REEL Rant: Viral Marketing
April 14th, 2008
I don’t get viral marketing. I’m talking about the kind of stuff they did for CLOVERFIELD, the utter insanity that is THE DARK KNIGHT currently, and the FORGETTING SARAH MARSHALL experience.
I like the idea behind, but what I’m baffled about is the financial angle. I can’t really see this kind of approach actually wooing over any fence-sitters. Don’t get me wrong, viral marketing is neat in theory, if not in financial practice. It seems to be an intention on the part of studios to reward – in a highly creative way – those who invest heavily in an upcoming release, catering to that investment by creating additional ways to immerse oneself in one’s own anticipation and the universe of the film. That’s exactly what makes no sense to me though. Let’s face it. I imagine most of the people who are getting involved with these campaigns are obsessive film geeks like myself. In other words, an audience that is pretty much a guaranteed ticket from the earliest stages of development of a film (like THE DARK KNIGHT). From a business point of view, what’s the point of investing money in catering to an audience that already wants to see your film?
Even more, most of this marketing seems to be occurring on the internet, and appealing to those who spend a significant amount of time there. And yes, the internet is a powerful place to advertise, but as SNAKES ON A PLANE proved, and maybe even CLOVERFIELD to a degree (I’d argue that the trailer in theatres with the decapitated Statue of Liberty sold the film more than any of its viral marketing), the internet is not enough to guarantee a film’s success.
Maybe my opinion comes down to my own inherent laziness. Yes, I’m a film geek who should – in theory – be all over this kind of thing, but for me it’s just too much of an investment of my time. I already want to see THE DARK KNIGHT really badly, I don’t need to surf something like fifteen viral fake sites, make a scavenger hunt like dash for a bowling alley, listen to fake press conferences, all for a film that already has my interest anyway. No matter how much I appreciate the intention and cleverness behind the idea, as well as the extreme effort and creativity used by all those involved.
Loading ...
Levi Says:
April 15th, 2008 at 9:30 am
I actually just started looking into Viral Marketing for my firm and so far, it seems like hit or miss. There are very few VM successes and many many flops.
But if you consider your own response to the Dark Knight previews and such, for example, as you have labelled yourself an “obsessive film geek” (which I will admit I also am), consider also that many of this “target group” may respond similarly. You posted a blog about it while I’m sure others have as well. This means more articles are written about the movies that have made their campaign so obviously a marketing campaign. In SEO, articles and blog posts are among the top key factors to optimize one’s internet presence. However, generally, one will pay hundreds of dollars to have bloggers post about them and twice as much to submit articles or press releases.
The meat of a VM campaign is essentially free. People do the talking for you, but you need to get them to talk.
Think about the obsessive tendencies of movie-goers. My roomate is a great example, as he is the kind of person that becomes obsessed to the point that he will buy your ticket, and another for himself, to a movie he has already seen, so that you will see it.
These marketing techniques target both sides of the fence and they encourage those people to pull others off the fence. In Viral Marketing, the LAST group a campaign should target is the middle of the run. You target one side to love you, the other side to hate you, then the two extremes have to talk about it (either how great or stupid it is) and those on the fence get caught up and are bound to fall to one side or the other.
At least, that’s what I’ve gathered so far, but I’m no professional, I’m just getting into this.