GoBots: Battle of the Rock Lords (1986) and Merchandising

A big part of movies and television is merchandising.  It can be another point of income for a property, netting extra money for the people who created the idea.  The more money, the better, and in the case of a hopeful franchise, a better chance at getting a sequel made.  That’s why toy stores are filled with different figures from different movies and television shows.  That’s why superheroes get new costumes in every movie.  It’s all so that merchandise can be sold.

This week’s movie was a big piece of merchandising, based on a toy from the 1980s.  In fact, it was so dependent on the merchandising that the movie was made to sell the toys rather than the toys being a result of the movie.  GoBots: Battle of the Rock Lords was a movie made to bring a new line of GoBots figures to market.  It was the introduction of the Rock Lord characters who would get their own figures as the movie was released.

The Rock Lords technically weren’t GoBots.  They were from another location and were human/animal/rock hybrids in the same sort of way that GoBots were human/robot/vehicle hybrids.  They transformed like GoBots.  They had evolved from humanoid races like GoBots.  They had a good faction fighting against a bad faction like GoBots.  The difference was that they were rock based instead of machine based.  That didn’t matter when it came to the toys though.  They were still the fun, transforming toys for children who didn’t get Transformers.

The story was that the Guardian GoBots travelled to the land of the Rock Lords to help the good guys, led by Boulder (Michael Nouri).  The Renegade GoBots decided to help the bad guys, led by Magmar (Telly Savalas), in an attempt to get the most powerful device in the universe.  It was pretty boring.  The demographic was kids, though, with the target audience being the ones who would beg their parents for the toys.

There have been other movie making decisions that have been rumoured to be about toys throughout the years.  That’s because of the extra money that merchandising can bring in.  If a movie can manage to make a lot of money from merchandising, even if the movie itself didn’t make a lot of money in theaters or on home video, it could still be worth it to make a sequel.  It could be worth it to add new characters or change the looks of old characters if that means that there will be more toys to sell.  Extra income is always a good thing when it comes to Hollywood.

Take, for example, the Star Wars movies.  George Lucas didn’t get paid much for directing the first film.  What he did get was merchandising rights and that paid off when the movie became a massive hit.  It was the first time that toys were a major source of income for a movie.  Every kid wanted the toys.  When I was a kid in the 1990s, I knew kids who had those original toys.  Other rumours surrounding the Star Wars movies and the toys were that George Lucas wouldn’t let Han Solo be killed in The Empire Strikes Back because he was one of the best-selling toy characters, and that the Ewoks were created for Return of the Jedi because they were child-friendly looking characters that would make good toys.

Another movie franchise that seems to have survived, at least partially, on the toys associated with it is Cars.  The Pixar produced animated franchise follows a bunch of talking cars in their talking car world.  Like Star Wars, I don’t want to take away from the theatrical success of the movies.  Each movie made back their budgets and then some.  They weren’t as critically well received as other Pixar movies, but they made money during their theatrical runs.  Yet the idea of toys always comes up when discussing Cars.

Many children like nothing more than to play with toy cars, much like many adults who like nothing more than to show off their real cars.  Having a movie with characters who are cars plays right into this love of vehicles.  Then to have toys come out that are based on the characters that the children have fallen in love with only makes the children want them as much or more than their Hot Wheels and Matchbox counterparts.  The toy cars from Disney sold like hotcakes.  Mater and Lightning McQueen were on lunchboxes, in toy boxes, and on bedsheets.  It was the Star Wars marketing train all over again.

Let’s bring all of this back to the Sunday “Bad” Movies.  There’s one movie that was written about a while back that managed to capture the whole idea of a movie depending on toy sales to make a good chunk of money.  Batman & Robin was the fourth film in that franchise and spent a lot of time ensuring that there would be a large line of toys for children to buy.  As Chris O’Donnell said in the sixth part of the Shadows of the Bat documentary, the fourth movie felt like a toy commercial.  There were new costumes, new cars, and new villains.  Everything had been put into the movie to get merchandising money.  Joel Schumacher, in the same documentary, mentioned that the movie had to be more kid friendly and toyetic, meaning that it was being directed at children so that the studio could sell toys.  That was the aim of the movie.  The studio wanted to make money off of the movie, but they wanted to make more money off of merchandising.

Batman & Robin, Cars, Star Wars, and GoBots: Battle of the Rock Lords were all movies in which the merchandising was as important as the movies themselves.  In the case of Batman & Robin and GoBots: Battle of the Rock Lords, the merchandising may have been even more important.  It helped shape the story and the characters to the point that without it, the movies would have been completely different. 

Merchandising is an important part of film, especially in the modern landscape where T-shirts, Pop Vinyls, and posters are important to both adults and children.  Movies rely on merchandising to bring in extra income, which can help to fund other movies, or help to make filmmakers succeed in Hollywood.  People are able to have their own piece of a movie, or share their fandom of a property.  That’s what merchandising can do.  That’s why it’s important.

Also important are these notes:

• Batman & Robin was mentioned in this post.
• Star Wars was mentioned.  I covered a Star Wars knockoff called Starcrash.
• Cars was mentioned.  A Car’s Life was a Cars knockoff watched in the early days of the Sunday “Bad” Movies.
• Transformers was another movie mentioned in this post.  I watched the knockoff Transmorphers franchise.
• GoBots: Battle of the Rock Lords featured the voice of Frank Welker, who has also done work in Anaconda, Mortal Kombat, and Hudson Hawk.
• Roddy McDowall was in GoBots: Battle of the Rock Lords.  He was in a movie called Shakma a few years later.
• Marilyn Lightstone returned to the Sunday “Bad” Movies with GoBots: Battle of the Rock Lords after being featured in Iron Eagle IV.
• Michael Nouri played Boulder in GoBots: Battle of the Rock Lords.  He had a role in Captain America.
• Finally, GoBots: Battle of the Rock Lords saw the return of Michael Bell to the Sunday “Bad” Movies.  He was in The Stupids.
• Have you seen GoBots: Battle of the Rock Lords?  Are there any other movies you can think of where merchandising was super important?  Discuss anything you want related to this post in the comments.
• I am always keeping an eye and an ear open for suggestions about what to watch for the Sunday “Bad” Movies.  The comments are a good place to let me know of any movies I should check out.  My Twitter is another good place to find me.
• Sometimes, I like to post stuff to my snapchat story.  Those things could be clips from the bad movies I watch.  They could be updates about what I’m watching in the theater.  They could be other things.  If you want to see that, add me.  jurassicgriffin.
• Next week, I’ll be checking out a movie called Squanderers (also known as Money to Burn), which I’ve been meaning to see for a while.  It was in my schedule way back before I hit 100 weeks, but I couldn’t find a way to see it.  Now I have one.  Check in here next Sunday (night because I work during the day that week) to find out what I thought about it.

Movie 43 (2013) and Wraparound Stories

There are pros and cons to every type of movie, and anthologies might have the most of both associated with them.  That’s because of the way that anthology movies are made.  They tell multiple stories and there are different ways in which the stories are presented.  There are two main methods to showcase the stories.  One is to simply have them, one after another, with title cards in between.  The other, and possibly more common method, is to create a wraparound story that happens between the segments.

If a filmmaker or group of filmmakers use the wraparound concept, it becomes important that they do it right.  This story becomes the most important of the entire movie since it sets up everything that happens.  Wraparound stories are not pages in a book flipping to get to the next story.  They are not channels on a television changing to begin a new “show.”  The wraparound stories are actual tales that have characters.  They are a story and should be treated or seen as such.

Like any story, there are ways that it can be better or worse.  The use of humour, the performances, and the overall structure can make a wraparound story more bearable.  They could even make a wraparound story good.  That’s crazy, isn’t it?  This part is important to keep a viewer’s attention and get them invested in the other stories that come up.

One movie that can show how important a wraparound story can be is Movie 43.  The movie was released in two versions, one American and one international.  Each version had a different wraparound story that tied the segments together.  I had the chance to check out each version in preparation for this post, which gives me the opportunity to compare them and examine the strengths and weaknesses of each.

The first wraparound story that I saw was called The Thread.  This was included in the international version of Movie 43.  Calvin Cutter (Mark L. Young) enlisted his friend J.J. (Adam Cagley) to play a prank on his brother Baxter (Devin Eash).  They told Baxter that they needed to find a banned video called Movie 43.  While he was searching for it, Calvin took Baxter’s laptop and watched a bunch of porn that would put viruses on the laptop.  Baxter went down a rabbit hole finding terrible videos before realizing that Movie 43 was a video from the future, signalling the end of the world.

The Thread was the more annoying of the two wraparound stories because the characters were all annoying and it was the simplest way to go from video to video.  The setup for each video was “I found another video” or “Let’s try this video.”  It wasn’t much of a setup, and really, any video could have played anywhere.  There was no real effort put into it.  The Thread wasn’t entertaining and definitely only got me excited about the different segments because then I wouldn’t have to watch the wraparound anymore.

The place where it fell apart was in the characters.  The Thread had three irritating characters in Calvin, J.J., and Baxter.  Calvin was the cocky, dumb, older brother who wanted revenge for nothing.  He was being a jerk and we were supposed to sympathize with him.  J.J. was just kind of there and had not much to do with anything other than being the sidekick.  Baxter was almost as bad as his brother, being the know-it-all computer guy, acting smarter and superior to everyone.  It got even worse when his future self was having sex with his mother.  It just got weird for no reason.  That fit with the rest of the movie, but didn’t make for an entertaining wraparound story.  Without caring for the characters, you don’t care for the story.  And that’s where the other wraparound, though also not great, improved the movie slightly.

The Pitch was the wraparound story for the American release of Movie 43.  This story played out much differently than the first.  Charlie Wessler (Dennis Quaid) was a screenwriter pitching his new ideas to a producer named Griffin Schraeder.  The first few stories didn’t go over so well, so Griffin declined the idea offers.  Charlie didn’t like this and pulled a gun on the producer.  He forced Griffin to go to the head of the production company and demand money from Bob Mone (Common).  Bob had recently slept with Griffin’s wife, and after okaying the series of shorts that Charlie wanted, Griffin went on a downward spiral ending in an attempted revenge on his boss.

There was more thought put into the story of The Pitch, and more work done to make the characters sympathetic.  They weren’t teens watching porn and playing jokes on each other while searching for videos.  Charlie Wessler was a down on his luck screenwriter hoping for one last shot at making a movie.  Griffin Schraeder was a man who had been walked over for many years and had finally snapped.  They were relatable, even if they were off the charts bonkers.  Their story arcs resonated and had some slight emotion put into them.  It helped that the jokes worked in some instances as well, which wasn’t the case with The Thread.

The weakest part of The Pitch was its ending.  It was funny, but took away from the story because there was no real resolution.  Spoilers ahead.  Griffin confronted Bob in the parking lot, going to more extreme lengths than Charlie had when trying to pitch his ideas.  Bob shot Griffin.  Then all of the actors broke character and said they shouldn’t even have that scene and should just go to the final segment.  The breaking character was funny.  The lack of resolution to the Griffin storyline left me wanting more.  That’s weird to say with Movie 43, but that’s what happened.

Regardless of the ending, there was still one more thing that put The Pitch above The Thread as a wraparound story.  That one thing was how it set up the segments.  In The Thread, the segments were videos that the kids had found on their computer.  There were no direct references to what was happening.  The kids just said “What the hell was that?” and went to the next video.  In the scenario of The Pitch, Charlie Wessler was pitching these ideas to production executives.  He would set them up by describing what they were about.  Once the shorts ended, the characters would reference them directly.  The segments affected where the story went.  There was a reason for everything that happened, and it revolved around the different comedy shorts within Movie 43.  The wraparound tied everything together, much like a thread should, and The Thread didn’t do that.

As you can somewhat see, when a filmmaker decides to use a wraparound story in their anthology film, it becomes an important part of what makes or breaks the movie.  A bad wraparound can be annoying and cause someone to lose interest in the movie before going to the next segment.  A good wraparound can blend into the movie in a way that feels natural as it tells a story that involves every other story.  It’s an important building block to structure the entertainment.

Movie 43 may not have been a good movie, but it found a good wraparound for itself in The Pitch.  I don’t know if it was the first of the two wraparounds created, or if The Thread came before it.  It doesn’t matter.  The Pitch enhanced the movie in a way that The Thread wasn’t able to.  It felt connected to everything else.  The Thread felt like any short films could have been used.  The Pitch integrated the segments into its story which strengthened the overall movie.  If you’re going to watch Movie 43, which I wouldn’t recommend, make sure you see the version with The Pitch.  It won’t be a good movie, but it’s the better of the two options.

Now let’s get to the notes so we can get out of here:

• Another anthologiey I have seen for the Sunday “Bad” Movies is The Summer of Massacre.
• Movie 43 was suggested by @prfessorsock, who also suggested Bucky Larson: Born to Be a Star.
• Now for the long list of actor connections.  Halle Berry made her fourth Sunday “Bad” Movies appearance with Movie 43.  She has also been in New Year’s Eve, Die Another Day, and Catwoman.
• Uma Thurman is now a three time Sunday “Bad” Movies alumnus.  She was in Movie 43, but before that, she was in Playing for Keeps and Batman & Robin.
• Also in Movie 43 and Playing for Keeps was Dennis Quaid.  He’s also a third timer this week.  His other movie was Jaws 3-D.
• The third person to reach the three timer level this week was Gerard Butler, who was also in Movie 43 and Playing for Keeps.  His third movie was Timeline.
• Common and Josh Duhamel were both in New Year’s Eve.  They returned this week in Movie 43.
• Movie 43 was the second Sunday “Bad” Movie for both Austin Cope and Charlie Saxton, who were each in The Happening.
• Mother’s Day saw the introduction of Aasif Mandvi and Jason Sudeikis to the Sunday “Bad” Movies.  They both made a second appearance by being in Movie 43.
• Terrence Howard was in Movie 43.  He was in an early Sunday “Bad” Movie when he had a part in Glitter.
• A Haunted House brought J.B. Smoove into the Sunday “Bad” Movies, and he came back for Movie 43.
• Movie 43 was a return for Julie Claire, who was in Beverly Hills Chihuahua.
• One of the actors in Movie 43 was Martin Klebba, who was also in Foodfight!
• Martin Pfeffercorn was in Movie 43 and Sharknado 2: The Second One.  That makes two Sunday “Bad” Movies appearances.
• Finally, Chris Pratt was one of the many actors in Movie 43.  A few weeks ago, he made his Sunday “Bad” Movies debut with a small role in Jem and the Holograms.
• One of the directors of Movie 43 was Steven Brill.  He was the director of Sandy Wexler.
• Have you seen Movie 43?  Have you seen the two different wraparound stories?  What do you think about wraparounds?  Discuss any of this in the comments.
• Movie 43 was a suggested movie for me to watch.  If you have a movie you want to suggest for me to watch, let me know.  There are two main places to do that.  You can leave your suggestions in the comments, or you can find me on Twitter and suggest there.
• Sometimes when I’m watching bad movies, I put clips of them into my snapchat story.  My username is jurassicgriffin.  If you want to see some of these clips, add me.
• Now let’s look to next week’s movie.  It seems like another rip-off that I’ll be covering, but it isn’t quite that.  The movie is more of an advertisement for toys.  GoBots: Battle of the Rock Lords is coming up in seven days.  I don’t have anything to say about it yet.  We’ll see next week what I say.