Originally Posted By FerretAfros From what I've seen, Bolt wasn't marketed nearly as heavily as many of Disney's other recent films (Meet the Robinsons immediately comes to mind). The approach was more along the lines of a lot of what Pixar does: they basically just let people know that there's a new movie out there. They don't say much about the movie, other than perhaps a few key plot points and characters, and let the rest be word of mouth. Now it's completley possible that I'm just not watching the right TV stations, but I don't think I saw a single commercial for it. I saw billboards and bus ads, but I can't think of seeing anything on TV. Wall-E is another recent example of a film that did well (very well, actually), with minimal advertising. Of course, since the release of the film, it's been featured in dozens of different ads (including almost every ad that mentions Blu-Ray), which would indicate to me that it was a successful film. All I remember of the ads from before it was released was the teasers with the "Brazil" song in the background. Hardly the $200,000,000 budget that some films have. Small art house films like Juno and Little Miss Sunshine also come to mind when talking about successes without much advertising, but I will admit that they are the exception to the rule. Does a film need a little bit of advertising to get it off the ground? Of course. Otherwise people won't know what it's about. But will it do everything? Absolutely not. A good movie will sell itself without any advertising if given enough time for word to spread. Both Little Miss Sunshine and Juno became popular in mainstream markets many months after they first opened. Quality will speak for itself. When the product is quality, marketing helps speed up that process. Unfortunately, when it's poor quality, the marketing constantly reminds viewers that it's there, reminding them of the bad reviews it's gotten. Anyone up for watching Gigli?
Originally Posted By NikkiLOVESMickey <<Carolina, So you simply think word of mouth is enough to create a success in today's world...>> The Blair Witch Project was a small independent film that didn't really advertise at all. People heard about the website and told their friends, who told their friends, who told their friends...a film that cost a under a million dollars to make made millions upon millions, all due to word of mouth and a very clever website and rumor. kennect, you were incredibly rude to Carolina in your earlier post. That's why people are upset.
Originally Posted By kennect Nikki, If I am right Blair Witch sold at a film festival...Which after that they intentionally set up the web site to promote the film and it apparently worked bigtime...A new and very different approach to marketing for the time but still extremely successful...Blair Witch the film was not a hit based on word of mouth...It was a hit based on pure hype created by the web site created by the people owning the film...Come on, what top critic wrote the line "the scariest movie ever"? If you can find that in a review of the film please let me know....So what you said about the Blair film is very true but it was pure genius to make it happen the way it did...They got everyone to buy into the whole haunted thing....The website was so professionally slick, if you remember it....When I finally saw the film I wasn't dissapointed since I had already figured out it was much ado about nothing...For me it had a very good premise but fell very short of what it could have been... As far as what your elder family members say...Don't listen to everything they tell you....Listen for yourself and learn something that is beyond the norm of someone else's thinking...Make your own decisions as to how this world works the way it does...My mother told me once that if I got on an airplane I would die because it was going to crash...Well, if I made that comment here I would expect someone to tell me my mother was stupid in her comment...Then again, she thought she was going to die if her feet left the ground...This is the woman that refused to ride Peter Pan at WDW for that very reason...Don't believe everything your parents told you...Sorry if I upset anyone but the truth does hurt sometimes...I am letting this die and hopefully everyone else will...There is no reason to have this thread eclipsed by a comment by me....
Originally Posted By NikkiLOVESMickey Don't be so rude in your posts if you don't want threads eclipsed. Ignoring what you said is akin to driving by a car crash and acting like it's not there. No one on these boards deserves to be treated the way you treated Carolina. It was disgusting.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 You wanna know what's disgusting? Having this intelligent, infomative and classy thread absolutely ruined by infantile back and forth. I feel like crying now ... and I was almost over the past eight years too! (OK, not quite!) I hope Santa left coal (or scary spiders!) in your stockings! (Going to listen to some happy Disney music!!!) Jay Rasulo rocks. Tom Staggs rolls.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< Having this intelligent, infomative and classy thread absolutely ruined by infantile back and forth. I feel like crying now ... >>> Spirit: I appreciated the thread, despite the side trip into quibbleland.
Originally Posted By MPierce >> Having this intelligent, infomative and classy thread absolutely ruined by infantile back and forth. I feel like crying now ... and I was almost over the past eight years too! (OK, not quite!) << Class dictated how this thread turned Spirit. Now go back to drinking Egg Nog.
Originally Posted By MPierce >> Well MPierce, I will remain tacky...Tell me the last huge hit of anything that didn't have advertising behind it? Can you answer that question? If you can please do so.... << Yes you do remain tacky, and I'm sad to see you take that kind of attitude. Advertising is definetly what is the norm today, but it doesn't always work. No matter how much advertising a company does it won't make a bad film good. Word of mouth is what drives a films ultimate success. People will go see a film when it gets rave reviews. People stop going when they here the film is bad.
Originally Posted By MPierce >> Don't believe everything your parents told you...Sorry if I upset anyone but the truth does hurt sometimes...I am letting this die and hopefully everyone else will...There is no reason to have this thread eclipsed by a comment by me.... << Yes you did upset someone. Your also hurt someone with your harsh comment, mainly yourself. I suppose it I came on this board, and insulted another member of this forum I would definetly hope it went away quietly. If you think your parents were stupid that's your business. It is totally beyond the pale of any acceptable decent human conduct on LP to go around calling other posters parents names. If you can't understand that concept I feel totally sorry for you.
Originally Posted By CarolinaDisneyDad >>>Anyone up for watching Gigli?<<<.................................................................................................................................Funny. That's the first movie that came to my mind too. Word of mouth destroyed that movie. People stayed away in droves.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<Spirit: I appreciated the thread, despite the side trip into quibbleland.>> SuperDry: I appreciate the fact you appreciated the thread. I hope to have more substantive things to add after the holidays (when all those 'imaginary' cuts take place at WDW!)
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<Class dictated how this thread turned Spirit. Now go back to drinking Egg Nog.>> I don't know. I skipped class today for winter break. And speaking of egg nog ... I bought some egg nog yogurt the other day and am having second thoughts about actually attempting to eat it. Ever have any? (sounds like redneck food)
Originally Posted By CarolinaDisneyDad Now, to the Spirit.................. I get that there are more cutbacks coming but I am wondering how this compares. How do the changes we are seeing now compare with what we saw after 9/11 when attendance tanked. Our first visit to WDW was in 2002 and mission space had just opened and philharmagic was being installed. Weren't these and other projects started during a similar financial crisis? Just trying to get a feel for the current cutbacks. Is what we are seeing now something that has been done before when times got hard or are these cuts something more?
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< Our first visit to WDW was in 2002 and mission space had just opened and philharmagic was being installed. Weren't these and other projects started during a similar financial crisis? >>> If Mission: Space opened in 2002, then it was started far before 9/11.
Originally Posted By CarolinaDisneyDad >>>>>If Mission: Space opened in 2002, then it was started far before 9/11<<<<<< ............................................................................................Good point, What I was getting at is that each year new stuff has been done so some projects must have been started during the last attendance decline. Also in 2002 quite a few things were seasonal like what Disney is doing now. So I'm just trying to gauge how different todays climate is from what has been seen in the past.
Originally Posted By SuperDry Responding to #235, I see what you're getting at and it's a good question/observation. One thing that I'd say that's different between today's situation and prior situations such as 9/11 is the cumulative affect of all of the cutbacks that have occurred in the meantime. It's my belief that even in good times, the recent (i.e. last 10+ years) earnings growth demands placed on WDW by the Parks & Resorts division, and indirectly by TWDC in general, are more than the resort can reasonably deliver. That is, it's my opinion that even when the economy is good and things are working well, the earnings growth expected of WDW is more than can be achieved through price increases and growth of the customer base, and because of this, reductions in cost are an always-necessary component to WDW meeting its earnings targets. I seem to remember that it was said by Michael Eisner in the early 2000's that part of the Disney magic was being able to cut costs behind the facade, in ways that increased the bottom line but did not affect the guest experience. I think he was right, at least partially. The problem is that I think that all of the easy cuts have already been made, and that most of the ones that are even possible have also been done. The reason I say this is what seems in recent times to be the rapidly-increasing occurrence of cutbacks that are clearly being done for cost reasons and have a material effect on the guest experience, notwithstanding any sort of corporate-speak "spin" being placed on them or however many guest surveys they conduct to show that people aren't noticing. I fully understand the need to hit performance targets in a for-profit venture. My point is that with all of the things that have already happened (let alone rumored to happen in the near future) that are affecting the guest experience, I think it's fair to say that most if not substantially all of the behind-the-scenes cutbacks have already been made. After all, there are lots of smart people working at WDW that I'm confident have done all they can think of to meet the targets given to them without affecting the guest experience. The fact that we see an increasing number of cutbacks that are visible "on stage" as it were tells me that the ones available to be made off stage are almost gone. If what I suspect is true actually is true, and projecting this forward during the current economic situation, well, I think that might answer the question of "why is this time different from last time?"
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 OK ...first for my favorite Disney Dan in Carolina ... Mission Space was greenlit back in 1999 (indeed it may have even been late in '98) so 9/11 had no effect on it at all ... PhilharMagic was 'poached' from HKDL's opening day roster with most of its developmental costs being picked up on the new resort's part. Also, while 9/11 killed air travel (and especially international guests for a few years), it wasn't accompanied by the total financial meltdown we see today. So, it's very hard to compare situations. But SuperDry hit home the current problem with cutbacks in 236 above. WDW has been operating since the mid-90s on a business model of constant 'fat' trimming in all aspects of running the resort. The problem is that all fat was likely gone by 2000-01, so everything that is now cut does lower the quality of the product no matter how it is spun by Disney's PR hacks. That's the crux problem of having MBAs, consultants and outsiders making decisions for a creative magic factory which has built and honed a well-crafted public image as a premium 'brand' that always strives to be the best ... because these days, that's all simply talk. You really wouldn't want to spend a day at WDW with me because I'd show you from top to bottom how things have been cut and the results. The scary thing is how many people have been conditioned to accept this WalMarted product as true Disney quality ... I've been moonlighting of late on another more 'magical' WDW fan site and it definitely skiews to a younger demo than the good, old LP, and it's so insidious to hear these 15-25 year-olds blather on about WDW never being better ... it shows you how successful this dumbing down of the core product has been. What will YOU celebrate? Not American Idol!
Originally Posted By fkurucz <It's my belief that even in good times, the recent (i.e. last 10+ years) earnings growth demands placed on WDW by the Parks & Resorts division, and indirectly by TWDC in general, are more than the resort can reasonably deliver. That is, it's my opinion that even when the economy is good and things are working well, the earnings growth expected of WDW is more than can be achieved through price increases and growth of the customer base, and because of this, reductions in cost are an always-necessary component to WDW meeting its earnings targets.>> I have seen this first hand where I work. In the past we were one of those "premium" brands as well, and in the last 10 years the pressure to deliver stratospheric profits has taken its toll on our products. Our previous CEO even went so far as to say that our stuff was too good, and that we should focus on "good enough". The problem with mediocre products is that people won't pay a premium price for them just because they have our logo on them.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 < I think it's fair to say that most if not substantially all of the behind-the-scenes cutbacks have already been made.< this is what happened at other companies also- ( those who actually tried to stave off theeffects of the economy hopingfor a turnaround )- eventually the hits will be painful.Hopefor a worldwide economic turnaround - for that alone can help what's coming down the pipe. <I have seen this first hand where I work. In the past we were one of those "premium" brands as well, and in the last 10 years the pressure to deliver stratospheric profits has taken its toll on our products. Our previous CEO even went so far as to say that our stuff was too good, and that we should focus on "good enough". The problem with mediocre products is that people won't pay a premium price for them just because they have our logo on them< I feel like we live in a parallel universe at times - I can so relate to this.
