The ‘Willow’ in the Wind

For a movie with such a wistful, almost docile title, “Willow” certainly is shaking up the town.

The fantasy epic, which arrives Friday at theater screens across the land, has achieved the status of an “event” and anxieties are high.

The reason: George Lucas, the force behind “Star Wars”--which forever altered the movie-going experience as well as popular culture--also created “Willow’s” fanciful characters and its story. He was also the executive producer. As the “Willow” press kit asserts, Lucas has been working on the concept 15 years. And it’s hard for anybody who follows movies not to be fascinated by an innovator with the ability to create enormous wealth--ticket sales from the “Star Wars” and “Indiana Jones” films total $1 billion , not counting dolls and T-shirts, etc.

But Lucas’ accomplishments have been overshadowed in recent years by a spate of disappointments. “Labyrinth,” which he co-produced, was filmed for $30 million and managed ticket sales of $12 million. He co-executive-produced Paul Schrader’s “Mishima” and Akira Kurosawa’s “Kagemusha,” both of which won high critical praises--but came to theaters and left quickly. Two Saturday morning animated series--based on characters from the “Star Wars” films--fizzled. Two TV movies about the Ewoks generated unimpressive ratings and unimpressive reviews.

And, of course, the most notable disaster: the $35-million “Howard the Duck.”

(Since its release in 1986, Lucas has said repeatedly that he had little to do with the picture. The press kit for “Willow,” which includes a two-page Lucas biography, doesn’t include a mention of the film.)

In the best (worst) tradition of gossipy Hollywood, great speculation has erupted over this newest project. The buzz from advance screenings is mightily divided. (More on that later.) Will “Willow” launch another phenomenon of “Star Wars” dimensions? Or will it make like a “Duck”?

However “Willow’s” performance might affect Lucas and his Lucasfilm Ltd., it also might affect the future of MGM/United Artists Communications, which is for sale.

MGM marketing president Greg Morrison told the Wall Street Journal that “Willow” will be big: “It’s boffo. It’s going to knock the socks off the country and the world.”

But, Journal reporter Daniel Akst called “Willow” “this year’s biggest money-making throw of the dice.” He noted, “Everything about this epic spells risk.”

Lucasfilm publicity director Lynne Hale warned against overemphasizing “Willow’s” strategic value: “You’re making it sound like this is a very important film for us. Well, it’s not that pivotal a film. I mean, each of our films is important to us. But it’s certainly not as if everything’s resting on what happens to ‘Willow.’ ”

Gambling for Dollars

If “Willow” doesn’t click, it could mean bad news for Kirk Kerkorian, who owns 82.4% of MGM/UA Communications--parent company of MGM and United Artists studios. What with the company for sale, offers could be affected by “Willow” ticket sales. In other words, a “Willow” hit might be considered a major asset and enhance the value of the company.

Last Wednesday, Daily Variety reporters Jane Galbraith and Richard Gold examined the film’s possible impact on the MGM/UA sale. The headline: “ ‘Willow’ A Big Question Mark for MGM.” They speculated that the studio “may be facing a loss on the picture.”

But there is no downside on the deal, according to Lee Rich, board chairman and chief executive officer of MGM/UA.

He said that MGM put up about $20 million of the film’s budget--which he said is closer to $35 million than the $40 million that has been quoted by other sources.

(Asked if Lucasfilm was putting up the other $15 million, Lee returned, “You’ll have to ask them.” But Lucasfilm is not talking about deal details.)

The $35 million doesn’t include costs for ads and movie prints (the film is opening in 1,000 theater; print costs average about $2,000 each). According to Rich, MGM will spend $6.6 million for prints and ads in the first week to 10 days of release.

Beyond that, he said, the cost for more ads and extra prints of the film will depend on how well it plays.

“I couldn’t give you a total ad figure right now. How could I? If a picture’s out there for 26 weeks, you’ll advertise it for 26 weeks.

“Right now I don’t have the slightest idea of how long ‘Willow’ will play. I couldn’t tell you how long ‘ “Crocodile” Dundee’ will play, either. Nor can (Paramount chairman of the board and chief executive officer) Frank Mancuso.

“The whole business is a gamble.”

Rich was irate at early published reports (“There’s been more inaccurate reporting regarding this film than any picture in this studio’s recent memory!”). Rich said that “Willow” represented “one of the best deals ever made in this studio’s history.” That deal gives MGM domestic and foreign rights, and free TV rights. “And we’ve already gotten most of our money back (from those rights).”

A Return to Glory?

Directed by Ron Howard, “Willow” is the name of a would-be sorcerer, played by three-foot-four Warwick Davis. A member of the diminutive Nelwyn race, he’s an unlikely hero on an important quest: to take the infant Elora Dawn to her homeland and rightful heritage. Along the way, he teams with a rogue swordsman--a Daikini (they’re taller)--played by Val Kilmer. The adventures that follow involve fairies, trolls, brownies and a two-headed dragon. Adding to the drama: an evil sorceress and her eye-catching daughter.

There are all sorts of risks involved with making “Willow” in the always risky business of movies. Among them is the prevailing Hollywood wisdom that fantasy films--especially the sword-and-sorcery realm, to which “Willow” is related--have had a hard time clicking with audiences.

But, optimists in the industry point out that “Star Wars” was an unknown factor when it opened--and perhaps “Willow” will do for fantasy what “Star Wars” did for science fiction.

For another risk, some movie-marketing insiders point to “Willow’s” advertising and promotional images, over which Lucas has all rights of approval.

One marketing executive from another studio hadn’t seen the movie but had seen the coming-attraction trailer and the ad copy--and admitted confusion: “I’ll be honest with you. I’m still not sure to this day what this movie is about. They’ve been so obscure about the story. I mean, it looks to be sword and sorcery--but only second- or third-hand. And it also has a look of being kind of ponderous and pompous, with one of those precedes that begins, ‘There was a time . . . .’ My feeling is, well, forget it. This is 1988. Today is the time, and kids are watching ‘Beetlejuice.’ ”

Several marketing specialists professed doubts about the film because of its casting of hundreds of dwarfs and midgets--Hollywood’s “little people”--which industry tradition says can pose marketing problems. (They play the race of Nelwyns.)

Of course, one executive pointed out, there was that notable exception--”The Wizard of Oz.’ ”

Another risk: The realities of the summer box office. More than 40 major movies are scheduled to battle it out for marquee space between now and September, with theater owners ready and able to run-in a fresh movie as soon as one falters.

Among the heavyweight contenders for the season are “ ‘Crocodile’ Dundee II” and “Rambo: First Blood Part III,” due May 25--the original release date of “Willow.”

The date has sentimental significance to Lucasfilm, as well as to fans of the “Star Wars” films. It was on May 25, 1977, that “Star Wars” was released. Its two sequels also opened on May 25.

During a 3-day salute to “Star Wars’ ” 10th anniversary at the Stouffer Concourse Hotel in Los Angeles last summer, attended by some 9,000 fans and even the generally reclusive Lucas, “Willow” was touted as a kind of return to glory for Lucas and Lucasfilm.

It happened during a presentation of upcoming Lucasfilm projects. There was a brief description of “Tucker,” the biography of automotive pioneer Preston Tucker, with Francis Coppola directing. It was announced that Indiana Jones would be going back into action--for a second sequel, with Steven Spielberg directing. Lucas will executive produce both.

But then, the audience was told, there would be “Willow.” Words like special and magical and wondrous accompanied a cryptic plot description and the showing of a handful of slides.

When the slide appeared announcing the May 25 release date, the audience burst into applause.

Continuing the high expectations: the fall 1987 issue of the Lucasfilm Fan Club magazine, which included a “Willow” spread, complete with plot details and photos. There was a box listing the “Willow” presentations scheduled for more than a half dozen sci-fi and fantasy conventions across the country: “And watch for more cities and events to be added right up to the May 25th release of ‘Willow.’ ”

But sentiment was finally pushed aside in moving up the movie to May 20. An MGM publicity executive was upfront: “This gives us a five-day jump on the competition.”

Scratching Their Heads

Concerns about “Willow” haven’t been helped by the Hollywood buzz--that is, the early word on the film from those who attended advance screenings.

Business Week reported, “Advance reviews on the film have been mixed. Some theater operators fear that Lucas may have a repeat of . . . ‘Howard the Duck’ on his hands.”

An exhibitor source who talked to Calendar said that many of his associates “came out scratching their heads after seeing the film. . . . They can’t quite figure this one out. It seems to have bits and pieces of so many other movies in it.”

In his Hollywood Freeway column in the Daily News, Frank Swertlow said that a “Willow” watcher told him the film borrows mightily from other movies. “And that could mean bad news for Lucas . . . if audiences get the feeling they’ve seen this before.”

Calendar polled two dozen exhibitors as they exited a “Willow” screening April 15 at the Village Theater in Westwood. They were largely positive.

For Jamiel Chatien , owner of Cinegold Theaters, with 14 locations in Southern California, it brought back the memory of the family film: “There were certain moments when I became all choked up and almost cried.”

Honey Berman, who works for the Hospital Satellite Network, which books films for hospital patients, declared, “It was fabulous. . . . It’s comparable to ‘Star Wars.’ I’m not 100% sure of its adult appeal, but it’s so entertaining.”

United Artists Theaters exhibitor Bill Parker predicted a “big financial success.”

But there were demurs: “The public will love it, but I don’t care for this type of film,” said one exhibitor. “It’s too derivative of 60 other films I’ve seen.”

One exhibitor said he admired Ron Howard’s direction but found the plot “blurry.” He also didn’t find it appealing to adults, and wondered if kids wouldn’t “fall asleep because it’s so slow.”

For the most part, the critics won’t have their say until opening day. But early indications are that they, too, will be divided.

At a press screening in Chicago last weekend, a reporter overheard a magazine critic saying, “I sure didn’t like it--it wasn’t my type of movie. But I’ll bet the masses will suck it up.”

After a press screening in New York, an editor said that his magazine won’t do any “Willow”-related stories--”unless the movie becomes a big hit--which would sure surprise us.”

Another New York screening found six reviewers comparing notes about other films that “Willow” calls to mind. “We mentioned ’10 Commandments,’ ‘Peter Pan,’ ‘Star Wars,’ ‘Darby O’Gill’ . . . ,” said a source. “Our feeling was that this film doesn’t seem to know what it wants to be.”

Forget All You Know

So what is “Willow”?

Cryptic and mysterious trailers--which began running late last year--showed freeze-frame images accompanied by the words:

You know what is real ... and what is not

You know what is light ... and what is dark

You know what is good ... and what is evil

You know what makes you laugh ... and what makes you cry

Now, forget all you know, or think you know.

The trailers also relied on the power of its film makers, touting “Willow” as a product of “the creator of ‘Star Wars’ and the director of ‘Cocoon.’ ”

The trailer’s message was echoed in a large, glossy “Willow” booklet--complete with snippets of plot--sent to 6,000 press members and exhibitors. Included was a holiday greeting card from MGM Pictures Chairman Alan Ladd Jr., who first teamed with Lucas on “Star Wars” at 20th Century Fox.

The PR package, which had been supervised by Lucas, was unprecedented for a Lucas movie. Equally surprising, to those accustomed to Lucas’ super-secrecy, was the release of the “Willow” novelization earlier this year.

Just a few weeks ago, Lucasfilm finally put its publicity campaign into action (campaigns for “ ‘Crocodile’ Dundee II” and “Rambo III” were well under way).

Veteran New York publicist Lois Smith was hired to handle “Willow.” Jerry Pam, of Guttman and Pam, was hired to promote Lucasfilm’s technical wings like Industrial Light & Magic. The PR for “Willow’s” merchandising tie-ins went to Dennis Davidson and Associates in Los Angeles.

(Sidney Ganis--who worked as senior vice president of marketing for Lucasfilm for more than six years--is these days worldwide marketing president for Paramount Pictures, home to “ ‘Crocodile’ Dundee II.” When he was asked about the difficulty of marketing “Willow” compared to the marketing of sequels of enormously popular hits, he was understandably diplomatic.

“Both are tough jobs,” said Ganis, adding that “Our industry needs constant infusions of new and different projects. That’s what makes it exciting.”)

MGM, meanwhile, had let loose a burst of new coming-attraction trailers. This time the trailers showed actual scenes from “Willow,” as opposed to freeze-frames.

Trailers also made their way onto two videocassette releases from MGM/UA Home Video--Mel Brooks’ “Spaceballs,” which debuted Feb. 5, and “Fatal Beauty,” starring Whoopi Goldberg, which comes out May 24.

An irony here is that “Fatal Beauty” (the term refers to a street drug) is very violent, which wouldn’t seem to offer a good audience match for “Willow.”

But Herb Fisher, senior vice president for sales and marketing for MGM/UA Home Video, said the company thinks in terms of advertising exposure.

Each new video release generates some 80 turns in 60 days, meaning turnover in video store rentals: “That means more than 40 million ‘Willow’ impressions,” said Fisher. “It may sound a little strange, our doing this, since we don’t even have the ‘Willow’ home-video rights. (They went to RCA/Columbia.)

“But Lee Rich has really instilled us with a sense of synergy. We’re a team. The teamwork is going to help make ‘Willow’ the blockbuster of the summer.”

‘Security’ Risks

The gate to Skywalker Ranch is guarded and the complex is surrounded by an electrified fence designed to keep deer out. But the fence also serves as a metaphor for Lucas’ desire for privacy--and his tradition of keeping his film plots secret.

The “Star Wars” sequels were filmed under the strictest security. Thus, the small-circulation genre magazine Cinefantastique captured national headlines when it “broke” the plot to “Return of the Jedi.”

Even the plot for “Howard the Duck”--which was based on a popular comic book character--was kept hush-hush. The “look” of the duck was kept a secret too. But shortly after the film opened to dismal box office, Lucasfilm and Universal Pictures changed their publicity/ad campaigns and sent out 8-by-10 photos of the duck.

Lucasfilm employees are required not to talk about their projects with the press. Crew members on Lucas’ films are also instructed not to talk out of school.

Example: A reporter put in a call to “Willow’s” veteran producer Nigel Wooll at his London home. Could he discuss his experiences on “Willow”?

“I don’t think there would be any problems at all,” said a friendly Wooll. “This one wasn’t like ‘Ishtar’ (which Wooll also produced) where we couldn’t say a thing. That was rather silly, wasn’t it? With this film we got to talk with a few press people on location. So I don’t think there’d be any problem at all. I’d love to chat with you.”

But, said Wooll, he felt he should get permission from Lucasfilm.

Two days later, Wooll’s enthusiasm had cooled. “Any information you want on ‘Willow’ will have to come directly from Lucasfilm. Sorry--that’s it for now.”

And several local publicists called a reporter to say that Lucasfilm had instructed them not to allow their clients to talk about working on “Willow.”

“I feel a little embarrassed by this,” said one. “But the fact is, my client would like to work with Lucasfilm again.”

Skiers in Helmets

At Elstree Studios in London, where “Willow” filmed on a closed set, the Daily Mail tried to sneak in a photographer.

“Didn’t make it,” said entertainment reporter Baz Bamigboye. “The closest I got to it was when my sister-in-law got hired as an extra in the film. She wore this Victorian-style gown and one day, Val Kilmer flicked a cigarette butt and it went right down her gown. So he dived in and retrieved it. That’s probably the most exciting thing that I heard about the shoot. They refused to talk to anyone. They really kept to themselves.”

Ah, but once “Willow” made its way to locations in New Zealand and Wales, so did the reporters.

Veteran reporter/columnist James Oram, of Australia’s Sunday Telegraph, said he heard about the production from “a dwarf stunt man in Sydney.” It took several flights (“I knew I was on the right aircraft, because there were a number of dwarfs aboard”) and a bus trip to reach Queenstown, New Zealand. (“There were dwarfs on the bus--which is when I really knew I was on the right track. Some had been flying continuously for 35 hours--they used a lot of imported dwarfs from Britain and Wales--so they were short-tempered dwarfs.”)

Once he reached Queenstown, Oram hung out at a local bar, “doing some drinking with the crew members--who pretty much turned silent after they found out who I was. I think they might have signed a (secrecy) contract.”

Before the crew members clammed up, Oram managed to get plot details. “And I talked to the local tradespeople--the mountain men who were riding the horses.”

A senior reporter for the Southland Times in Queenstown, a year-round resort area with a population about 5,000, Sue Fea said, “(The “Willow” crew) went on and on about how much they liked our country. But they certainly didn’t give us much access to them.”

Fea’s paper reported that 200 locals applied to be extras in the film, kept readers appraised of which locations were being used and later reported citings of resort skiers with Viking-style helmets on local fields.

To her disappointment (“I’d grown up watching Ron Howard as Opie”), Fea didn’t get to talk with Howard. “I’m still a little grumpy about that,” she said. She and other local reporters “got to stand in the background and listen” as “Entertainment Tonight’s” Leeza Gibbons talked with Howard for the “ET” cameras.

Land of Xanadu

“It’s a world of secrecy. We’re talking Xanadu,” said a Bay Area film maker who has had dealings with Lucasfilm. “It’s the irony of ironies. He comes up here to get out of the studio system and he perpetuates another one.”

Said Marin County film maker Robert Dalva, who’s known Lucas since his USC days, “It’s too bad that all movies just can’t come out and be discovered. Would we be having this conversation if Lucas didn’t live 400 miles away from Hollywood?”

Dalva, film editor of Haskell Wexler’s “Latino” and director of “The Black Stallion Returns,” said, “Mention ‘Howard the Duck’ and everyone says, ‘Oh, George Lucas is finished.’ Well, that’s crazy!

“Do you realize what George Lucas did? He taught a whole generation how to watch movies!”

Another Lucas associate lamented that Lucas’ industry status has made him a target for criticism: “It’s an unfortunate thing--but it seems to go with being successful.

“His decision to be a reclusive person also seems to instill suspicion. I guess it automatically enhances the desire to know more about him.”