quote:
No they aren't. Advertising =/= Marketing. What exactly did you major in at Ole Miss to not know the difference? I'll make it easier for you: Advertising = Trailer. Marketing = where you put the trailer. They trailer placements were just fine. They promoted the movie enough. It was the content that was the problem, not the placement. Savvy?

I'm aware of the fricking difference, they're just extremely intertwined, to where if one fails, the other does as well. Marketing should question everything advertising does and vice versa. Its equally their fault.

quote:
No it wasn't. Hell either you or another poster said that movies with the title Mars in it don't do as well. Hell when some people see Mars in the title, they get turned off by it. They wanted to emphasize the character John Carter in their title as it was HIS story they were telling. You don't call it Thor of Asgard or Iron Man of Malibu. I know you are going to say "YEAH BUT NO ONE KNOWS WHO HE IS RUBBARUBBARUBBARUBBA". That's why they should have emphasized that he and his story were the original space/sci-fi story. This story literally did influence the stories of Star Wars, Avatar, and scores of old school sci-fi/space-related movies. They didn't wise up until the last week of advertising and by then they had already fricked up their first and second impressions. Seriously whoever thought putting a faggy arse Peter Gabriel song in the trailer for a sci-fi adventure film deserves to be fired, only to be hired again a week later and fired once more. What next? Celine Dion's Titanic song for the The Avengers 2 trailer?

And you really think you're fooling anyone GCA.

3 ...

Report Post

Posted by Kafka

I am the moral conscience of TD

Member since Jul 2007

142456 posts

Posted on 11/18/12 at 3:43 am to OMLandshark

This film has apparently made $117 (not $117K -- $117, period) at the box office so far:

LINK

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by Pectus

Internet

Member since Apr 2010

67302 posts

Posted on 11/18/12 at 9:20 am to OMLandshark

OMLandshark is right in his assessment.

All these movies made by Disney that didn't get their investment back were a matter of advertisement and marketing versus product.

John Carter was a great movie and if you didn't know what it was about, then the "of Mars" would have helped.

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by TheBiggestSpur

Member since Oct 2012

1049 posts

Posted on 11/18/12 at 4:52 pm to OMLandshark

quote:

I'm aware of the fricking difference, they're just extremely intertwined, to where if one fails, the other does as well. Marketing should question everything advertising does and vice versa. Its equally their fault.

No, it's not, but keep thinking that.