Kick Ass Promotion!

Why ‘Kick-Ass’ is Kicking Butt in Disk Sales?

Lionsgate announced yesterday that Kick Ass “proved dominant across all revenue channels this past week.” The film debuted in the number one position in DVD and Blu-ray sales – as well as the top movie download on iTunes since its release August 3rd.

The critical success of Kick-Ass hinted at the potential for excellent performance in home entertainment sales. While it wasn’t a huge surprise, for many of us, it offers a welcome sense of validation. Those of us who believed in the film’s potential for ‘cult’ success were rewarded with quantifiable proof this week.
Last April, there was much ado about nothing with regard to the film’s “failure at the box office.” In fact, the film was only a “failure” when measured against the inflated projections for opening weekend numbers – numbers that were based on perceived “audience awareness.” What these projections failed to consider was that the perceived awareness was isolated to a powerful, but segmented, fraction of the population at large – meaning an improper sampling. The blogosphere often becomes a self-cannibalizing entity and the response to Kick Ass illustrates that trend beautifully.


There was (an understandable) fan boy and girl fervor in anticipation of the film. One which lead credence to the notion that Kick Ass would strike it big opening weekend – and by big I mean projections forecast a $35 million open weekend – for a film that cost $25 million to make.

There was also an enormous influx of trailers, videos, and other marketing materials prior to the release of the film – a tactic that could have backfired, positioning the audience to rail against a film – as a result of overexposure. When the film failed to perform as projected, the blogosphere (unsurprisingly) jumped at the opportunity to write a bunch of snarky articles outlining the film’s financial shortcomings. To put that in perspective – remember the film cost $25 million and went on to make $96 million worldwide.



Here is what those projections failed to account for:

1. As mentioned, the “audience awareness” sampling came from a community predisposed to be aware of, and interested in, a film like Kick Ass – as well as its source material. Without a recognizable name attached, or broader brand appeal, that awareness wasn’t representative of the general movie-going audience.
2. Much of the target audience for Kick Ass was not old enough to take themselves to an R (hard R) rated movie, and this film is not an easy sell to parents. “Oh yes mom, can I please go see this film that features an adorable mass murdering twelve year old who makes liberal use of the ‘C’ word? Yep, it’s the very one Roger Ebert called ‘morally reprehensible’!”
3. How hopelessly square Americans really can be (this feeds off of number two on the list). Now, don’t misunderstand, I like Roger Ebert. I don’t always agree with him, but I like him. However he asked in his review if his response to Kick Ass made him “hopelessly square.” My response is – yes, yes it does.
4. Misinterpretation or rejection of the film’s central characters and story lines. Again this is a follow-up to number three on the list. I will use Mr. Ebert as the singular representative to a broad stick in the mud reaction to the film.

Many felt that the film was morally bereft due to its depiction of an exquisitely violent little girl. Emphasis on little girl. I contend that Hit Girl’s gender played a powerful subconscious role in some people’s negative reactions to her. Further, people felt that the film lacked a broader social message. To that I would ask: What kind of message would you like? A lie? Would you like to be told that good triumphs over evil every time and all is really simple and neat in the end?

I would follow those questions up with another: Is a film under an obligation to deliver a standard ‘moral of the story’ which is easily digestible by all? An idea already broadly accepted that adds nothing new to our cultural discussion? Or can it not simply be tons of fun and wickedly entertaining? I did myself the favor of steering clear of all the videos released for Kick Ass prior to its open. As a result I was both delighted and surprised with Chloe Moretz. I found Hit Girl’s action sequences alone enough to justify a trip to the movies.

However, I would argue that the film does in fact have a moral and societal message. A very simple message perhaps, but a clear one imbued in every moment of the movie. The message is this: You, even you, ordinary, non special “regular Joe” you who is just like ordinary, “regular Joe,” non special me can do something – so why don’t you? Why do you, do we instead just sit back and watch?
We see this in the character of Kick Ass himself. This perspective is clearly laid out in his “YouTube treatises,” but can also be seen in everything he tries, fails and succeeds at doing throughout the film. We see this theme play with Nick Cage as the  hilariously overzealous Big Daddy – crazy, but committed. We see this in Kick Ass’s love interest Katie who takes the more traditional social action route. We particularly see this in the character of the “bystander” who watches, but does nothing – and is eventually shot for it.

What Kick Ass does so beautifully is set itself up as a film that is going to be the “anti-comic book” movie, the one that breaks all the rules – and pokes fun at the accepted tropes of the genre. Then at a certain point (around the time of Big Daddy’s confrontation with his ex-partner) the film takes a turn and fulfills every aspect of a standard comic book tale. Kick Ass tells you it is making this turn by visually propelling us into the comic book world of Big Daddy’s creation. This is some fun and outstanding filmmaking.
Kick Ass felt like a film that was destined to be misunderstood in its initial release and then appreciated by a large cult audience as time progressed. The kids who could not get their parents to take them to the movie can now buy the DVD. Those who balk at $10 in the theater seem okay with $15 spent on the more permanent DVD or $25 for a Blu-ray.

“Word of mouth” has had a real chance to spread to the general population. Many “non-traditional” films have followed this same trajectory to cult film success. Some notable selections include; Blade Runner, Office Space, Fight Club, TV series would include Firefly, Freaks and Geeks and Arrested Development.

This article was written by Jennings Roth Cornet and first appeared on Screen Rant in 2010.

Kick Ass Succesfull Or Not Succesfull?

Updated: Deadline is reporting that Kick-Ass actually won the week by a narrow margin of $19.8 million to $19.6 million for How to Train Your Dragon.

I’m sitting in a giant echo-chamber of a movie theater complete with it’s old-style, curved panoramic screen and chairs that were ordered with gusto by someone in the 1950s. In the Century Park 16, tucked away from the rest of the bustling world in Tucson, Arizona, it’s no surprise that my afternoon screening of Kick-Ass is almost completely empty except for a trio of teens who are skipping school, a middle-aged man who’s slouched down in the back, and a couple that sneak in fifteen minutes into the action. There’s almost never a huge crowd there (which is part of why I love it), but the bad news for Matthew Vaughn and company is that the scene I witnessed was the norm, not an outlier. So now everybody is asking the proverbial question about how a movie with that much hype performs with such lackluster at the box office. After all, it came out with geeks screaming its praises from Butt-Numb-a-Thon, from South by Southwest, and from Austin in general. How could all of those positive reviews not lead to success? It’s fairly simple actually, but the first thing to remember is that Kick-Ass wasn’t a failure except at playing the expectations game. Let’s look at it in context: Kick-Ass is an indie film made for $30 million that just made $37 million world-wide by its U.S. opening weekend. Even with the average path a film takes through the theaters, the movie has already made its budget back, will make its advertising budget back by next weekend, and will ultimately be a financial success. It won’t be the smashing success that some predicted, but it will still be a success. Of course, those raw numbers don’t take into consideration the split between Lionsgate, the theaters, and the film’s producers, so technically the production team has not regained its original investment. However, a film (especially one with this type of budget) making an equitable number back on its opening weekend is a good sign that it will be on schedule to be a positive investment. People are shifting in their seats about sequel possibilities seeming out of reach now, which is a fine question to ask, but we’ll get to that after taking a look at why Kick-Ass didn’t explode out of the box.

‘R’ Does Not Stand For ‘Target Audience’.

 The film world does a metric ton of editorializing about the ratings system. In particularly, we talk a lot about how those secretive, old white people hurt the artistic process and the business model by slapping an R-rating on a film for seemingly arbitrary reasons. However, in the case of Kick-Ass, I think everyone can agree that it earned its R. Unfortunately, that rating doesn’t do well when your target audience is 14-year old boys. Those boys have a tough time getting into the theater without buying a ticket to How to Train Your Dragon. Am I saying that the numbers are inflated? Not exactly. I’ve always hated that argument because it’s so absolutely unprovable, but on the common sense level, I will make the bold claim that at least one whole ticket for the family fare ended up wandering into the wrong theater for some ultra-violence. Still, the ultimate obstacle there is creating a movie aimed at the younger set and then barring them from seeing it. It’s a simple case of conflicting goals – which is fine – especially considering that the filmmakers clearly weren’t making a film to maximize profits. Unfortunately, that’s a reality they’ll come face to face with over the course of the next few weeks.

Conservative Groups Don’t Matter, Do They?

 Usually there is a boost in sales when people threaten to protest. The do-gooders and morality policemen often have the opposite effect by increasing awareness and interest in a project, so many people are confused that Kick-Ass might have been hurt by the attention instead of helped. The only reason I can come up with is pointing out that there were no protests. For all the screaming about controversy on the internet, there were no major parental organizations that planned or executed protests – at least not on any sort of large scale to have an effect. All of the controversy talk about violence and children saying naughty words seemed to come directly from the filmmakers. And, you know, Roger Ebert. In this case, conservative groups don’t matter because they weren’t ever really in the equation. Perhaps attempting to drum up controversy only alerted some who were planning on seeing it to the very type of film. Without some flustered parent making a jackass of himself on national news networks, the film didn’t have that organic boost that comes from people buying a ticket just to see what has the Christian League of Conservative Christians of America all knotted up.

Then What About How to Train Your Dragon?

 It’s a nice tidy picture that a kid-friendly film launched back from the pack to beat the kid-friendly film with violence in it, but there’s no conspiracy here. Yes, How to Train Your Dragon moved from being 3rd back to 1st, but it also lost money. It also lost its #1 spot to a movie that got dragged through the mud upon opening (Clash of the Titans) and dropped all the way to 5th, and a comedy that is keeping a standard course in diminished ticket sales in its second week (Date Night). A simple look at the math from the previous weekend and this weekend shows that Dragon didn’t so much soar back into 1st as it limped past other films on a faster decline. Still, Kick-Ass failed to overtake it. It’s not a grand, conservative conspiracy, but the film earned every bit of its 2nd place finish.

No Names.

 The movie didn’t feature any big name talent (except for Nicolas Cage who didn’t happen to searching for any lost treasure), and that can definitely be a factor in breaking a movie beyond its built-in audience and out into the mainstream. This is a likely culprit, along with other factors, as to why the film didn’t bust right out of the gate. However, the reverse argument is also true in this case: a film with no known stars just made $20 million in one weekend.

Accidental Marketing.

 One other possible hypothesis is that Lionsgate just didn’t know how to market the film. There was a lot of red band material, but it was all shown to people already interested in going. Plus, most of the television spots all high-lighted the humor and camp which, some believe, led certain possible movie goers to think of it as a spoof along the lines of Superhero Movie (which opened with less than $10 million back in March of 2008). Yet again, another completely unprovable hypothesis. Plus, it’s one that sounds moronic considering that, yes, there was humor in the trailers but, no, it was miles away from anything in the spoof world. Even the casual television watcher could have seen a noticeable lack of Leslie Nielsen in the Kick-Ass trailer. Still, with that conspiracy theory unprovable, it still stands to reason that there was a failure in marketing here that was augmented by the challenge outlined earlier in selling a comic book movie to kids who won’t be allowed into the theaters without an adult.

Will There Be a Sequel?

 I don’t know. I don’t know because I’m not Mark Millar or Matthew Vaughn. I’m sure that there are some conversations to have, but the important thing to remember here is that the film was actually a success at the box office. It wasn’t a huge success, it wasn’t the kind of success that people preached about, but based purely on the numbers, the film is in the money. As an indie film picked up for distribution from Lionsgate, it is in a unique position. This isn’t like Spider-Man where Sony had a target number and executives waiting to give the go-ahead based on ROI. This is a film that is in its own driver’s seat. That driver’s seat might be occupied by Lionsgate now, but all the talk about the film failing or not deserving a sequel is a bit absurd. If there’s a fan base there, and if the production cost can be kept low, and if the artists want to see what else they can do with the material, and if Chloe Moretz thinks of something more offensive to say, then I don’t see why there wouldn’t be a sequel. And all of those seem well within the realm of the possible. Especially the part about Moretz. I hear she can curse like a sailor. To every geek out there slapping his or her forehead, and for everyone currently wringing their hands about whether a sequel will be made, please take a deep breath. Count to ten. Take a ride on your jet pack. Kick-Ass was a success even if it doesn’t exactly feel that way.

This article was written by Cole Abaius and first appeared on Film School Rejects in 2010.

The Pilot Scene To LOST

Mine&Toms Lost Observations

Lost- Jack on Prezi

Important key Terms For Audience and Institution

An institution (in the film industry)
Definition: any company or organisation that produces, distributes or exhibits films. The BBC makes films with their BBC Films arm; Channel4's Film Four produces films, Working Title also produce films, as does Vertigo Films, etc. Some institutions need to join with other institutions which distribute films. Vertigo Films is able to distribute its own films, Channel Four distributed Slumdog Millionaire through Pathe. Working Title's distribution partner is Universal, a huge US company which can make, distribute and show films. The type of owner ship within an institution matters as, for instance, Channel 4 and the BBC are able to show their own films at an earlier stage than other films made by other institutions. They are also better placed to cross-promote their in-house films within their media organisations. Use you work on Film Four as the basis for most of what you write, Moon is a good cross comparison as Duncan Jones had to create his own institution just to get the film made.


Distribution and Marketing
Definition: the business of getting films to their audiences by booking them for runs into cinemas and taking them there in vans or through digital downloads; distributors also create the marketing campaign for films producing posters, trailers, websites, organise free previews, press packs, television interviews with the "talent", sign contracts for promotions, competitions, etc. Distributors use their know-how and size to ensure that DVDs of the film end up in stores and on supermarket shelves. Distributors also obtain the BBFC certificate, and try to get films released as the most favourable times of the year for their genre, etc.
Examples:Universal distributed Working Title's The Boat That Rocked; Pathe distributedFilm4 and Celadors' Slumdog Millionaire after the original US distributor, Warner Independent went out of business. TRON was heavily marketed across a variety of mediums, Moon struggled to get press attention and Duncan Jones had to really push the film  in obscure places like Popular Mechanics etc. The Kings Speech was distributed by Momentum (a susiduary of Aliance films) who are a major independent film distributor.


ExhibitionDefinition: showing films in cinemas or on DVD. Media attention through opening nights and premieres How the audience can see the film: in cinemas, at home, on DVD, through downloads, through television, including premieres, the box office take in the opening weeks; audience reviews which includes those of the film critics, ordinary people, cinemas runs; awards in festivals, The Oscars, BAFTAS, etc.
Examples:
Slumdog Millionaire almost never got distribution. Its early US distributor, Warner Independent was a victim of the economic downturn and went out of business. The film's makers then struggled to find a distributor! Then Fox Searchlight stepped up and "the rest is history". The 8 out of 10 Oscar nomination wins ensured that the film has been the greatest British success in awards and in box office for nearly 60years.
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/boyle-reveals-slumdog-millionaire-was-nearly-never-made-1331821.html . Motherhood

took just £86!
Moon. Initially Sony Pictures Worldwide were due to distribute the film but they specialise in straight to DVD features. Following positive reaction following its Sundance film festival the rights were acquired by Sony Classic Pictures who gave the film a limited release in the US in Cities like New York and LA.

Exchange
Definition: The unintended use of an institution’s media text (i.e. a film) by OTHER PEOPLE who use the film or parts of it to form new texts. What happens to a film, etc. after the public get their hands on it using digital technology. 
Examples:People unconnected to the institution/ film using WEB 2.0 applications such as YOUTUBE, Blogger, Amazon film message boards, TWITTER, Face-Book, discuss the film or edit parts of together to form a new text which the may then put a new soundtrack to and publish on YOUTUBE, etc. When you add a trailer from a site like YouTube on your blog you have been engaging with exchange. Look back to MArk Kermodes video regarding piracy and the new release strategies for films like Ken Loach's "Route Irish" (Loach has reportedly steeled himself for a frosty response from critics and anticipates an underwhelming box office, noting the difficulty he faced securing a distribution deal. Though pragmatic in his view that “people don’t make films to communicate; they make it as a commodity”,an unorthodox release strategy utilising Sky Movies Premier - which will place the film (and by extension, its subject matter) in a wider public sphere than it might otherwise have reached – suggests he hasn’t given up on pedagogy entirely.) or the Jack Ass 3 release on DVD and Sky Box Office.


Vertical and Horizontal Integration
Definition: Absorption into a single firm of several firms involved in all aspects of a product's manufacture from raw materials to distribution.
Example:Vivendi Universal have integrated film, music, web and distribution technology into the company, including owning big stakes in cables and wires that deliver these services. Therefore they are vertically integrated because they own all the different companies involved in film, from production to distribution to exhibition. They are also horizontally integrated because they have all the expertise for producing media content under one roof – films, TV, magazines, books, music, games thus being able to produce all the related media content for one film under the same roof (see synergy). This is important for the control the institution has over their product/film.


Synergy/Synergies 
Definition: The interaction of two or more agents (institutions/companies) to ensure a larger effect than if they acted independently. This is beneficial for each company through efficiencies in expertise and costs. 
Examples:Working Title know how to make films and they have formed a business partnership with Universal, a massive US company, who have the experience and size in the marketplace (cinemas, stores, online, etc.) to distribute them. (They create the marketing campaign to target audiences through posters, trailers, create the film’s website, free previews, television and press interviews featuring “the talent”, drum up press reviews, word of mouth, and determine when a film is released for the best possible audience and the type of release: limited, wide, etc.) Channel Four’s Film 4 and Celador Films(Celador also produce Who Wants to Be A Millionaire and films, too) benefited by pooling their know-how, experience and expertise to jointly produce Slumdog Millionaire. These companies formed a business relationship with France’s Pathe to distribute this film. In the UK Pathe helped create the poster, trailer, website, etc. In the USA the film found another distributor after being nominated for the Oscars.


Viral MarketingDefinition: A marketing technique aiming at reproducing "word of mouth" usually on the internet and through existing social networks. YouTube Video pastiches, trailers, interviews with cast members, the director, writer, etc. You can find interviews of “the talent” trying to gain publicity for your case study films on YouTube. Find some clips from the films we have studied to help you in the exam.
Guerilla MarketingDefinition: The use of unconventional and low cost marketing strategies to raise awareness of a product. The aim is usually to create “buzz” and “word of mouth” around a film. Unusual stunts to gain publicity (P.R.) on the film’s opening weekend, etc.
Examples:Sasha Baron Cohen created “buzz” before the release of his film “Borat” by holding fake press conferences. The studio also accessed the popularity of YouTube by releasing the first 4 minutes of the movie on YouTube, a week before it’s release, which can then be sent virally across the nation. At a special viewing of “Bruno” Cohen landed on Eminem “butt first” from the roof MTV Awards venue, dressed in as an angel outfit with rents in the rear end.


Media Convergence
Definition 1: Convergence of media occurs when multiple products come together to form one product with the advantages of all of them. 
Examples:More and more films are being marketed on the Internet and on mobile phones. You no longer need even to buy the DVDs or CDs as you can download films and music directly to your laptop, Mac or PC. Blue Ray DVDs can carry more features than ordinary DVDs and can be played on HD televisions and in home cinemas for enhanced/cinematic picture quality. You can save films on SKY digital, Free-box digital players, etc. You mobile phone has multiple features and applications. With media and technological convergence this is growing year on year. Play-Stations, X-Boxes and the Wii can can connect with the Internet and you can play video games with multiple players.


Technological Convergence

Definition 2: The growing interractive use of digital technology in the film industry and media which enables people to share, consume and produce media that was difficult or impossible just a few years earlier.
Examples:For instance, the use of new software to add special effects in editing; the use of blue-screen; using new types of digital cameras like the one Danny Boyle used in “Slumdog Millionaire” (The Silicon Imaging Camera to shoot high quality film in tight spaces); you can use the Internet to download a film rather than go see it in the cinema; you can watch it on YouTube; you can use special editing programs like Final Cut Pro to edit bits of a film, give it new soundtrack and upload it on YouTube; you can produce illegal, pirate copies on DVDs from downloads and by converting the film’s format; you can buy Blue Ray DVDs with greater compression which allows superior viewing and more features on the DVD; distributors can use digital software to create high concept posters; cinemas can download films to their projection screens and do not have to depend on a van dropping off the film! The is also the Digital Screen Network. There are tons of ways in which technological convergence affects the production, distribution, exhibition and exchange by prosumers. ( A prosumer is someone who not only consumes (watches films) but also writes about them the Net, blogs and make films out of them, often uploading them on sites like YouTube, etc.

A Mainstream FilmDefinition: A high budget film that would appeal to most segments of an audience: the young, boys, girls, teenagers, young people, the middle aged, older people, the various classes in society. Distributors often spend as much or more than the film cost to make when distributing mainstream films that are given wide or universal releases.
Example:

The Boat That Rocked was a mainstream idea and was given the mainstream treatment on wide release. The film flopped at the UK box office on release ( and has not done too well since mid November 2009 on release in the USA. This was mostly because of its poor reviews, particularly from “Time-Out”. However, when young and older audiences see the DVD they generally like the film because of its uplifting storyline and the well-chosen soundtrack.


Art House FilmsDefinition: A low budget independent film that would mostly appeal to an educated, higher class audience who follow unusual genres or like cult directors that few people have heard of. Therefore it is usually aimed at a niche market. Foreign films often come under this category.
Examples: The low budget film, Once (2007) which found a specialised, boutique distributor in Fox Searchlight fits this label. (FOX the mainstream company usually distributes big budget film and blockbusters); So does “Juno” from 2008 which began as a low budget film about teenage pregnancy that the big studios thought too risky to touch – but it found popularity through its touching storyline, engaging music and its Oscar nomination for best script. Like “Slumdog Millionaire” the film crossed over between art-house cinemas and audiences to mainstream ones because of the recognition it received from Canadian film festivals and award ceremonies like Britain’s BAFTAS and the Hollywood’s Oscars.

Ratings bodies BBFC - The British Board of Film Classification

How your institutions films are rated will affect audiences in so far as WHO can see them. Remember that sex scenes, offensive language, excessive violence, the use of profanity, etc. can affect the rating and certificate the film receives and therefore affect who is able to see the film.

Asumptions & Steriotypes

What do you think of this man? What do you think he does?

When I first looked at this man I saw his patched up jeans, his scruffy beard, trousers that appear to be too short for him, his un-neatly button clothes and assumed that he was some sort of tramp, a homeless person cant afford new clothes exectra exectra but... If you look carefully those patches on his jeans are rather neat and those short trousers are folded neatly and the bottom and are neat and appeared to be ironed, his clothes in fact look brand new except for the rather stupid looking patches on his trousers, and this is because they probably are this man works for one of the most luxury fashion brands in the world Ralph Lauren and has a very important role in the way that there stores look on the inside.



Same questions again what do you think of him? and what did he do?

First impressions he looks like and intelligent man, he is well dressed in what looks to be quite fancy clothes, he looks neat and tidy, he has shaven, hair isn't over grown he looks as if he is quite well of. He looks to me like a teacher or a lawyer, he is reading some papers, which could be students work or papers in court, and as it turns out he is reading papers in court as a lawyer but his own lawyer, because if you didnt reconise this man you probaly should as this man is serial killer, and is know to have killed over 30 people, so I certainly wouldnt want him as my teacher, and this man got close enough to kill so many people becuase of how he looked and acted so the way he looked lead people to asume that he was a nice guy trying to do a nice thing.

And the same again.

I saw this women and thought oh dear, what was she thinking and I know absolutly nothing about fashion an even I know that that is bad, she looks like a rainbow gone wrong, with alot of abstract coloured clothing the funny hat, blue hair the list goes on, I thought that she was a slightly crazy acentric old women that had got lost on the way to the supermarket, but she is one of the most respected women in fashion called Anna Piaggi, she was a writer for Italian Vouge, she had a collection of clothes that includes 2,865 dresses and 265 pairs of shoes and never wore the same outfit out in pulblic more that once.

When we first see people we judge them buy what they look and dress like and relate that to people that we have seen before or things that we see on TV, and what we see then becomes a stero type for anyone else we see dressed like that and that can lead to some seroius missjudgements.