Internet Buzz as Promotion

[nerd4hire]

For almost a year, the Internet has been buzzing with hype about a movie called "Snakes on a Plane." Eventually the mainstream media picked up the buzz.

The message was clear: "SoaP" (as devotees call it) was the most eagerly awaited movie of the year. Watch out, George Lucas and Steven Spielberg! Move over, Harry Potter and Spider-Man! Here comes the new blockbuster franchise!

But on opening night, people were not exactly camping out at theaters. The AMC chain reported none of its shows sold out.

"SoaP" won the weekend, opening at No. 1, but its $15 million haul was far less than expected. It seems a lot of people were amused by the title but had no real interest in seeing the movie.

The studio can't blame bad reviews, because there were no advance screenings for critics. New Line explained that the movie was "for the fans." This prompted Entertainment Weekly to quip: "And we thought it was for the Oscar voters."

The movie's less-than-stellar reception was more proof that Internet buzz does not guarantee a hit. Joss Whedon learned this last year with "Serenity." Kevin Smith learned it last month with "Clerks II." Most people still discover movies through broadcast and print advertising "” and, yes, through reviews.

The writer goes on to suggest a priority of importance in promotion is critical success. The suggestion seems to be if the critics don't like it, it will bomb. That point might be taken with SoaP, but Serenity was for the most part a critical success. Ebert and Rober, among other high powered critics gave it positive reviews. Serenity however didn't get strong promotion from the studio in other media. So why didn't Serenity meet our expectations at the box office anyway? Was it lack of promotion outside the internet, or was it just the wrong film for the wrong time?