Chevalier + Darjeeling = what exactly?
This is amazing. Next week theatres will begin to show Anderson's 20-minute Hotel Chevalier prequel before Darjeeling. I reviewed Chevalier for Reporter a few weeks ago. In brief: There's awkward conversation, talk of feelings, and no resolution. The short ends. It's kind of like a Raymond Carver short story, if Carver's stories were illustrated by Dr. Seuss. Or maybe Chris Ware?
There's no immediate lesson to be learned from the studio's/Anderson's decision to include Chevalier with Darjeeling in theatres. You can't really construe the decision as a victory for "online video" (whatever that means), since any merit to the piece is somewhat overshadowed by the fact that Natalie Portman appears nude in it. Not full frontal. She's sorta in a Rodan-meets-Jane Fonda repose. But still. "Natalie Portman nude" sells tickets.
Then there's the question of whether Chevalier actually served its purpose, which was to drive interest in Darjeeling. Darjeeling, at $2.5 so far, doesn't seem to have benefited. Does that mean that cross-medium promotions don't work well?
No easy answers to these questions right now. Despite that, I argue that deciding to release Chevalier online was a smart move. And I guarantee if Darjeeling was released online shortly thereafter, the studio would have a whole lot more than $2.5 mil in their pockets.
