A little lesson in movie marketing for the Philadelphia Inquirer.

In a recent item from Chris at Movie Marketing Madness, we learn that the Philadelphia Inquirer newspaper has rejected plans to drape its building (seen here on the left; click it for a larger version) in the component parts of a marketing campaign for Jerry Seinfeld’s upcoming animated dud feature Bee Movie. Apparently some community groups decried – yes, they actually decried! – the plans as “shocking” and “garish”.

With all due respect to the fine people of Philadelphia, each one of you is clearly out of your freaking mind.

We’re living in a topsy-turvy world when the fine cities of this country can just out-and-out refuse to support Hollywood blockbusters. Before you know it, TV stations will refuse to run spoiler-filled movie trailers. Talk shows will reject appearances by Cameron Diaz and Dakota Fanning. And not only will we stop seeing the distribution of the secret sex tapes of desperate actresses, but it could come to pass that when Jessica Alba is finally granted her star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame, no one will show up to see her caress, kiss, and rub her body all over it as if it means something important.

Well, I for one will not tolerate, nor will I live in such a world. I’m here to get the Philadelphia Inquirer firmly back on track – and “on the same page” as we say in marketing – with Hollywood again. Your fancy schmancy venerated newspaper building is too good for the likes of a Jerry Seinfeld movie? Okay, then: here are four new ideas for upcoming movies that maybe will appeal to your local landmark aesthetic (and yes, the pics are all enhugeable):

Movie: Fred Claus Proposed graphic: Ginormous Vince Vaughn-head “trapped” inside the building. Why it’s great marketing: Clearly this movie is destined to become a hilarious holiday classic the likes of which Philadelphia hasn’t seen since, well, Philadelphia. What’s more, it includes a banner that says “Im inside ur bildin messin up ur paperz”. Drawbacks: It is certainly possible to have too much Vince Vaughn.

Movie: Things We Lost in the Fire Proposed graphic: Very large flames; an overly emotive Halle Berry. Why it’s great marketing: It’s hard to go wrong with an awards season-baiting campaign like this. People are likely to come from miles around to gaze upon the image of Berry, and wonder where it was exactly that their own lives went so wrong. Drawbacks: It’s been proven that people who work inside buildings decorated with images of Oscar-winning actresses end up feeling lazy, uninspired, full of themselves and generally unproductive for decades to follow (see: “The Gwyneth Paltrow Cleveland City Hall Incident”, 2001).

Movie: Rendition Proposed graphic: A rather poorly Photoshopped and grossly bloated Jake Gyllenhaal-head. Why it’s great marketing: Gyllenhaal’s particular brand of sleepy, doe-eyed blockbuster great looks is sure to lull the local population into a serene sense of euphoric well-being. Drawbacks: In short order, rumors will run rampant in the media that the building has been spotted having sex with all different kinds of other buildings.

Movie: Atonement Proposed graphic: Copious images of starlet Keira Knightley looking alternately wan, forlorn, miserable, uneasy, rueful, joyless, desolate, pitiable, wretched, melancholy, gloomy, funereal and otherwise laden with sorrow. Why it’s great marketing: Are you kidding me? She’s our national sweetheart! Drawbacks: Mass suicide.

Hope that helps, Philadelphia, and that you’ll be able to correct some of that poor marketing thinkin’ you’ve been doing. And in answer to your obvious question: yes, I am available to be put on retainer as a consultant.

(Inquirer building image courtesy of a view on cities.com)