The reliance on creating an event atmosphere around movies — something that’s been going on for a number of years now but really has seen some success in 2010 — is coming at a time when theatrical windows are shrinking (“Alice in Wonderland” famously went to DVD less than three months after its initial release) and DVD revenues are dropping. That’s meant more focus on a movie’s opening weekend and a strong opening during that frame.
To some extent every movie-marketing campaign attempts to make the film it’s supporting into an event. But while the campaigns for “Alice in Wonderland” (see Johnny Depp ham it up — in 3-D!) and “Clash of the Titans” (see Liam Neeson release the Kraken — in 3-D!) motivated audiences to spend their hard-earned dollars on high-priced 3-D tickets, the marketing for “Sex and the City 2,” “Robin Hood” and other summer tentpoles didn’t deliver, or at least didn’t live up to expectations.
So why fewer movies opening at No. 1? Read whole article: adage
I say stop promoting ever single film as ‘must-see’. It loses it’s meaning after a while. Like the boy who cried wolf. Audiences’ trust will wan. All movies need marketing but they must earn their ‘must-see’ status. This opens up an interesting line of discussion. Do you believe the hype? What propels you to see a film? Is it a franchise that you enjoyed and see it regardless of it’s advertising campaign in your face during every commercial break? Do the actors play a large role in your decision? Or are the reviews for a film the deciding factor?