|
|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
Recent Entries
» Waving Adieu, Adieu, Adieu
» On Principles » Netflix » DVD Cover Compromise » Tristram Shandy and the Death Knell of Post Modernism » On Self-Doubt » The World's Mostest Clichés » Iranian Censorship vs. American Censorship » The Late Great Charles Bukowski » The Wellington Film Festival » New Zealand Cinema » Humiliation as a Path to Humility » People vs Movies » Postcard from New Zealand » Other People's Trailers » Bruce Conner » A Scanner Darkly » To Record or Not To Record a DVD Commentary » Welcome to the Big Leagues » Film Comment Article Categories
Archives
Keyword Search
My Links
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
| DVD Cover Compromise
Yesterday, the Weinstein Company sent me a revised DVD cover. I had complained that the previous cover was lacking in humor, and that I found the Roger Ebert quote less-than-inspiring. I liked the new cover much better than the last one, and preferred the new quote, but I was still unconvinced that it was better than the original poster image. Moreover, when I asked for feedback from readers, the comments were overwhelmingly in favor of the original poster. Today, I spoke with the marketing people at the Weinstein Company, and they said two things that I found convincing. 1) They said that if a couple walked into a video store together to look for a video to watch together, they would be more likely to rent a video with their DVD Cover than with mine. I found this plausible, and most likely true. 2) They said that they had taken their own survey, and that the comments they had gotten were overwhelmingly in favor of their DVD cover. I found this surprising, since I'd had the opposite experience, but I conceded that my blog readers were undoubtedly a very specialized audience, and might not represent the majority opinion. I nevertheless objected that the proposed cover arguably misrepresents the film, and that the hypothetical video couple might rent it but then be annoyed that the film wasn't what they had been led to expect - namely a sexy, erotic thriller. The Weinstein Company people countered by saying that the poster also misrepresented the film, and that they had found the film to be much funnier and more complicated than the poster had led them to expect. Moreover, they argued that their proposed cover would more likely bring in a wide range of viewers who might not otherwise rent the film, but who might really like it once they saw it. Their arguments were persuasive, and so I capitulated and agreed to their proposed compromise cover.
 
Posted by caveh on Aug 3, 2006 | Related
|
|
| ||
|
 |
|
