Snakes on The Net Fail to Put Butts in the Seats

Lev13than writes "An article in The Globe & Mail discusses the disappointing performance of Snakes on a Plane. Despite extensive Internet hype and unprecedented audience involvement in the movie's development, it barely slithered into first place with a meager $13.8M weekend box office. 'The Internet stuff was just fun that people were having with it, but I don't think that necessarily meant that those people wanted to see the movie... those who had made that decision based their decision more on the traditional marketing than on all this Internet buzz.' Was all of the hype about blogger power just that — hype?"

Comments

Why Mine Wasn't

[ackthpt]

Years ago there was the viral marketing about The Blair Witch Project. I wondered what all the buzz was about and saw it. To me it was money down the drain. I didn't care for it and became a bit cynical about film pushed this way. Now if someone I knew who had similar tastes and saw a film and liked it, which I used to do, I'd give it a try.

Years ago I used to read the Detroit Free Press, which had a little grid in the back, which summarised what various critics thought of films. I learned which leaned most often my way and followed their advice. Most often we were in sync. Now I just chance it, mostly on trailers, of indie fliks. Hollywood stuff you usually get all the good bits and the whole plot in trailers.

Upon Scott Kurtz' endorsement I saw Little Miss Sunshine, which is quite the little gem.

Internet is a buzz

[olddotter]

The internet is a buzz for months with people making jokes about how stupid this movie is going to be, and they are suprised its not the next Titanic?!

I given what people expected $13M isn't too bad. It did get first spot, if barely. It will probably still gross more than "A Prairie Home Companion".

I haven't seen it, but I have heard it is better than expected!

Re:Did I read that right?

[Omestes]

Miami Vice has a broader appeal than SOaP, it had the urban-gang-action thing for it (not that any of these movies are anything but B, no matter the gross), I'm sure there were hot thug-chicks, bad gangsta rap (better than the SOaP credit emo, I'm sure), and all the other things the hoi polloi love.

SOaP, on the other hand, had that bad campy feel, that most people don't like, since they want to take their movies seriously within-genre. Miami Vice was straight action, and advertised as such, while SOaP was... A spoof, of sorts, arguably a survival action flick, it was really just a comedy. Think Evil Dead 2, it looks like a horror movie, but in reality it is pure comedy, without the idiotic Sandler or Farrel jab of making damn sure you know its a comedy at all times ("hey look, this is funny. I pooped myself and ran into a window!"). All the people I know who didn't like it, didn't like it in the capacity that it was a bad action movie, entirely missing the fact that it was really just a spoof of movies like the Poseidon Adventure and Towering Inferno. I think this movie is doomed to be a cult phenomena, and like all cult movies, doomed to semi-obscurity (who watches Rocky Horror, or Evil Dead, or even Eraserhead?)

Yes, it was obscure, but it did make 15m, meaning it wasn't too obscure. Everyone made a buck, everyone got their laugh. No news here, its a happy (and thus uninteresting) ending.

Re:Hollywood made a serious mistake

[QRDeNameland]

Bingo! I have to believe 99% of all the people who passed around the "Snakes on a Plane" meme did so out of a "My-God-this-is too-stupid-even-for-Hollywood" mindset. Does it really surprise anyone that such publicity might not result in blockbuster sales?

I know these Hollywood marketing types are trained to believe that there's no such thing as bad publicity, but this is the second article I've read wondering why the Internet buzz didn't translate into 3. Profit! without either even mentioning the fact that all the hype was based on the absurdity of the film's name.

"No, no, this just proves the failure of the Internet as a marketing tool." Hmmm...then again, maybe it's a good thing for them to draw that conclusion, and keep these clueless asshats focused elsewhere.

oh, there was a movie?

[Bobtree]

I thought the buzz WAS the product.

Re:"Serenity," anyone?

[PresidentEnder]

I saw "Serenity" twice; then I went back home to my podunk little home town and showed my copy to all the web-illiterate rednecks there. Then they bought it. Know why? 'Cause it was a good movie, damnit. SoaP is a joke, only not enough people are in on it.