Avatree Posted August 25, 2017 Share Posted August 25, 2017 8 hours ago, HenryMeyers20 said: Opening weekend is 100% marketing. Soderbergh bad decision was to focus the marketing to the lowest populated and poorest parts of the country.Rural areas don't have enough people for a big box office hit. A lot of rural people don't even have money to go to a movie.It's amazing it made as much as it did.If your are selling a product you have to go where the people live, people that can also afford your product. How do you expect the masses to turn out when you don't marketed to the masses. Soderbergh is a very good director and he is good at financing his film. But he knows nothing about film marketing. I'm not an expert in these things but isn't NASCAR, like, massive in rural America? Surely it makes sense to market a NASCAR movie to them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HenryMeyers20 Posted August 25, 2017 Share Posted August 25, 2017 5 hours ago, Manchester by the Tree said: I'm not an expert in these things but isn't NASCAR, like, massive in rural America? Surely it makes sense to market a NASCAR movie to them. Apparently not, top the 30 theaters for LL was in LA and NY. Rural America did'nt show up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avatree Posted August 25, 2017 Share Posted August 25, 2017 I'm not saying the movie has been a success, it evidently hasn't been a hit at the box office for whatever reason. What I'm saying is that I don't know why you'd criticise marketing towards demographics who are interested in the topic of your movie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HenryMeyers20 Posted August 25, 2017 Share Posted August 25, 2017 5 hours ago, Manchester by the Tree said: I'm not saying the movie has been a success, it evidently hasn't been a hit at the box office for whatever reason. What I'm saying is that I don't know why you'd criticise marketing towards demographics who are interested in the topic of your movie. Well that just it, that demographic wasn't interested in this movie. That same demographic are also known for not being big moviesgoers. In some of these areas people have to drive 20,30,40 miles to a theater. It not like a coastal city where there are plenty of theaters in your nieghborhood. This is why traditional distributors mainly marketed there movies in big cities. The problem with Soderbergh is that he seem to assume that big Hollywood is wrong about everything. He thought he could sell this movie in these areas because it was about them, big Hollywood knew better. Don't get me wrong, I'm a big Soderbergh fan, I think he's a great filmmaker. But just because you're a great filmmaker doesn't mean you know how to sell a movie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnack Posted August 25, 2017 Share Posted August 25, 2017 I think it would have been a good idea, but that the movie goes a bit into the laughing at that demographic and they will often reject it (a bit like faith audience if they feel it is not authentic). Do we have some stats in ticket selling by state/region in the US ? If we look at where Hell of high water (27m) was popular: Hacksaw ridge (67m): It is still probably possible on a budget to get your audience outside the coast. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HenryMeyers20 Posted August 25, 2017 Share Posted August 25, 2017 3 hours ago, Barnack said: I think it would have been a good idea, but that the movie goes a bit into the laughing at that demographic and they will often reject it (a bit like faith audience if they feel it is not authentic). Do we have some stats in ticket selling by state/region in the US ? If we look at where Hell of high water (27m) was popular: Hacksaw ridge (67m): It is still probably possible on a budget to get your audience outside the coast. But unlikely, it hard to get the rural areas to support a movie. The marketing is just overall poor for LL. I've never seen a tv ad, l've only seen a trailer one time in a theater and it wasn't a full trailer, it was like a 30 second commercial. Still haven't seen a billboard. Most of the people I know never even heard of this movie. Soderbergh marketed this movie as a limited release. He put this movie in 3000 theaters and hide it from the masses. Next time Soderbergh should stick to filmmaking and let an actual distributor do the distribution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnack Posted August 25, 2017 Share Posted August 25, 2017 5 minutes ago, HenryMeyers20 said: He put this movie in 3000 theaters and hide it from the masses. Next time Soderbergh should stick to filmmaking and let an actual distributor do the distribution. I'm not sure how much control he had distribution wise he would have liked the very first trailer/material way closer to the release date. It is maybe him talking in hindsight... https://www.filmcomment.com/blog/interview-steven-soderbergh-logan-lucky/?utm_source=wordfly&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=FC08-25-17&utm_content=version_A I’m of a belief that for a certain kind of film, putting the trailer out four months in advance is ridiculous. A movie is never as hot as when the first trailer drops. I’ve been having conversations about radically reducing the time between announcing the movie and dropping the trailer, and releasing the movie. People consume culture now at a faster rate. If I had my way I’d compress all of that, at least for a genre movie. Another thing I learned is how many people don’t make the decision about what they are going to see until very late. Three days out, 30 percent of people don’t know what they are going to see on Friday. Waiting for this thing to drop has been the longest four months, because there are just so many questions I want answered one way or the other. He probably would have loved the trailer to release more july than may I imagine the reviews out 24 july was a bit far from release also. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HenryMeyers20 Posted August 26, 2017 Share Posted August 26, 2017 I think Soderbergh has now learned the hard way about late trailers. He can learn a few lessons from Hitman's Bodyguard. THB trailer was release in April and Lionsgate attached to the big summer blockbusters. The Logan Lucky trailer was nowhere to be found. When the trailer finally hit theaters it wasn't even a full trailer. Even if LL is at a profit, this was a botch distribution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WrathOfHan Posted August 26, 2017 Share Posted August 26, 2017 3 minutes ago, HenryMeyers20 said: I think Soderbergh has now learned the hard way about late trailers. He can learn a few lessons from Hitman's Bodyguard. THB trailer was release in April and Lionsgate attached to the big summer blockbusters. The Logan Lucky trailer was nowhere to be found. When the trailer finally hit theaters it wasn't even a full trailer. Even if LL is at a profit, this was a botch distribution. Er, what? It was in the trailer mix options since the beginning of June. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HenryMeyers20 Posted August 26, 2017 Share Posted August 26, 2017 57 minutes ago, WrathOfHan said: Er, what? It was in the trailer mix options since the beginning of June. I go to a lot of movies, all I can tell you is l haven't seen any LL trailers in theaters. But I sure did see a lot of THB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WrathOfHan Posted August 26, 2017 Share Posted August 26, 2017 3 minutes ago, HenryMeyers20 said: I go to a lot of movies, all I can tell you is l haven't seen any LL trailers in theaters. But I sure did see a lot of THB I only got a trailer before Annabelle. Theaters were attaching it, but neither of us were particularly lucky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HenryMeyers20 Posted August 26, 2017 Share Posted August 26, 2017 Maybe I'm being too hard on Soderbergh, because LL has already made profit. But I think he was expecting bigger profit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClaudeManhattan Posted August 26, 2017 Share Posted August 26, 2017 (edited) On 8/25/2017 at 8:37 PM, HenryMeyers20 said: Maybe I'm being too hard on Soderbergh, because LL has already made profit. But I think he was expecting bigger profit. Well, if you target the promotion towards low density locations you're going to get low density box office results. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this out. Edited August 27, 2017 by ClaudeManhattan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HenryMeyers20 Posted August 27, 2017 Share Posted August 27, 2017 (edited) Logan Lucky holds well with a strong WOM. Only a 42% weekend drop. Edited August 27, 2017 by HenryMeyers20 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClaudeManhattan Posted August 28, 2017 Share Posted August 28, 2017 What makes this upsetting is a traditional distributor would have easily opened it at $15-$20 million. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnack Posted August 28, 2017 Share Posted August 28, 2017 2 minutes ago, ClaudeManhattan said: What makes this upsetting is a traditional distributor would have easily opened it at $15-$20 million. Not sure about easily, The Nice guys had a little bit more going for it imo, and it was released by the giant Warner machine, arguably the best to release a movie like that with the biggest releasing budget it could get and it only did 11.2m OW, Shane Black / from the guys that gave you Lethal Weapon/Iron Man 3 didn't really had less appeal than Soderbergh. Comparable release distributed by MPAA studios: Lucky number sleven : 7m Nice Guys: 11.2m Hot Pursuit: 14m War dogs: 14.6m Lets be cops: 17m Will Smith focus: 18.6m Bay,Wahlberg,Dwayne Johnson Pain&Gain: 20m And most of those movies had a bit of a clearer high concept sold to the audience, some of the biggest movie star of the 2010s, bigger production, etc... 15-20m for a movie like that is not easy specially nearing on 20m that would have been a great result hard to achieve for a movie like that, even from a traditional distributor. If you look at a list of comparable since 2012: http://www.imdb.com/search/title?genres=comedy,crime,drama&release_date=2012,&sort=boxoffice_gross_us,desc&title_type=feature Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClaudeManhattan Posted August 28, 2017 Share Posted August 28, 2017 The Nice Guys had much stronger competition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barnack Posted August 28, 2017 Share Posted August 28, 2017 Just now, ClaudeManhattan said: The Nice Guys had much stronger competition. Hitman bodyguard was a somewhat strong competition for Logan Lucky, not that different than Neighbors 2 (maybe a bit stronger), hard to be a more direct one. Sure Logan Lucky weekend had no comparable to being in civil war 3 weekend big legs (Annabelle creation second weekend was about half of Civil War), but a nice May weekend (137m) vs a moribund August one (66m) probably make up a bit of the difference. Remove Civil War or make it is 4th weekend, Nice Guy does not necessarily reach 12.5m Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClaudeManhattan Posted August 28, 2017 Share Posted August 28, 2017 I think THB is not as strong as it seems to be. It just no competition right now. If The Nice Guys would've open last week, it would have been doing much better than THB. THB is benefiting from weak competition and Logan Lucky poor marketing strategy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HenryMeyers20 Posted August 28, 2017 Share Posted August 28, 2017 Message to Steven Soderbergh: Just because I know how to design and build a car doesn't mean I know how to sell it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
