'Splendor in the Grass'

I would assume there's millions of dollars and millions of man hours discussing, planning and executing how a record, film or book is perceived by the public at large.

From advertising to reviews and trailers, those of us digesting all this shit are inundated with information and pretty pictures, which help form our opinions out art, good or bad.

I've assumed over the last 30 years that Splendor in the Grass was a sappy, boring love story, with the only redeeming quality being looking at the gorgeous Natalie Wood for two hours.

Alas, I was proven wrong. If the film was marketed to me (30 years after it was released ... so I'm sure the studio does not care about my opinion) as an antiestablishment commentary on provincial values, small-town ethos and the pre-Depression landscape of innocence, I would've watched it 10 years ago.

Which brings up the point of how much does the studio or producers get for me putting this on my Netflix and watching it? Surely they get something. Somebody gets that money. I would assume it's not particularly worth their time and money to put any effort in marketing movies to audiences whose parents were barely born when the movie came out.

I sincerely believe a lot of today's teenagers would dig Splendor in the Grass if they gave it a chance. Chances are, they won't.