Does the Megalopolis trailer contain fake movie critic quotes?

None of these negative quotes from Pauline Kael, Andrew Sarris, Vincent Canby or Roger Ebert appear in their reviews. What is the intention here?
Photo: Lionsgate

Since this story was published, Lionsgate has dismantled the trailer and apologized: “Lionsgate is immediately recalling our trailer for Megalopolis. We sincerely apologize to the critics involved, as well as to Francis Ford Coppola and American Zoetrope, for this inexcusable error in our selection process. We made a mistake. We are sorry.

We’ve all seen movie marketing campaigns that try to trick us, using quotes out of context and trying to make a widely panned movie seem like a well-loved one. Every now and then, a movie goes in the opposite direction, emphasizing the fact that it divided critics. Such is the case with the ads for David Lynch’s Lost Highway touted Siskel and Ebert’s “two thumbs down” reviews of the film. At first, this new trailer for Francis Ford Coppola’s highly anticipated film, decades in the making Megalopolis It seems Coppola has taken a turbocharged approach to this latest strategy, going back in time to give us examples of critics who hated Coppola’s early masterpieces. And not just any critics: these are quotes from people like Pauline Kael and Andrew Sarris, two of the biggest names in film criticism.

Except it seems they didn’t say any of that. Pauline Kael, for her part, absolutely adored both of them. The Godfather And The Godfather 2She praised the adaptation, direction and performances, and said of the epic as a whole: “It’s a bicentennial film that doesn’t insult intelligence. It’s an epic vision of the corruption of America.” The quote allegedly attributed to her in this trailer – that The Godfather is “diminished by its artistry” — is nowhere to be found in any of her (rave) reviews of the first two films. (She was less enthusiastic Part III(but that sentence doesn’t appear in this review either.) In fact, Kael felt that Coppola’s refinement and talent – his artistry, in other words – greatly improved Mario Puzo’s admittedly trashy source material.

I know that Sarris, always the charming contradictor, was less enthusiastic. The Godfatherbut that was somewhat predictable. Yet the quote attributed to him in the trailer (“a sloppy and self-indulgent film”) is not found in his review either. Vincent Canby does not appear to have called Apocalypse Now “hollow at the bottom.” He had mixed feelings about the film, though. Rex Reed actually quite hated it Apocalypse Nowbut his quote from that trailer doesn’t appear in his review either. And, no, Roger Ebert’s mostly positive review of Bram Stoker’s Dracula There are no quotes in the book “The Triumph of Style Over Substance.” Instead, he says, “The film is an exercise in feverish excess, and for that, if nothing else, I enjoyed it.” He gave it three stars, which was actually one of the most positive reviews the film received at the time. Is it possible that all of these quotes are made up? I’m not going to bother digging through John Simon’s archives—I’m already in a very bad mood—but I wouldn’t be shocked if his quotes were also altered or made up entirely.

What is the intention here? Did the people who wrote and edited this trailer simply assume that no one would pay attention to the veracity of these quotes, since we live in a made-up digital world where showing any curiosity about anything from the past is considered a character flaw? Did they do it to see which media outlets would simply accept these quotes at face value? Or maybe they did it on purpose to get us to reread these past reviews and find out what a good review can be? If so, then it worked, in my case. I have read a lot of Pauline Kael reviews in my life, but I had never read her review of The GodfatherI encourage you to do the same.

But there’s another problem here. Yes, Coppola has built his career on films that baffle some critics and audiences upon release, but ultimately turn out to be visionary works of art. I wrote an entire column about that! And, yes, Megalopolis This film will divide. It already has. Many of us saw it at Cannes and were both baffled and fascinated. It is a totally crazy, totally unforgettable work. (You can quote me on that.) The film is not only divisive among critics, it is divisive in the mind of the individual critic; I suspect that many viewers will have a similar reaction. I also know that MegalopolisLike many of Coppola’s more neglected films over the years, it’s much more appreciated on a second viewing. The film is full of thorny, intriguing ideas and bold stylistic choices—the sort of things that critical voices are often very helpful in bringing out. Taking on critics can be an exciting and cathartic marketing tactic, but I suspect Megalopolis It’ll need the critics to support it when it comes out. And making up fake quotes from our heroes is probably not the best way to get us on your side.