For your consideration: Ads a mere ego massage

When it comes to awards campaigning, a “Winking-at-the-Truth in Advertising” law sounds like a pretty good idea.

That’s because among the scores of “For Your Consideration” ads now proliferating, there’s always a few 500-to-1 nags being touted alongside 3-to-1 thoroughbreds.

Will “War of the Worlds” finally get Tom Cruise his Oscar?

Not this time. But ads in the Hollywood trades are promoting him as a best actor candidate anyway.

What about Jane Fonda in her return to the big screen in “Monster-in-Law?”

Maybe she’ll land a Golden Globe, since it offers an award for actresses in a comedy or musical. But it’s a good bet Fonda doesn’t have to fret about finding space on her bookshelf for another Oscar alongside her trophies from “Klute” and “Coming Home.”

Will Johnny Depp sneak in and grab a best acting nomination for “Charlie and the Chocolate Factor?” Enough said.

Welcome to the “For Your Consideration” period leading up to nominations, one of Hollywood’s peculiar annual rituals.

Just about everybody agrees it’s absurd and a waste of money better spent elsewhere.

Naturally, they still do it anyway.

In the past, such Oscar-worthy fare as “Barbershop” and “Demolition Man” have had “For Your Consideration” status bestowed on them.

Steve Martin was once promoted for best actor consideration for playing a dentist in the 2001 black comedy “Novocaine,” a movie that disappeared at the box office faster than it takes to perform a root canal.

When spirits giant Seagram Co. owned Universal Studios, one 1997 trade ad solicited best song votes for “Whenever There Is Love,” the theme from the Sylvester Stallone action flick “Daylight.” The co-author was an unknown songwriter named Sam Roman. At least people thought he was unknown.

Turns out it was a pseudonym for then-Seagram Chief Executive Edgar Bronfman Jr. Bronfman is still waiting for that first nomination.

Companies that preach the virtues of disciplined cost controls at Wall Street media conferences seem to have no qualms spending whatever it takes to kiss up to stars, directors and producers come awards season.

Granted, trade ads don’t put a huge dent into studio coddling budgets. An ad that may cost from $5,000 to $10,000 to tout talent from a film may in the long run be cheaper than an SUV full of gift baskets.

Nonetheless, the ads are a symptom of the “Just Say Yes” attitude that takes over Hollywood during awards season.

Veteran publicist Harry Clein, who worked on such award campaigns as “Forrest Gump” and “Cinema Paradiso,” notes that it’s often easier for studios to buy the ads rather than fight the urge to pass.

“People in Hollywood have longer memories for what wasn’t done for them than for what was done for them,” Clein said.

Clein, who now consults and teaches, has one of the best stories involving how thin skins can get during awards season. He was fired by a producer Meryl Streep accidentally forgot to thank from the podium when she accepted her Oscar as best actress in “Sophie’s Choice.”

Sometimes the ads have a larger, more noble purpose. Someone of Paul Newman’s stature might get a “For Your Consideration” ad because, well, he’s Paul Newman.

There’s also a Hail Mary mentality. Clein notes that there’s usually one spot in the Oscar categories that is genuinely up for grabs. So why not run an ad on the off chance it works?

“It’s a crapshoot,” he said.

Still another reason some publicists mention is the “trial balloon.” An ad is taken out to gauge the reaction and measure buzz. If it generates laughter, forget about running a second. But every so often people think the suggestion is a good idea.

For most of the year, studios whine about out-of-control marketing costs. Then they go on a spending binge for scores of ads that have no other purpose than to massage some talent’s already inflated ego.

One of these days they may want to think about drawing a line. Just for consideration.

Sucking up to the enemy

The current crop of award ads may be the first time that one studio is actively campaigning on behalf of the chairman of a rival.

A Warner Bros. ad for “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory” promotes the film and producer Brad Grey for best picture.

Grey is head of Paramount Pictures. He produced “Charlie” in his previous job as head of the Brillstein-Grey management and production company.

This might call for a sit-in

A Screen Actors Guild member who wanted to remain anonymous, presumably because he belongs to a union where members like to fight, asked in an e-mail responding to last week’s column on the SAG Awards why nonunion “seat fillers” are used by the show’s producers.

Is there an International Brotherhood of Seat Fillers Local 82 we don’t know about?

Fillers quickly slip into empty seats during awards shows the minute someone is called to the stage to make a presentation, or accept an award.

Audiences then will always see a packed crowd, and Chad Lowe has someone to talk to while wife Hilary Swank is backstage answering press questions on what it felt like to win.

This guild member, however, made a good point: Why doesn’t SAG use some of the thousands of background actors, or extras, who belong to the union?

SAG spokesman Seth Oster said the union uses a company that supplies professionally trained seat fillers. Some of them, he adds, are no doubt also struggling SAG actors just trying to make a living.

James Bates is deputy entertainment editor at the L.A. Times. He writes Behind the Screens as a regular column for the Envelope (theenvelope.latimes.com), a Times website devoted to Hollywood’s awards season. Send your ideas, comments, criticisms and tips to [email protected].