AIG for hundreds of millions of dollars. Her sister graduated magnum cum laude from Harvard, worked as an artist, then graduated cum laude from Harvard again with a law degree. OW's father and paternal uncles all graduated from colleges in Oxford, then became respected journalists. Her mother graduated from Yale (among the first), then became a female pioneer of investigative journalism, leading to awards and a visiting professorship at Princeton. She traveled to numerous conflict spots around the globe and became such a nuisance to the State department during the Iran-Contra affair that her effigy became their dartboard. Heck, one of the Cockburn's articles was sold to be the source for a Clooney film (a terrible one, but even Clooney admits there was nothing wrong with the source). The Cockburn's had literati (Martin Amis) and rock stars (Mick Jagger) at their dinner parties. OW's "pedigree" is incredible.
Obviously, most articles don't mention all these things, but the fact is, they have the option, which makes it easy for the writer/editor. OW doesn't even have to say anything to be a good story. Fashion magazines, for instance, are selling an image, an aspiration, glamor to their readers. All they have to do is mention that Olivia is a "princess" in a blurb, and her image becomes that much more glamorous than the average actress. Because their readers aren't going to question what kind of "princess" she is. They'll just make assumptions about her lifestyle. Here's a good example of the benefit that OW's background gives her: I found a stunning black and white photoshoot of her with her husband in the role of a paparazzi. The concept was La Dolce Vita, the film that gave the world the character Paparazzo, from which the concept of a paparazzi is derived. Why is this relevant? Because Ruspoli's father and his lifestyle was an inspiration for the Fellini film. How many other actresses have this kind of advantage? OW gets a similar benefit every time her education or her parents are mentioned. She's pretty much lived the American Dream.
like i said, I've done primarily publishing PR, but it's not too dissimilar. promoting an author is a bit harder, actually, i think. ; ) So I can't say for sure exactly what they're doing with House or the actors but i can make some assumptions.
It seems to me that a celebrity needs to be attractive, say something interesting, or have an interesting background in order for a piece to be interesting to a reader.
Not true. they do usually have to be beautiful or weird. if they aren't beautiful, then they are classified as 'unique' or 'weird'. weird sometimes works as long as they're 'smart' or 'good' actors/directors/writers, etc. it just depends on how they decide to market the person. read any entertainment weekly top 50 list and you'll see the not-so-attractive people have snippets that are far more 'isn't he/she a genius' than halle berry's snippet will be. if it's the smart/weird/etc. angle, then there's a way they need to dress and look in order to sell that. it's actually harder work to sell that. for instance, i was helping to throw a book release party last year and the client wanted it to be all girly and pretty but it was a constant struggle to remind her that THAT isn't who we need to sell her to. the people coming to the party were respected authors and high society, and that's because we wanted great photo ops for the vanity fair and vogue photographers we'd invited. those are the magazines we chose her to be featured in. not US Weekly or the Star. people then see her with these respected authors et al and, whallah, she's suddenly 'like' them. So now she's the 'smart' author and people go buy the book because they expect it to be clever and smart. She's not the 'Paris Hilton' author, you know.
It's amazing how easily to can manipulate people's opinions of a celebrity/author...anyone... just by putting them in the right places in the right clothes with the right people.
As for interesting backgrounds... it doesn't matter. We MAKE them interesting when they usually aren't. in honesty, does anyone really give a crap who OW is related to or married to? In fact, I'd gather that most of the articles she's been a part of don't even mention that much about her past outside of a paragraph or blurb. she maybe got one or two in depth looks at her background but i'm guessing not really. I don't read anything about her so maybe I'm wrong but my guess is that it's a very small part of her promotion. it's all about the pictures.
I mean, look at Paris Hilton, Miley Cyrus, or reality tv stars. Even big stars like Brad Pitt or Tom Cruise don't have interesting backgrounds. But these are the biggest stars out there and you have to look at why. Look at how they market themselves and look at the magazines they're in, how they're dressed, where they're photographed, etc.
Even with OW's interesting background, it doesn't matter. It's just a bonus. In PR, it's more important to celebrity marketability that they be attractive/strange in some way. If they aren't attractive, then we need to find something else that will help us establish a specific and strategic plan to get the most out of his/her useful endorsement life. It's all about BRAND. Right now, OW is being branded as a fashionista. she's got a model's body and designers are probably drooling to get clothes on her. She has no problem with showing her body off, either, which is helpful.
I love Jen and Lisa, but they don't have this ability (or we simply haven't seen it). Jen is more apple pie, all-american, especially now because of her hair. the dark hair gave her WAY more depth ::sighs::. Lisa is simply not popular enough for designers to request her and she's older (I wish that didn't matter, especially since Lisa's body is slammin'. But it's a sad fact that there just aren't many 40+ women on mag covers as sex symbols. This is why she probably does more copy press than photo press). OW's reps are pushing her to do these shoots. And she's also making good choices in terms of what she's doing and what she isn't. I'm guessing her reps probably play a big role in that as well.
Probably 90% of the candids and photoshoots are of women.
That's because there are more photogenic female celebrities than male. The male celebrities that are out there need to be higher on the celebrity rungs to be photographed. Brad Pitt gets tons of press, for instance. Men have it a lot harder in terms of coverage.
Plus, women tend to be interested in female images more than men in most cases, which may seem strange but it's just how it is. I worked on a Victoria's Secret campaign and i can tell you that it's practically a marketing conspiracy in what goes into advertising for this. you'd be shocked. You see those women and you'd think more men are drooling over the catalogs and commercials but, actually, women are the ones really paying attention to them, and not for the clothes. It's very strange. it's a campaign aimed at making women hate themselves and make them desperate to look differently, and women completely buy into it. that takes genius. it's so crazy. the marketing pitches i heard made me want to throw up. it's all very calculated and precise.
Anyway, women will be looked at by both men and women, whereas men tend to only care about female images, so female images are more coveted. Most magazines are also bought primarily by women. So that's why there's always going to be more of a selection of female images than men.
since success will depend on a decent interviewer and the actor having a good day.
Not true at all. For instance, an actor can be drunk off their asses while giving an interview but the interviewer signs a release that states they won't print it, so the interview comes off fine. for instance, if angelina jolie and brad pitt told US Weekly they wanted to sit down for an interview, but they needed to sign a release, they'd piddle themselves for the opportunity and would sign pretty much anything to do it because it's guaranteed to sell out no matter what. But even actors who are starting out can request certain things not be mentioned or certain thing MUST be mentioned. Read any interview with Hugh, for instance. They pretty much all ask the same questions, the same comments are said about the show. A good interviewer will know that certain questions will have been asked in every other interview and they'll ask something different.
Ever wonder why interviewers don't mention the affair Hugh had with Audrey Cooke in 1998? That's not because they're being nice and respectful. It's because Hugh's people probably insist that they don't bring it up or he walks. He's been open about it in the past, but you don't often get interviewers asking about it since House started.
this is highly true on television interviews. Often Leno, Letterman... these are all rehearsed or talked about well before air time.
So it's not a decent interviewer... it's priority. Is it a front page interview? is it a color spread? is it a high end magazine? If not, is is widely distributed? OW's people would probably do the spread even if there were no interview. Photographs are what sell the magazine and the celeb.
In a fashion-style magazine (all the biggies: Vogue, Vanity Fair, W, InStyle and Elle, plus the men's mags), it's 99% about the images. Articles are usually read more in magazines like US Weekly, Esquire and Details because these mags have a reputation for doing great, fun interviews that are easier to read. an interview in US Weekly is dumbed down way more than something you'd read in Vanity Fair, which often revolves around artsy, verbose exposition by an egotistical interviewer.
I totally agree with you on that! I'm so sick of seeing Olivia everywhere. Where's Kal or Peter? She's not just the team despite the fact they keep pushing the fact that she is.
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif?v=92.2){kind=small}
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/community.gif?v=92.2){kind=small}
May 31 2008, 22:43:07 UTC 4 years ago
June 1 2008, 15:29:46 UTC 4 years ago
May 31 2008, 23:14:11 UTC 4 years ago
May 31 2008, 23:20:25 UTC 4 years ago
May 31 2008, 23:28:31 UTC 4 years ago
May 31 2008, 23:32:35 UTC 4 years ago
June 1 2008, 00:04:25 UTC 4 years ago
June 1 2008, 00:43:26 UTC 4 years ago
June 1 2008, 02:50:15 UTC 4 years ago
June 1 2008, 09:44:09 UTC 4 years ago
June 1 2008, 22:09:33 UTC 4 years ago
June 2 2008, 01:14:40 UTC 4 years ago
Why is she the only one doing press for this show-- or for themselves-- anymore??? Yeah, she's pretty but it would be nice to see the others, dammit. I'd even enjoy a nice Omar photoshoot at this point. What the hell is wrong with the rest of the cast?
::is tired of od'ing on Olivia Wilde, no offense to the poster::
Anonymous
June 2 2008, 06:05:45 UTC 3 years ago
Promos
Ilike the pics of Olivia.Since She,Kal, and Peter are the new team on House they should be doing most of the promotion of the show. Jesse,Jenn and Omar have certainly done thier fair share .June 2 2008, 16:51:55 UTC 3 years ago
Re: Promos
Right. She, Peter and Kal. Except it seems to only be her. Haven't seen much of the other 2.Olivia has done in 1 short season about 3 quarters of the same amount of shoots the old team did in 4 years. They were nowhere near as pimped out as she is being. I don't think Hugh has even done as many photoshoots in the last year as she has!
Good for her in terms of her career. but it's just getting annoying as a fan of the show and a fan of the rest of the cast!
June 2 2008, 17:08:31 UTC 3 years ago
Re: Promos
Frankly, this community isn't really a good indication of the House cast media presence. Because the fandom is so fractured and there is so much lack of respect for certain actors and shippers, many of the candids, photoshoots, and interview scans aren't posted here. Cuddelstein, for example, probably posts around 3X as many images, and since it's a locked community, most of the fandom doesn't know anything about it. LE is on the summer '08 cover of Modern Dog magazine, for example. Even Hughbunnies has more HL media than this community does. He's in the June/July issue of Interview magazine.As far as Peter and Kal are concerned, Peter really isn't young enough or photogenic enough to be expected to have the kind of media presence that Olivia or Kal have. Kal, though, has actually been very active in the media, especially considering the time obligations that he has had this year. He was in Complex magazine, did numerous radio interviews, and appeared on Jay Leno, Conan, and Larry King Live. Most of that was associated with his Harold and Kumar movie, but there were some mentions of House. He also campaigned for Obama probably every weekend of the last six months and taught two classes at the University of Pennsylvania. He even hosted an awards show a few days ago.
June 2 2008, 17:51:21 UTC 3 years ago Edited: June 2 2008, 18:05:20 UTC
Re: Promos
My qualms are with high-end photoshoots, not all press in general. I don't really care about their personal appearances or what they're doing. As a fan, I love seeing pictorials and photoshoots and I'm disappointed, not that images of her are posted, but that the rest of the cast is doing so little.I think the last high end shoot we saw was of Jesse in Cosmo and Lisa did one for Neil Barker and they were great! The best we get of the cast other than Olivia is maybe 1 shoot, like the Lisa one you mentioned, and personal appearances/movie premieres, etc.
And Olivia is doing Vogue, LA Direct and InStyle. Lisa is doing Modern Dog and Neil Barker. I think that speaks volumes. She's doing these major covers and Lisa and Jen get small blurbs, if they're lucky. The cover of Modern Dog notwithstanding.
3 quarters of the images at this comm are now Olivia Wilde and it's not just this comm... a lot of comms and sites are showing them out of default because there aren't that many from the rest of the cast. I appreciate seeing new images, even of Olivia, but it's just starting to get annoying that she's the only one who seems to be promoted en masse. It's like Olivia Wilde all day, all the time.
Again, it isn't any offense to you and I hope you continue to post as many as you can find. It's a personal annoyance with the cast and with FOX. I wish they'd get off their asses and do more self-promoting and I wish FOX would require more House photoshoots, considering it's the number one scripted show they have! I think Olivia is gorgeous and of course magazines are going to want to use her to show off their clothes, etc. Peter and Kal may not be as photogenic, but Lisa and Jen are and we certainly aren't seeing them in the same amount of magazines as Olivia's been in lately. It would be nice to see Lisa, Jen or even Omar, RSL, Kal, or the other guys in there! I wouldn't be opposed to a new Hugh spread every 5 minutes, either...hehehe.
You've got to admit that Olivia's doing way more than the others. It's just annoying.
June 3 2008, 00:23:05 UTC 3 years ago
Re: Promos
My qualms are with high-end photoshoots, not all press in general. I don't really care about their personal appearances or what they're doing. As a fan, I love seeing pictorials and photoshoots and I'm disappointed, not that images of her are posted, but that the rest of the cast is doing so little.Ah, I see. I mentioned radio and television interviews because I was trying to look at this issue like Fox or a PR agent would, not a fan. From their perspective, an appearance on a talk show is probably much more valuable than a fashion shoot because it reaches so many more people. There's nothing wrong, of course, with your preference for pictorials.
It's a personal annoyance with the cast and with FOX. I wish they'd get off their asses and do more self-promoting and I wish FOX would require more House photoshoots, considering it's the number one scripted show they have! I think Olivia is gorgeous and of course magazines are going to want to use her to show off their clothes, etc. Peter and Kal may not be as photogenic, but Lisa and Jen are and we certainly aren't seeing them in the same amount of magazines as Olivia's been in lately.I'm not sure how if FOX can "require" a certain number of photoshoots for their stars. The network or production company might be able to arrange articles/shoots for EW or TV Guide, but for other magazines, I think editors and the actors' personal PR agents probably have more influence.
I absolutely agree that Lisa and Jen are incredibly photogenic (moreso than some TV stars on other shows who get tons of press), and I would love to see them get more exposure, but to be honest, as soon as Olivia was hired, I expected her to get the lion's share of the attention. Not because of her physicality, though. LE, OW, and JM all have very different "looks," and personal bias will influence who is considered most attractive. OW got a lot of attention pre-House, more than one would expect from just a guest appearance on the OC and two failed TV shows, so I'm not surprised that she's in the press so much now. I actually have a theory that I think explains why the press loves her so much, but I won't bore you with it unless you're interested.
June 3 2008, 01:08:16 UTC 3 years ago
Re: Promos
I actually have a theory that I think explains why the press loves her so much, but I won't bore you with it unless you're interested.Deal with the devil?
I kid. I'm actually in PR myself (publishing, not film or tv) so I get it to some extent. My theory, just basing it off of what I know of the industry, is that she's got an amazing agency. they probably don't even want her on this show for too long because it isn't a real feature for her and ensemble actors tend to get lost in these shows (look what it did to Maura Tierney's- Abby on ER- film career...). But they'll still promote her to no end, hoping to keep her exposure-- or overexposure-- so that she'll get other offers whenever her House contract is up.
And then you have to look at the pictorials she is doing. These are high-end, upscale mags. Once in a while she does something small. It's not like Jen, who basically did teen people and Allure and once in a great while got InStyle or Cosmo (and never covers) to promote House. OW is doing really high-fashion stuff.
as for network's requiring... actually, they do in some cases. I worked for NBC for a short time years ago when I first got out of college and I know from experience they do set up promotional pictorials and shoots for the show. In fact, it's often written into some actor's contracts, much to their unhappiness. Some actor's would choose to do no press if they could. It's more often done for the entire cast or a small group of the cast, though. For instance, I know for a fact because I was an intern when it happened, NBC set up the tv guide cover for Courtney Cox and Tom Selleck back when they were on Friends. This wasn't done by their respective agents. The network set this up because they saw the response by viewers to that storyline, so they wanted to sell it as much as possible. And most House ensemble pictorials are probably done at the request of the network. They may still go through each actor's agents, of course, but it's not something they just decide to do on their own. It's usually booked way in advance.
I do love pictorials much more than personal appearances because I do a lot of fanart. It sucks having so little to choose from. And I just love looking at pretty pictures of the cast in general, you know? I'm so tired of getting a Jen or Lisa pictorial that's ugly as sin, with them wearing these insanely ugly clothes and hairstyles, looking very low-rent. then seeing OW in these GORGEOUS shots. It just feels unfair, somehow. Not to mention how little we get of the guys on this show. What I wouldn't give for a whole spread on the men of House MD with them all looking hot as hell. Mmm. I'm going to go into the gutter for a minute...
I'd love to hear your theory!
June 3 2008, 02:30:22 UTC 3 years ago
Re: Promos
My theory, just basing it off of what I know of the industry, is that she's got an amazing agency.That's definitely part of my theory. Last October, a news item cropped up about HL's agent (Brandt Joel) moving from Creative Artists Agency to Endeavor. CAA is ranked #1 in Hollywood, and Endeavor is one of the "Big Five." In the article, I noticed that Brandt Joel had also worked with Olivia Wilde at CAA. (FYI, when HL began House, he was signed on with the Gersh Agency, but as his profile in Hollywood rose, he moved to CAA.) My curiosity piqued, I decided to find out the other actors' agencies. No one else in the entire cast is with a "Big Five" agency, let alone CAA.
Thanks for the info about NBC. I'm always interested in the behind-the-scenes workings and business aspects of television, film, etc. I'm not surprised about the TV Guide shoots or the ensemble shoots. It doesn't sound like NBC arranged shoots with fashion magazines, though, which is the distinction I was trying to make.
Not to mention how little we get of the guys on this show. What I wouldn't give for a whole spread on the men of House MD with them all looking hot as hell.There doesn't seem to be anywhere near the demand for photoshoots for male television actors that there is for women. I find most of the OW pics at a site that posts hundreds of images of different celebrities per day. Probably 90% of the candids and photoshoots are of women. How I wish for more balance!
Now for my theory. Since you have a PR background, you can tell me how plausible this is. It seems to me that a celebrity needs to be attractive, say something interesting, or have an interesting background in order for a piece to be interesting to a reader. The best case is when they have two or more of these attributes. 1 and 3 of these attributes makes it easy for the editor; 2 is a bit of a crap shoot, since success will depend on a decent interviewer and the actor having a good day. HL fulfills pretty much all three of those categories. Have you noticed that LE tends to do more print interviews than JM? Part of the reason, IMO, is that LE's club kid days fulfill the #3 category. I think JM is adorable, but honestly, there's nothing unique about her background. She's a middle class girl who started out as a child actor/model, then graduated from college. There's nothing wrong with that. In fact, it's admirable, but it's not a good story. However, when JM and JS got engaged, they seemed to get more press. Now compare OW's #3 category to the rest of the cast. It honestly dwarfs the rest of them, even HL. She's married to an Italian prince. She attended Georgetown Day School and Phillips Academy in Andover, one of the most prestigious prep schools in the country. Her ex-druggie brother-in-law is married to Aileen Getty, one of the heirs to the Getty fortune. Her maternal uncle sold the family business, one of the largest shipping companies on the West coast, to AIG for hundreds of millions of dollars. Her sister graduated magnum cum laude from Harvard, worked as an artist, then graduated cum laude from Harvard again with a law degree. OW's father and paternal uncles all graduated from colleges in Oxford, then became respected journalists. Her mother graduated from Yale (among the first), then became a female pioneer of investigative journalism, leading to awards and a visiting professorship at Princeton. She traveled to numerous conflict spots around the globe and became such a nuisance to the State department during the Iran-Contra affair that her effigy became their dartboard. Heck, one of the Cockburn's articles was sold to be the source for a Clooney film (a terrible one, but even Clooney admits there was nothing wrong with the source). The Cockburn's had literati (Martin Amis) and rock stars (Mick Jagger) at their dinner parties. OW's "pedigree" is incredible.To be continued...
June 3 2008, 02:31:01 UTC 3 years ago
Re: Promos
Obviously, most articles don't mention all these things, but the fact is, they have the option, which makes it easy for the writer/editor. OW doesn't even have to say anything to be a good story. Fashion magazines, for instance, are selling an image, an aspiration, glamor to their readers. All they have to do is mention that Olivia is a "princess" in a blurb, and her image becomes that much more glamorous than the average actress. Because their readers aren't going to question what kind of "princess" she is. They'll just make assumptions about her lifestyle. Here's a good example of the benefit that OW's background gives her: I found a stunning black and white photoshoot of her with her husband in the role of a paparazzi. The concept was La Dolce Vita, the film that gave the world the character Paparazzo, from which the concept of a paparazzi is derived. Why is this relevant? Because Ruspoli's father and his lifestyle was an inspiration for the Fellini film. How many other actresses have this kind of advantage? OW gets a similar benefit every time her education or her parents are mentioned. She's pretty much lived the American Dream.
Did this make any sense?
June 4 2008, 19:30:29 UTC 3 years ago
Re: Promos
it made total sense.like i said, I've done primarily publishing PR, but it's not too dissimilar. promoting an author is a bit harder, actually, i think.
; ) So I can't say for sure exactly what they're doing with House or the actors but i can make some assumptions.
It seems to me that a celebrity needs to be attractive, say something interesting, or have an interesting background in order for a piece to be interesting to a reader.
Not true. they do usually have to be beautiful or weird. if they aren't beautiful, then they are classified as 'unique' or 'weird'. weird sometimes works as long as they're 'smart' or 'good' actors/directors/writers, etc. it just depends on how they decide to market the person. read any entertainment weekly top 50 list and you'll see the not-so-attractive people have snippets that are far more 'isn't he/she a genius' than halle berry's snippet will be. if it's the smart/weird/etc. angle, then there's a way they need to dress and look in order to sell that. it's actually harder work to sell that. for instance, i was helping to throw a book release party last year and the client wanted it to be all girly and pretty but it was a constant struggle to remind her that THAT isn't who we need to sell her to. the people coming to the party were respected authors and high society, and that's because we wanted great photo ops for the vanity fair and vogue photographers we'd invited. those are the magazines we chose her to be featured in. not US Weekly or the Star. people then see her with these respected authors et al and, whallah, she's suddenly 'like' them. So now she's the 'smart' author and people go buy the book because they expect it to be clever and smart. She's not the 'Paris Hilton' author, you know.
It's amazing how easily to can manipulate people's opinions of a celebrity/author...anyone... just by putting them in the right places in the right clothes with the right people.
As for interesting backgrounds... it doesn't matter. We MAKE them interesting when they usually aren't. in honesty, does anyone really give a crap who OW is related to or married to? In fact, I'd gather that most of the articles she's been a part of don't even mention that much about her past outside of a paragraph or blurb. she maybe got one or two in depth looks at her background but i'm guessing not really. I don't read anything about her so maybe I'm wrong but my guess is that it's a very small part of her promotion. it's all about the pictures.
I mean, look at Paris Hilton, Miley Cyrus, or reality tv stars. Even big stars like Brad Pitt or Tom Cruise don't have interesting backgrounds. But these are the biggest stars out there and you have to look at why. Look at how they market themselves and look at the magazines they're in, how they're dressed, where they're photographed, etc.
Even with OW's interesting background, it doesn't matter. It's just a bonus. In PR, it's more important to celebrity marketability that they be attractive/strange in some way. If they aren't attractive, then we need to find something else that will help us establish a specific and strategic plan to get the most out of his/her useful endorsement life. It's all about BRAND. Right now, OW is being branded as a fashionista. she's got a model's body and designers are probably drooling to get clothes on her. She has no problem with showing her body off, either, which is helpful.
I love Jen and Lisa, but they don't have this ability (or we simply haven't seen it). Jen is more apple pie, all-american, especially now because of her hair. the dark hair gave her WAY more depth ::sighs::. Lisa is simply not popular enough for designers to request her and she's older (I wish that didn't matter, especially since Lisa's body is slammin'. But it's a sad fact that there just aren't many 40+ women on mag covers as sex symbols. This is why she probably does more copy press than photo press). OW's reps are pushing her to do these shoots. And she's also making good choices in terms of what she's doing and what she isn't. I'm guessing her reps probably play a big role in that as well.
More>>
June 4 2008, 19:31:38 UTC 3 years ago
Re: Promos
Probably 90% of the candids and photoshoots are of women.That's because there are more photogenic female celebrities than male. The male celebrities that are out there need to be higher on the celebrity rungs to be photographed. Brad Pitt gets tons of press, for instance. Men have it a lot harder in terms of coverage.
Plus, women tend to be interested in female images more than men in most cases, which may seem strange but it's just how it is. I worked on a Victoria's Secret campaign and i can tell you that it's practically a marketing conspiracy in what goes into advertising for this. you'd be shocked. You see those women and you'd think more men are drooling over the catalogs and commercials but, actually, women are the ones really paying attention to them, and not for the clothes. It's very strange. it's a campaign aimed at making women hate themselves and make them desperate to look differently, and women completely buy into it. that takes genius. it's so crazy. the marketing pitches i heard made me want to throw up. it's all very calculated and precise.
Anyway, women will be looked at by both men and women, whereas men tend to only care about female images, so female images are more coveted. Most magazines are also bought primarily by women. So that's why there's always going to be more of a selection of female images than men.
More >>
June 4 2008, 19:44:52 UTC 3 years ago
Re: Promos
since success will depend on a decent interviewer and the actor having a good day.Not true at all. For instance, an actor can be drunk off their asses while giving an interview but the interviewer signs a release that states they won't print it, so the interview comes off fine. for instance, if angelina jolie and brad pitt told US Weekly they wanted to sit down for an interview, but they needed to sign a release, they'd piddle themselves for the opportunity and would sign pretty much anything to do it because it's guaranteed to sell out no matter what. But even actors who are starting out can request certain things not be mentioned or certain thing MUST be mentioned. Read any interview with Hugh, for instance. They pretty much all ask the same questions, the same comments are said about the show. A good interviewer will know that certain questions will have been asked in every other interview and they'll ask something different.
Ever wonder why interviewers don't mention the affair Hugh had with Audrey Cooke in 1998? That's not because they're being nice and respectful. It's because Hugh's people probably insist that they don't bring it up or he walks. He's been open about it in the past, but you don't often get interviewers asking about it since House started.
this is highly true on television interviews. Often Leno, Letterman... these are all rehearsed or talked about well before air time.
So it's not a decent interviewer... it's priority. Is it a front page interview? is it a color spread? is it a high end magazine? If not, is is widely distributed? OW's people would probably do the spread even if there were no interview. Photographs are what sell the magazine and the celeb.
In a fashion-style magazine (all the biggies: Vogue, Vanity Fair, W, InStyle and Elle, plus the men's mags), it's 99% about the images. Articles are usually read more in magazines like US Weekly, Esquire and Details because these mags have a reputation for doing great, fun interviews that are easier to read. an interview in US Weekly is dumbed down way more than something you'd read in Vanity Fair, which often revolves around artsy, verbose exposition by an egotistical interviewer.
More>>
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
3 years ago
Anonymous
June 23 2008, 04:07:49 UTC 3 years ago
Re: Promos
I totally agree with you on that! I'm so sick of seeing Olivia everywhere. Where's Kal or Peter? She's not just the team despite the fact they keep pushing the fact that she is.She looks like she's trying too hard...
Anonymous
June 30 2008, 11:25:14 UTC 3 years ago