Jump to content

Issac Newton

Christmas Weekend Thread | Xmas Day #s - Purple 18.1, Aqua 10.6, Wonka 10.3, Boys 5.7, Migration 5.4, Ferrari 2.9 | #BlackGirlMagic dominates the charts

By Issac Newton, in Numbers and Data

Recommended Posts

dallas Sleeper Hit

dallas

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, Porthos said:

I know it was a few pages back with @MovieMan89 leading the way (tagging him even though I'm not quoting any specific post so he knows about the convo here), but...

 

What even *IS* "heavy marketing" in this day and age of declining linear programming and scattered to the four winds internet media viewing?

 

I can't tell you how many times I've heard "Well, [INSERT COMPANY HERE] didn't bother to market [FILM OF CHOICE] much" and I think about all of the ads I did see for it.  And I don't even watch that much TV! Certainly not much non-sports TV at any rate.

 

But, like, if someone (and here I'm talking about a Hypothetical Someone and not anyone on this board) isn't watching broadcast/cable TV and has ad blockers installed while they surf the net and skips ahead of promos on places like YT or Twitch or wherever then how can one even know if something is being marketed to them or not?  How viral it is?  If it gets something on Fortnite?  If it somehow breaks through their bubble?

 

The above might sound sarcastic, but I truly don't mean it that way.  What I am saying is that the overall marketing landscape is even more fractured than it was 10 years ago, and it was pretty damn fractured then. It is getting easier and easier and easier with every single year that passes to just miss out on an advertising campaign that one might have been aware of even a few years prior.

 

I might be somewhat sympathetic to the virality argument, except getting viral on places like Twitter and TikTok is a very inexact science that I don't think Madison Avenue has cracked yet, esp for TikTok.  Sure once something has established itself as having viral juice behind it, marketing knows how to amplify it (see Barbenheimer).  But actually getting something virally launched in the first place? Don't think that nut has been reliably cracked yet. M3GAN and Smile might be success stories in that department (more the former than the later) but I think it's still in its infancy.  Especially on non-Twitter hangouts.

 

So then are we just judging by a Success Based Metric?  I.e. "Well, none of the kids/women/gamers/DEMO-OF-CHOICE I spoke to knew about it"?  I mean, fair enough if so.  But, like, then we get back to the original question?  Just what is marketing in an age when so many people are going out of their way not to see advertisements?  How does Hollywood target folks who don't want to be targeted?  Try to get some viral juice?  Hope The Almighty Algorithm that dishes ads on any given platform smiles upon them?  I really don't know.

 

Not that I have any answers here.  Just more examining the central question of "what even is marketing in anti-marketing age?"

 

The Flash definitely had one of the heaviest marketing campaigns of the year. It could have gone above $400M WW had audiences not completely rejected the film. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites










Speedorito Sleeper Hit

Speedorito

Posted
Posted
23 minutes ago, Porthos said:

I know it was a few pages back with @MovieMan89 leading the way (tagging him even though I'm not quoting any specific post so he knows about the convo here), but...

 

What even *IS* "heavy marketing" in this day and age of declining linear programming and scattered to the four winds internet media viewing?

 

I can't tell you how many times I've heard "Well, [INSERT COMPANY HERE] didn't bother to market [FILM OF CHOICE] much" and I think about all of the ads I did see for it.  And I don't even watch that much TV! Certainly not much non-sports TV at any rate.

 

But, like, if someone (and here I'm talking about a Hypothetical Someone and not anyone on this board) isn't watching broadcast/cable TV and has ad blockers installed while they surf the net and skips ahead of promos on places like YT or Twitch or wherever then how can one even know if something is being marketed to them or not?  How viral it is?  If it gets something on Fortnite?  If it somehow breaks through their bubble?

 

The above might sound sarcastic, but I truly don't mean it that way.  What I am saying is that the overall marketing landscape is even more fractured than it was 10 years ago, and it was pretty damn fractured then. It is getting easier and easier and easier with every single year that passes to just miss out on an advertising campaign that one might have been aware of even a few years prior.

 

I might be somewhat sympathetic to the virality argument, except getting viral on places like Twitter and TikTok is a very inexact science that I don't think Madison Avenue has cracked yet, esp for TikTok.  Sure once something has established itself as having viral juice behind it, marketing knows how to amplify it (see Barbenheimer).  But actually getting something virally launched in the first place? Don't think that nut has been reliably cracked yet. M3GAN and Smile might be success stories in that department (more the former than the later) but I think it's still in its infancy.  Especially on non-Twitter hangouts.

 

So then are we just judging by a Success Based Metric?  I.e. "Well, none of the kids/women/gamers/DEMO-OF-CHOICE I spoke to knew about it"?  I mean, fair enough if so.  But, like, then we get back to the original question?  Just what is marketing in an age when so many people are going out of their way not to see advertisements?  How does Hollywood target folks who don't want to be targeted?  Try to get some viral juice?  Hope The Almighty Algorithm that dishes ads on any given platform smiles upon them?  I really don't know.

 

Not that I have any answers here.  Just more examining the central question of "what even is marketing in anti-marketing age?"

 

That’s a really good question that I don’t think anyone can really answer.

 

But I think trying to find ways to go viral is key. For example, Jennifer Lawrence became a meme (again lol) after she promoted No Hard Feelings on Hot Ones. And if people turn away from ads, you have to just insert yourself into what they do want to see. Timothee Chalamet and Austin Butler are doing a Call of Duty match or something to promote Dune.

 

Even though actors aren’t really box office draws anymore, studios can still use them to draw eyes to their upcoming projects.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Megajohn01 Straight-to-DVD

Megajohn01

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, titanic2187 said:

RT VA score 

Aquaman 79%

Migration 86%

Iron claw 96%!

 

Now its

Aquaman 2: 78%
migration: 86%
iron claw: 97% 

 

iron Claw’s score isn’t surprising after watching it on the 13th!

Edited by Megajohn01
Added stuff
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Porthos Global Phenomenon

Porthos

Posted
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, dallas said:

The Flash definitely had one of the heaviest marketing campaigns of the year. It could have gone above $400M WW had audiences not completely rejected the film. 

 

This ties into something I was just pondering about the question, actually.

 

One thing that has sorta, kinda, taken the place of old fashioned marketing?  "News stories" on various webpages and YT/Twitch/TikTok channels. 

 

Scare quotes around 'news stories' very very very intentional.

 

I was just actually thinking about how damn successful Baldur's Gate 3 has been and how it really didn't have much of an advertising campaign... that I was aware of (which ironically enough gets back to my post about how folks can be in bubbles).  Certainly no TV/media buys due to it being from an indie studio.  But even banner ads or things like that on the web weren't all that prevalent at launch compared to some games, at least that I was aware.

 

But what it had was lots and lots and lots of discussion in nerd friendly places.  The expansion to Cyberpunk 2077, Phantom Liberty, having AAA juice behind it, was a bit more prevalent in marketing, I think.  But even there, the heavy lifting in marketing was being done by the "nerd press" and Twitch.  Successfully, I think.

 

So to tie this back to Migration, then perhaps the observation could be that the animation corner of the geek/nerd press (and here I absolutely include YT and Twitch) just didn't take to Migration initially like it had other Illumination fare.  If so, why not?  Could Illumination had done anything differently to get the geek/nerd press more interested in discussing the film?  Without dipping its toes too overtly into the whole payola area that is.

 

Again, don't know.  But it's something I was just thinking about in relation to this whole "reach people who are trying the darnedest not to be reached" problem.

Edited by Porthos
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites




dallas Sleeper Hit

dallas

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, HummingLemon496 said:

This is making me realize how bad Love and Thunder's 76% verified score is. It got a B+ but it was probably right next to a B.

Maybe this is the copium in me, but could Aquaman still get a B+ in this case? It's the holiday season and this apparently has good WOM among parents and children. I'm not saying it WILL happen, but it's a slim possibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites




HummingLemon496 Box Office Gold

HummingLemon496

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, dallas said:

Maybe this is the copium in me, but could Aquaman still get a B+ in this case? It's the holiday season and this apparently has good WOM among parents and children. I'm not saying it WILL happen, but it's a slim possibility.

Maybe. But more like a Thor 4 B+ instead of a Blue Beetle B+, where it's much closer to an B instead of an A-

  • ...wtf 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


PlatnumRoyce Box Office Gold

PlatnumRoyce

Posted
Posted
45 minutes ago, Porthos said:

I can't tell you how many times I've heard "Well, [INSERT COMPANY HERE] didn't bother to market [FILM OF CHOICE] much" and I think about all of the ads I did see for it.  And I don't even watch that much TV! Certainly not much non-sports TV at any rate.

 

On the other hand, if you look at ispot anecdotes, at least that third party metric shows a clear reduction in aggregate tv spending at least post-pandemic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites






Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.

  I accept