I agree to the creation of an account at FlickFilosopher.com.
When you log in for the first time via a social-media account, this site collects your email address to automatically create an account for you here. Once your account is created, you’ll be logged in to this account.
disagreeagree
connect withD
I agree to the creation of an account at FlickFilosopher.com.
When you log in for the first time via a social-media account, this site collects your email address to automatically create an account for you here. Once your account is created, you’ll be logged in to this account.
disagreeagree
please login to comment
8 Comments
oldest
newestmost voted
Inline Feedbacks
view all comments
RogerBW
Fri, May 13, 2016 9:03pm
“Look! Marketable faces!” Well, if that’s really all it takes to drag someone into the cinema…
The thing is, though, is anyone who is so young and restless that watching a two-minute trailer is an imposition going to be interested in a Tom Hanks movie. He’s like the granddad of those people.
Doesn’t matter if they hate it, as long as they pay?
I don’t know. Marketing people are often wrong, but their employment largely depends on being seen to be Doing Something, so it doesn’t really matter if they’re wrong as long as they keep changing stuff.
Not a new phenomenon — I was reading about it in the trades in the early Nineties, completely befuddled at the idea of Coca-Cola and Budweiser spending billions on campaigns and then dropping them, without doing any tracking research on results let alone what people were or weren’t responding to…
It reads/reeks of “what can we do to appeal to these kids who won’t get off our lawn AND have money to spend? I know, Kids These Days Like X!, we’ll put X! in an advertisment!”
In other words, a day ending in Y at Pym’s Publicity, Ltd…
Bluejay
Fri, May 13, 2016 10:01pm
The article was tl;dr. I just skimmed your headline and got all the info I needed. ;-)
But seriously: I wonder if this is also a way to have the trailer as a YouTube ad and communicate all the necessary info before the “Skip This Ad” button appears.
You have the correct answer. Longer ads (time before skip button) cost more. Companies spend the big bucks when you have to watch the full 30s ad before viewing your content.
Owen1120
Fri, May 13, 2016 11:10pm
I saw three of these at a recent screening of Civil War: Central Intelligence, The Secret Life of Pets, and The Shallows.
“Look! Marketable faces!” Well, if that’s really all it takes to drag someone into the cinema…
The thing is, though, is anyone who is so young and restless that watching a two-minute trailer is an imposition going to be interested in a Tom Hanks movie. He’s like the granddad of those people.
Doesn’t matter if they hate it, as long as they pay?
I don’t know. Marketing people are often wrong, but their employment largely depends on being seen to be Doing Something, so it doesn’t really matter if they’re wrong as long as they keep changing stuff.
Not a new phenomenon — I was reading about it in the trades in the early Nineties, completely befuddled at the idea of Coca-Cola and Budweiser spending billions on campaigns and then dropping them, without doing any tracking research on results let alone what people were or weren’t responding to…
It reads/reeks of “what can we do to appeal to these kids who won’t get off our lawn AND have money to spend? I know, Kids These Days Like X!, we’ll put X! in an advertisment!”
In other words, a day ending in Y at Pym’s Publicity, Ltd…
The article was tl;dr. I just skimmed your headline and got all the info I needed. ;-)
But seriously: I wonder if this is also a way to have the trailer as a YouTube ad and communicate all the necessary info before the “Skip This Ad” button appears.
You have the correct answer. Longer ads (time before skip button) cost more. Companies spend the big bucks when you have to watch the full 30s ad before viewing your content.
I saw three of these at a recent screening of Civil War: Central Intelligence, The Secret Life of Pets, and The Shallows.