trailer break: ‘Flipped’Take a break from work: watch a trailer... Looks cute enough, and it’s from director Rob Reiner, who’s hardly a tricky box office sell -- his last film, The Bucket List, earned back more than twice its budget domestically, and earned more than $175 million worldwide. So why is this film getting “careful handling from Warner Bros.,” as The Los Angeles Times wondered last week? How do you market the sweet and the square in a time of the slick and the hip? Oh, man: It’s now a problem trying to market a nice movie? Is this where we are now? Apparently so: With a film that runs so counter to the zeitgeist, Warner Bros. has needed to get creative — namely, by using that discordance to its advantage. It sent Reiner to cities such as Indianapolis for a screening with an outfit called the Heartland Film Festival, which also offered up a quote for some of the television spots. (Reiner said that "by holding word-of-mouth screenings and events in markets which are not so accustomed to Hollywood screenings we generated a lot of attention and terrific reaction.") Counter to the zeitgeist? Since when is a love story counter to the zeitgeist? Flipped opened in 45 theaters last weekend, and earned $224,233. That’s a per-screen average of $4,983... better than those of Salt and Dinner for Schmucks, at No. 4 and 5 at the box office for the weekend. This movie does not look like a hard sell to me. WTF? Flipped is now playing in limited release in the U.S. and Canada, and expands on August 27; no U.K. release date has been announced. Disqus commentsblog comments powered by Disqus |
posted:
Thu Aug 12 10, 1:11PM categories: movie buzz permalink 3 pre-Disqus comments Disqus comments tip jarshare
read morerelated· must reads: “Why renters and pirates watch such different movies” · question of the day: Does an on-demand DVD business make sense? · why no ‘Harry Potter’ this fall? · Flipped (review) · ‘Inception’ attacks ‘X-Men: First Class’; pushing back against 3D; Lisbeth Salander does not eat pray love; more: leftover links · cinematic roots of: ‘Flipped’ · trailer break: ‘Dinner for Schmucks’ · question of the weekend: What does the word ‘schmuck’ mean to you? · Dinner for Schmucks (review) · female gazing at: Paul Rudd bloggyprevious post: question of the day: Does Jet Blue flight attendant Steven Slater deserve to be a folk hero? next post: looks like ‘The New York Times’ A.O. Scott is a nasty feminazi |









pre-Disqus comments
posted by Daniel (Thu Aug 12 10, 2:05PM)
I saw this article a week ago, when it first showed up online, and found it kind of puzzling. Here in New York, the film was barely advertised at all, and the one review I saw said that the movie was terrible.
So my initial take was that the studio had more or less buried the film, and then belatedly tried to put a positive spin on the situation.
But maybe I'm wrong. Maybe there's a huge market for this sort of movie in Sacramento and Indianapolis that doesn't exist here in the big city. Or maybe the film got a lot of publicity on Nickelodeon or ABC Family or another channel I don't watch. Have other people had a different experience than mine? 'Cause, actually, I really liked Rob Reiner's early films, and I'd like to see him successful again.
posted by Nate (Thu Aug 12 10, 2:44PM)
The local critics where it has been released are salivating over it. I think Morgenstern is the only one who's outright panned it so far.
posted by RogerBW (proud subscriber) (Fri Aug 13 10, 7:21AM)
Judging purely by the trailer: does it have anything to say that hasn't been said many, many times before? I kept waiting for the point that would make this film any different from all the thousands of teen films that have already been made... and then the trailer ended.
(Context for this is my standard rant that a film coming out now isn't just competing with this month's new releases, it's competing with every film on Netflix, every film that's had a DVD release, etc.)