-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Wonder Woman set to pass $400M domestic today, after 68 days in release
- Thread starter kswiston
- Start date
Lol, yeah. Makes that Mystery of the Wonder Woman Marketing thread even sillier now. Bobby was lucky he escaped tagging on that one
Mighty Chin
Banned
I liked about 80% of this movie. I will rewatch again but I'm pretty sure that ending won't change.
To be fair to some of the people quoted, it did only hit $100M opening weekend thanks to stellar reviews. And doubting Stellar reviews in a cinematic universe that had received mediocre reviews at its peak wasn't completely crazy.
Wonder Woman opened like a mid-sized comic film heading towards $250M domestic, but instead made over $400M. Part of the reason that legs are record breaking for the genre is because marketing failed to completely convince the target audience to go. That took word of mouth.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
Eh I don't know what sort a marketing someone would have envisioned that would convince enough of the audience to turn up launch week to cause WW to reach 400 million with usual CB drops.
I don't know of a single CB movie that opened with it's first movie lke that. So to say the marketing failed because it didn't reach that seems pretty inaccurate.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
This has come up before:
1) I didn't write the article.
2) the article was pretty popular before I made a thread about it
3) the marketing isn't why the movie made 400 mil
Like, just because the movie was a phenomenon with legs not seen for over 10 years doesn't mean those legs are due to how well Warner Bros sold the film, and definitely not due to how well Warners was selling the film at the time that article was written (and then when the thread was made).
The marketing did ramp up, yes. And it got better! These are good things. These are the things people were wanting back when the article got published. That they got them shouldn't be seen as a "Gotcha." And I don't get the framing of it as such, either, unless you're looking to seriously back the notion that raising questions regarding the competency of corporate marketing is some sort of taboo, and that public displays of distrust in that regard are somehow out-of-bounds. This board would probably look a lot different if that were the case.
There's a real loose, floozy relationship with cause & effect going on that I don't wanna shame or anything, the way you choose to love is your business, but if you'd like something a little more solid and meaningful, there are better ways to go about it.
Thanks K-Swiss!
An opening in Suicide Squad or Deadpool's range would have given Wonder Woman $400M with more typical legs. Still good superhero legs, granted, but not a run that hasn't happened in close to 30 years. Both of those films happened last year, so it isn't some impossible feat for a non-sequel.
Marketing undersold the film. If it wasn't for the amazing reviews (and WOM), the opening would have missed $100M.
The marketing was fine. There was way to much focus on tv spots as that was the only thing. Five weeks before release WW had more money spent on marketing then SS. Because the focus was way more on Kids Choice awards, NCCA finals, Supergirl tv show and more focus on woman magazines etc. The marketing blew up in the last month. And buzz for the movie was crazy at the perfect moment. There was a intresting article with the lead marketing from WB. Cant find it anymore. That they learned from SS by focusing way more. Instead of a shit ton clips etc.
The Drum also has a nice write up about the marketing.
http://www.thedrum.com/news/2017/06...keting-outlining-nuanced-campaign-warner-bros
The Drum also has a nice write up about the marketing.
http://www.thedrum.com/news/2017/06...keting-outlining-nuanced-campaign-warner-bros
Principate
Saint Titanfall
Neither suicide squad or dead pool reached 400+ million and dead pool had the best marketing we've probably seen of a comic book movie and suicide squad was an ensemble of a bunch of popular stars a and characters. So your point really is out there since you don't have a single comparable result.
The chances of Wonder woman even as good a marketing as dead pool was low as it's just not that sort of movie and character. Word of mouth would have always played a big part of this movie's success regardless of the marketing. It's just not that easy of a movie to sell.
TheTylerDurden
Member
Here's how you should look at the ending:
Ares is trying to convince Diana that she needs to help him destroy mankind. So it's a back and forth of taunting and toying with her - not trying to kill her. He wants her alive and on his side.
Remember: up until the point where she kills Ludendorf, she is convinced that Ludendorf is the God of War. When she kills him and nothing changes, her faith about everything she knows is destroyed. Steve only adds to this pain by confirming for her that yes, man is capable of war all on their own. She is crushed to realize this, and has no faith in mankind.
When the real Ares appears, his campaign to win over Diana begins but Diana at the very least knows that destroying mankind is wrong so the fight begins. When she sees Steve's sacrifice and 'relives' her final moment with him, she realizes that love and sacrifice are the better part of mankind.
She now knows her mission was correct ALL along, and her faith in mankind is restored. So she unleashes the full brunt of her powers on Ares and destroys him. Keep in mind that all through the fight, we see Diana learning about her hidding powers and doing more and more. The end where she is able to absorb the lighting from Ares and use it for herself is a huge surprise to Ares (look at his reaction) and Diana is also pleasantly surprised to see that she can control it as well. So you not only get the conflict between the two of them, you get Diana's evolution of her powers in that scene.
Remember: up until the point where she kills Ludendorf, she is convinced that Ludendorf is the God of War. When she kills him and nothing changes, her faith about everything she knows is destroyed. Steve only adds to this pain by confirming for her that yes, man is capable of war all on their own. She is crushed to realize this, and has no faith in mankind.
When the real Ares appears, his campaign to win over Diana begins but Diana at the very least knows that destroying mankind is wrong so the fight begins. When she sees Steve's sacrifice and 'relives' her final moment with him, she realizes that love and sacrifice are the better part of mankind.
She now knows her mission was correct ALL along, and her faith in mankind is restored. So she unleashes the full brunt of her powers on Ares and destroys him. Keep in mind that all through the fight, we see Diana learning about her hidding powers and doing more and more. The end where she is able to absorb the lighting from Ares and use it for herself is a huge surprise to Ares (look at his reaction) and Diana is also pleasantly surprised to see that she can control it as well. So you not only get the conflict between the two of them, you get Diana's evolution of her powers in that scene.
To me, the final act is far too simply interpreted as a CGI crapfest 'lets fite' kind of thing. It's too bad, but looking at the story much more deeply makes this final act make so much more sense. The CGI isn't terrible at all, but I can see how it might look a little layered and call attention to itself. It's absolutely not the worst CGI but certainly not the best. It services the story.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
I don't think you understood K-Swiss' argument though. Or maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're trying to say.
Wonder Woman didn't hit $400 mil based on the strength of its marketing. So using Wonder Woman's total as proof that its marketing did the best job it could have done doesn't really track. Saying "But Deadpool didn't hit 400 mil" doesn't really address the point, because Deadpool's word of mouth wasn't anywhere near as good as Wonder Woman's. It was good, no doubt - films (especially R-rated films) don't make that much money without people genuinely loving them and telling others about them. But Suicide Squad had bad word of mouth, and its run showed that. However, both films had much bigger openings than Wonder Woman did, and one of the best (if not the best) measures of a film's marketing campaign is that opening weekend.
Deadpool had great marketing, yes. That's not the argument. The argument was that, at the time of the article's being released (again: I didn't write it, I just linked it here for discussion, hah) Warners was being criticized for not having pushed Wonder Woman as strongly has they had Suicide Squad, or most any other DCEU movie in a similar time frame. People were setting Wonder Woman's bar, both marketing-wise and financially, at Doctor Strange.
That Deadpool and Suicide Squad had much bigger opening weekends but shorter legs and smaller domestic runs in total doesn't disqualify the idea that Wonder Woman's marketing could have been better. If anything, it proves it even moreso.
It's certainly a more considered argument than some chopped together facebook meme from a fan page Theorry visits
Lmao.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
I didn't make you post that
Principate
Saint Titanfall
Deadpool had great word of mouth It's box office worldwide and domestic total still sits in the same range as WW despite being R rated so to say it's word of mouth wasn't anywhere near WW is just plain false.
My point of contention is that is that K-Swiss that stated that part of the reason why WW had such great legs was due to it's failure in Marketing while stating two of the best marketted comic book movies in history one of which with great word of mouth whose tone is completely different to that of WW. My point being I conidering the circumstances I don't think WW not perfoming at opening like the two best marketed comic book movies to have failed is a fair point in the first place.
My point had nothing to do with the arguement and what rumour nonsense that entailed it but I will say it was never a shock to me that WB didn't start trying to fight for primetime slots during a time marvel were in full swing marketing Guardians of the Galaxy 2 a movie that went on to gross 388 million domestically.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
That wasn't what he said at all, though. You're seeing a cause & effect that isn't there. The legs weren't good because the marketing was bad. The marketing wasn't even bad. It just was late, and probably not as good as it could have been - although that's harder to prove because we're speculating on some potential marketing campaign we never got.
But it was kinda late-ish.
The point was that had the marketing been better, Wonder Woman's domestic total would have crossed $400mil awhile ago, because it would have had a better opening weekend than the one it did. It would have had a stronger start, which is what marketing is supposed to provide a film - a great jump out of the gate.
It's not "bad marketing = better legs." That's not the argument being made.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
Bobby Roberts
Banned
I believe he's speaking about the multiplier being as high as it is because the opening weekend was lower? I don't wanna speak for him, but that's how I read it. It's part of the same point I'm making - the legs look extra impressive because the opening was probably a little lower than it would have been had the marketing landed at full force, which it didn't.
It was a decent marketing campaign. It got a late start. It led to a 100mil open, but even then that open was part of the word of mouth (from critics, specfically) being what it was, and not so much from the commercials/spots.
If I'm misreading his intent, I'm sure he'll clear me up, and I apologize for adding to the misunderstanding that's happening.
Further: The notion that Warners was smart not to increase marketing because other superhero movies were also advertising their own movies doesn't really make sense, and didn't when people were bringing that up back in the spring: It always read like a basic application of the logic surrounding scheduling the movies themselves. People appeared to be going "well, you can't put a movie next to another movie because people will only choose one and you might lose out so you gotta space the movies apart."
But people don't "choose" to watch commercials that way. They just come on. You don't have to do anything but be in front of a screen to watch them. The idea that commercials have to clear out of other commercials way just doesn't make any sense. That's not really how selling things works, and the evidence is plentiful once you look back at basically anything. The Super Bowl would not work as it does if companies were worried about people not watching their ad because they could watch some other ad if they wanted, for example.
Ads aren't movies. Scheduling ads like you schedule theatrical runs isn't how that's done.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
It has nothing to do with choose it has everything to do with cost. I'm not not even sure why your even making that arguement. Everything costs money marketing prime time and competing with someone else at at the same time to get those best slots costs money. That would have to been offset by the opening weekend and we're talking like a 10-15 million increase opening weekend if we're generous as all the other problems that went into that launch still existed. Dimishing returns is what I was talking about. WB was conservative but it's wasn't some shocking and crazy thought process.
QuantumBro
Banned
Bobby Roberts
Banned
I don't understand what you're trying to say, Prince. Competing with someone else is the whole point of marketing. You don't wait for other people to stop selling their product before you start selling yours. Otherwise nobody would sell shit.
Again - you're treating the scheduling of commercials like they're little movies, and as such they have to be slotted like movies are slotted into a calendar. That's not really the same thing. That's not really how they work. Spending money to advertise your big budget blockbuster at the same time another studio is also spending money to advertise their big budget blockbuster isn't a mistake. It's a necessity.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
Opportunity costs, returns on investment and timing. Do you think every company tries to market during the superbowl ad breaks? Sure the reach of those ads are great but if the RoI on those ads is not paying themselves Your going to have to reconsider. Spiderman homecoming was marketed a fuck ton and also got great reviews and opened above WW by only 17 million despite being by far the bigger brand of the two.
It may not have been the best thought process but considering WW likely expectations it wasn't crazy.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
I'm familiar with the concepts, yeah. The idea that Warners was somehow handcuffed by these factors and that's what led to Wonder Woman's marketing being what it was (and that it was good enough, and probably couldn't have been any better) is basically what we're arguing at this point. I don't know that I buy that Warners did the best they could to sell the film that ended up rescuing their entire Superhero program.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
Of course not because that wasn't their expectation of it in the first place that was obvious to all to see. My point was it's lack of marketing at the time wasn't some shocking mystery either, they were clearly trying to conservative with it but hardly sending it out die.
Wonder Woman' And 'Frozen' Both Topped $400M Despite Allegedly Mediocre Marketing
Seems appropriate to add to the discussion.
Seems appropriate to add to the discussion.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
Fuckin' Mendelsson.
That's a lot of words for the same bullshit-ass "well it made a lot of money so obviously the marketing worked flawlessly" argument that isn't all that solid.
At least the chunky-ass facebook meme was brief.
edit: holy shit is he caking himself in liquid cynicism.
That's a lot of words for the same bullshit-ass "well it made a lot of money so obviously the marketing worked flawlessly" argument that isn't all that solid.
At least the chunky-ass facebook meme was brief.
edit: holy shit is he caking himself in liquid cynicism.
I wasn't saying that the marketing on Wonder Woman was bad. I don't think that it turned people off the film. I just think that it failed to convince people that Wonder Woman was a film they needed to see. Hence the Thursday previews start that was about the same as Doctor Strange, despite the reviews, and the fact that Wonder Woman is easily in the top 5 in terms of popular superheroes prior to their first film adaptations. The other 4 would be be Superman, Batman, Spider-Man, and Hulk. Three of those set records for weekend grosses on their debuts. Hulk was poorly received and still managed the 15th best debut of all time at release. Wonder Woman was fantastically received and managed #40.
Why did WB put less of an emphasis on selling their third most popular superhero than they did on something like Suicide Squad? Wonder Woman has a central role in their expanded universe, while Suicide Squad was very much a peripheral film. How would the film have fared if it received a more typical superhero reception, instead of being viewed as a summer zeitgeist which avoided a lot of the problems people have with both the DCEU and MCU films?
In the end, it didn't really matter. Wonder Woman found its audience, thanks to the reviews, the word of mouth, the public narrative surrounding the film after release, etc. However, I don't think that you can just take all that for granted after the fact and say that the marketing for film was good enough. I think that WB owes more to Patty Jenkins and her crew, and to the terrible slate of May-June films, than they do to their marketing team. Even if it wasn't bad, I don't think that it can be disputed that Wonder Woman received the weakest marketing effort in the DCEU to date. Man of Steel had fantastic marketing. Suicide Squad had fantastic marketing. BvS's marketing would have been fantastic if we ignore the hiccup in trailer 2 that revealed too much about what we were actually getting quality-wise.
Frozen set and still holds the opening record for Thanksgiving weekend, topping Tangled by $25M over the 5-days, and Toy Story 2 by $13M. Disney has 9 of the top 10 openings that weekend, so it is well tested ground for them. How much better was it supposed to do?
Why did WB put less of an emphasis on selling their third most popular superhero than they did on something like Suicide Squad? Wonder Woman has a central role in their expanded universe, while Suicide Squad was very much a peripheral film. How would the film have fared if it received a more typical superhero reception, instead of being viewed as a summer zeitgeist which avoided a lot of the problems people have with both the DCEU and MCU films?
In the end, it didn't really matter. Wonder Woman found its audience, thanks to the reviews, the word of mouth, the public narrative surrounding the film after release, etc. However, I don't think that you can just take all that for granted after the fact and say that the marketing for film was good enough. I think that WB owes more to Patty Jenkins and her crew, and to the terrible slate of May-June films, than they do to their marketing team. Even if it wasn't bad, I don't think that it can be disputed that Wonder Woman received the weakest marketing effort in the DCEU to date. Man of Steel had fantastic marketing. Suicide Squad had fantastic marketing. BvS's marketing would have been fantastic if we ignore the hiccup in trailer 2 that revealed too much about what we were actually getting quality-wise.
Frozen set and still holds the opening record for Thanksgiving weekend, topping Tangled by $25M over the 5-days, and Toy Story 2 by $13M. Disney has 9 of the top 10 openings that weekend, so it is well tested ground for them. How much better was it supposed to do?
Sgt. Kabukiman
Banned
Just playing Devil's advocate, but prior to WW's release, I can totally see why they would invest more in a movie starring the Joker, Harley Quinn, Will Smith and guest-starring Batman rather than in a solo Wonder Woman movie taking place in World War 1. WW might be part of the DC trinity but the Joker is easily one of the most popular fictional villains ever. In hindsight, it's easy to poke holes in their marketing strategy but I think they did a solid job overall. They went with the Fox blitzkrieg approach instead of the long-term investments of BvS and Suicide Squad and it worked out quite well for them in the end.
I wonder how they'll handle Aquaman. Will they try to replicate the WW strategy or now that they're emboldened, will they bet all their chips on that film? Should be interesting.
Not sure if marketing deserves a carte blanche, as at least overseas performance warrants a second look. Not sure if I ever saw a WW ad on a site here in Germany. Mind you, my anecdotal evidence is worthless.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
Mendelsson gonna Mendelsson.
Here's a thing I was thinking though:
Does Forbes actually pay him? Or did he simply use their free platform as a means to build himself a legitimate audience? I was under the impression "Forbes Contributor" is an easy enough to attain title based on the way their blogging works.
At which point, I think maybe K-Swiss needs to take his analysis and just - start putting it there. Because if all it takes for Mendelsson to Mendelsson is to consistently post blogs at Forbes, it shouldn't be too hard for K-Swiss to outclass the man under the same umbrella.
Here's a thing I was thinking though:
Does Forbes actually pay him? Or did he simply use their free platform as a means to build himself a legitimate audience? I was under the impression "Forbes Contributor" is an easy enough to attain title based on the way their blogging works.
At which point, I think maybe K-Swiss needs to take his analysis and just - start putting it there. Because if all it takes for Mendelsson to Mendelsson is to consistently post blogs at Forbes, it shouldn't be too hard for K-Swiss to outclass the man under the same umbrella.
I think that Mendelson does a lot of their official box office stuff, but presumably on a per article basis instead of in a staff position.
His Forbes work is a mixture of commissioned articles and personal blog stuff.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
USURP HIM
Bobby Roberts
Banned
I didn't say anything about him leaving his job, Jesus.
I just want him to swoop in on his free time, kneecap Mendelsson, and end his fearsome reign as cynical, cruel ruler of all box-office at Forbes.
That's like... a Tuesday for K-Swiss.
I just want him to swoop in on his free time, kneecap Mendelsson, and end his fearsome reign as cynical, cruel ruler of all box-office at Forbes.
That's like... a Tuesday for K-Swiss.
SlickShoesRUCrazy
Member
got notification from best buy that I can pick up my 4k steelbook on the 19th of Sept.
TheTylerDurden
Member
Okay, Bobby lol
Bobby Roberts
Banned
what
Nothing man, it's all good