Pants Optional
Notice anything interesting about the movie poster on the right?
If the movie is called Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants 2, then how come none of these girls are wearing pants? Am I the only one who thinks that’s totally weird?
Now don’t get me wrong, I’m a strong supporter of the Sans-Pants Lifestyle™, but I’d also like a little bit of truth in my advertising. I see no pants. Where are the pants? Show me the pants!
When I first pointed this strange omission out to my friends they remarked that it might be intended as something of a conversation starter. Sure, I can see that. The poster may have been designed to specifically make you wonder, “Hey, shouldn’t there be pants in this picture?” Is it because of the Mediterranean-looking locale? That would make sense. You don’t want to be wearing pants if it’s hot out. I mean, unless there’s an issue with bugs, in which case pants would be preferable. It’s also not fair to exclude pants that might have been designed with that specific climate in mind. An airy pair of pants would be fine, for example.
Alternately, the pants in question are more suited for going out at night. Maybe they’re sexy leather pants. I think the leggy blonde in the front could rock some leather pants. But if there’s any humidity then leather pants would get sticky and gross, which may become a plot point (like that hilarious episode of Friends where Ross got trapped in a pair of his own leather pants). Heck, it’s not inconceivable that the entire film deals with the conundrum of the sticky leather pants. I mean, why not?
One also might wonder: if they’ve forgone with the pants, what else aren’t these girls wearing? Hmmm.
The real problem, however, is that the marketing people at Warner Brothers (this film’s distributor) have missed a golden opportunity to draw in part of the male demographic. As it stands, there is nothing about this film that could possibly appeal to a non-castrated heterosexual dude, but if the title were changed to better reflect what appears to be the reality of the poster — something like Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants 2: No Pants Required, or Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants 2: Commando Style, or Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants 2: Shaven Naked Flesh Aplenty — then, yeah, I think that would translate into an increase in box-office receipts. At the very least, there would be a lot more late-night TiVo-ing of the flick, provided the little paragraph of info in the guide doesn’t screw it up by mentioning something stupid, like that the chick with the giant forehead was on Gilmore Girls and therefore totally lame, just like Gilmore Girls (lameness is contagious, like herpes). That’s the key to a successful blockbuster: cross-over appeal. Give guys — specifically, horny guys who are too lazy to check online to find out what your stupid movie is about — a reason to see your film. Simple. Easy. Pantless.
The lesson here is to be mindful that the images and the words that are used in marketing material need to be cohesive, and if you put the word “pants” in the title of your film you should considering paying the wardrobe lady to go down to Macy’s and pick out a pair of frickin’ pants. Unless you’re making a porno.
Leave a Reply