A cable channel all about movies.

As interesting as that sounds on the surface, there’s a part of me going, “Trailers and talkshows and reviewers and websites and the TVGuide channel and fastfood licensing and print ads aren’t enough?” I have the feeling it’s going to be too much like the Home Shopping Network for me to like it; I don’t care what *they* think is a good movie, I care what I and my friends and family think is a good movie, and *they* rarely agree with *us.*

I’ve been doing a lot of thinking lately, and I’ve come to the conclusion that Hollywood is full of idiots who only know one thing: marketing. They don’t know math, they don’t know science, and they don’t even really know good storytelling! The only thing they manage to do well is marketing, because they beat the public to death with those ads: pulse-pounding music, big explosions, romantic kisses, attractive people running around like chickens with their heads cut off…

Yeah, they make it look exciting, and people go to see it, and only later, when the emotional high has worn off, do we stop and notice (well, most of us, anyway - some notice in the middle;) that the plot really hinged on some nonsensical devices that couldn’t work in the real world. I mean, really, Batman Begins? It’s fun and angsty, but come on, a giant microwave that can boil water in pipes hundreds of feet below without harming the two men wrestling in the monorail car *right next to it*? Oh, and of course, the waterworks employees who didn’t know about pressure valves? Nobody could go open a fire hydrant to release the pressure?

How about Armageddon? It got pretty roundly trashed for the spinning space station with the floor on the wrong surface. Centrifugal force isn’t that complicated, guys. Also, apparently in October Sky the real Homer Hickham noticed a math error in the “figuring out where the rocket went” scene. They told him not to worry about it, since no one will see that part - it goes by too fast. The storytelling, too - if Hollywood was full of insightful productions, they wouldn’t be following every sudden “trend” and they certainly wouldn’t be losing audiences the way they are. Everyone wants a good story, so if the films are good stories, they’ll find an audience. They’re *guessing* on almost every movie, because they really have no idea why people like one movie over another, but like many ignorant people, they cover up their failings with bluster about how we ordinary people just don’t understand filmmaking and we should leave all the thinking to them because they’ve got it covered. NOT!

Nielsen to gauge TV viewing on Web, mobile devices

NEW YORK (Hollywood Reporter) - In a move with far-reaching implications for commercial television, Nielsen Media Research said Wednesday it plans to integrate TV with Internet ratings and to measure viewership for such portable devices as cell phones and iPods.

It’s about time.
Read the rest of this entry »

I really don’t care about Prairie Home Companion, though I have some qualms about the idea of a movie based upon it, but the most interesting part of this article is at the bottom, where the writer elaborates on the Word of Mouth Marketing Association.

Having never heard of them before, I was curious, so I searched for them and found their homepage. It’s important to recognize that word of mouth is the most powerful form of advertising. Filmmakers often forget that, because they’re too caught up in the “everybody’s doing it” mentality of TV trailers, Flash websites, and magazine ads. Bear in mind, though - consumers are not stupid. They know the producers pay to run ads, and they’ve seen enough great trailers made from lousy movies that they’re skeptical. Word of mouth, though, is inviolate; people trust their friends’ judgment, and yes, internet friendships still count. Win over a handful and watch them tell everyone else; word will spread, I promise.

Whether your film deserves good word of mouth is up to you to guarantee.

I’m not sure what I think of this, yet. There’s a certain amount of, “well, maybe if it’s entertaining,” but then I remember that TV and radio ads often fail to be entertaining even when they’re trying to be. I understand that entertainment has to be supported somehow, but live shows typically have tickets that really ought to cover the cost of the show. If I had any faith that it wouldn’t be abused and turn into “ad shows with a little bit of entertainment,” I’d be more interested in this new trend.

The strange thing is, I wrote this back in September 2004. I was sorting through stuff on my computer today and found it, and didn’t remember that I’d written it. I kept looking for an indication of what news website I’d saved it from. It’s a bizarre kind of self-flattery, I guess, to realize ‘Hey, I wrote that!’ Even more interesting to note that the studios are starting to try web downloading.

People are tired of commercials. Advertising is everywhere - billboards along the roads, commercials on TV and radio, flyers in the mail, spam in the email inbox, popups and banner ads on websites, posters at your favorite stores or restaurants - each one flashier and brighter than the last in a game of one-upmanship where everyone loses. Consumers grow jaded, and advertisers grow frantic.

People are also complaining about the low intellectual content of current TV fare. People have commented that higher intellectual capacity audiences are less likely to be influenced by the commercials, and thus it is in the best interest of advertisers (and, by extension, TV providers) to cater to the lower intellectual capacity audiences. More and more people are simply ceasing to watch TV.
Read the rest of this entry »