how to get the non-fan / general public interested in MOS?

[sf2]

as we know, "quote=it's pretty much DO or DIE for Superman. He can't have a medicore film performance. HE needs a critically and financially successful one if we are to see him in the films without him taking another two decade break." it's crucial to get the public interested in MOS.

in other word, how to make MOS as movie of the year, a topic of daily discussion? if you don't watch it, you'r outdated/ out-fashion / out of trend, kinda thing.

you know, like it's really an epic of movie like LOTR, people have to go to watch it.

 

[KrypJonian]

It's goddamn Superman...

EVERYONE will watch it...

Let's just hope Pirates doesn't open the next weekend... Even SR would have made the money to make another one if it weren't for Pirates....

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

How about you put "From the makers of The Dark Knight trilogy, Inception & 300" all over it? That will put some asses in the goddamn seats.

 

[KrypJonian]

as we know, "quote=it's pretty much DO or DIE for Superman. He can't have a medicore film performance. HE needs a critically and financially successful one if we are to see him in the films without him taking another two decade break." it's crucial to get the public interested in MOS.

in other word, how to make MOS as movie of the year, a topic of daily discussion? if you don't watch it, you'r outdated/ out-fashion / out of trend, kinda thing.

you know, like it's really an epic of movie like LOTR, people have to go to watch it.

LOTR was just about the biggest, most successful gimmick to ever hit theatres since George Lucas reissued the OG trilogy... The movies were good, but the marketng was better...

The Hobbit is going to make nowhere near the same numbers...

Superman really needs to be something nobody has seen in a BIG way! This flick has to make people forget about the original... Which is the goddamn godfather of all superhero movies... It has to blow minds...

And no amount of CGI/blue screen is gonna do it, I hope the filmmakers understand...

We have to believe... And this time it's not just people who had never seen it before, now they need to make it REAL

 

[KrypJonian]

I take that back... we ned blue screen more than cgi like crazy... I was in the middle of a rant and didn't notice that...

 

[Ponyboy]

I think people were ready for Superman again when Superman Returns came out, and it was moderately successful in the worldwide market. I think where SR failed (in part) was by word of mouth. A large number of people went to see it, and then had nothing really to say about it. It didn't leave people excited to see what happened next.

It's easy for us to look back and say "do this/do that"... But I really feel that the new movie needs to have that grand feel that the Richard Donner film did. It's all about the beginning of the character and making people care about him again. It showed Jonathan dying when Clark was younger. People identified with that loss and it gave a very grounded, and human, side to Clark/Superman. It also set a reason for why Clark does what he does... "All those powers, and I couldn't even save him."

And... let us not forget the performance of Christopher Reeve made us believe it. I think Cavill has to just totally get his head around the part and sell it. I hope that he does. And then, and only then will the non-fans come in droves.

 

[Alientraveller]

Let's just hope Pirates doesn't open the next weekend... Even SR would have made the money to make another one if it weren't for Pirates....

Dead Man's Chest was a big obstacle but it was one of Superman Returns' lesser problems.

I think simply, making this really feel like Superman reborn. Returns' theme was Superman was back didn't gel considering he's never really been away (with Lois and Clark, Smallville, the Timmverse cartoons and highly publicized DVD release of the original film), but offer them the promise of something new with the filmmakers behind Batman's rebirth and 300, then I'm sure they'll be interested.

And yes, I know I'll earn a lot of people's ire for saying this, but if they ditched the trunks... although frankly I think that's unimportant because the focus ought to be on making Superman an engaging character as opposed to the icon he was in Returns.

 

[jthom19802]

Overall, I think marketing has to be the majority of it (obviously) but I think if you really want to ensure it convince the studio of three very important things.

1. The first image of him. Honestly the reveal of the SR photo was probably at least a 50 million dollar hit, and yes I am serious.

2. After said image of him, you go away. Blips of news and stuff like that is okay, but we don't see anything. Then you convince WB to dump whatever the cost is into a key time of the Super Bowl and you make it close to the longest SB commercial ever (I believe the record is the Detroit Chrysler commercial which runs about 3 minutes). Call it 2:00 and make it the baddest a** 2:00 trailer possible. If WB wants to gripe about the cost, you remind them that 180 million people watch the Super Bowl and tell them to feel free to do the math.

3. Then you go away again. Maybe even as long as Comic Con 2012 where you do some reveal, some peeking and after that promote the heck out of it and do it well (see: Star Trek or Thor).

A carefully orchestrated but well handled campaign would do wonders in getting the GA interested. ESPECIALLY #2. About the only major blockbluster flop that has had a SB commercial unveiling was GI Joe and that still ended up grossing almost $400 mil after international BO and DVD sales.

After all of that of course, the aforementioned word-of-mouth is necessary, but that requires a good movie.

 

[Kal-El.9859]

well I think they are making the general public very interested by casting such amazing actors

 

[KrypJonian]

I think people were ready for Superman again when Superman Returns came out, and it was moderately successful in the worldwide market. I think where SR failed (in part) was by word of mouth. A large number of people went to see it, and then had nothing really to say about it. It didn't leave people excited to see what happened next.

It's easy for us to look back and say "do this/do that"... But I really feel that the new movie needs to have that grand feel that the Richard Donner film did. It's all about the beginning of the character and making people care about him again. It showed Jonathan dying when Clark was younger. People identified with that loss and it gave a very grounded, and human, side to Clark/Superman. It also set a reason for why Clark does what he does... "All those powers, and I couldn't even save him."

And... let us not forget the performance of Christopher Reeve made us believe it. I think Cavill has to just totally get his head around the part and sell it. I hope that he does. And then, and only then will the non-fans come in droves.

I agree. Even at my age, I recently had the joyous oppourtunity to put STM on for somebody for the first time...

Now I've wished for years that I could wipe my memory of the Reeve movies, only to be able to see them again for the first time. Obviously that can't happen, but I was able to relive the magic through this person (a sexier lady then I would ever think possible... dreams do come true apparentlyt and really appreciated the first movie for all it was made to be...

I can only hope that this new flick will capture the same magic, and make their own memorable scenes that define Superman for the next generation, and really make people appreciate it the same way we did STM.

Even the people like myself that were born 4 years after it was made and still were raised on that movie...

 

[KrypJonian]

Overall, I think marketing has to be the majority of it (obviously) but I think if you really want to ensure it convince the studio of three very important things.

1. The first image of him. Honestly the reveal of the SR photo was probably at least a 50 million dollar hit, and yes I am serious.

2. After said image of him, you go away. Blips of news and stuff like that is okay, but we don't see anything. Then you convince WB to dump whatever the cost is into a key time of the Super Bowl and you make it close to the longest SB commercial ever (I believe the record is the Detroit Chrysler commercial which runs about 3 minutes). Call it 2:00 and make it the baddest a** 2:00 trailer possible. If WB wants to gripe about the cost, you remind them that 180 million people watch the Super Bowl and tell them to feel free to do the math.

3. Then you go away again. Maybe even as long as Comic Con 2012 where you do some reveal, some peeking and after that promote the heck out of it and do it well (see: Star Trek or Thor).

A carefully orchestrated but well handled campaign would do wonders in getting the GA interested. ESPECIALLY #2. About the only major blockbluster flop that has had a SB commercial unveiling was GI Joe and that still ended up grossing almost $400 mil after international BO and DVD sales.

After all of that of course, the aforementioned word-of-mouth is necessary, but that requires a good movie.

Good call... Something at least this extreme...

 

[KrypJonian]

Dead Man's Chest was a big obstacle but it was one of Superman Returns' lesser problems.

I think simply, making this really feel like Superman reborn. Returns' theme was Superman was back didn't gel considering he's never really been away (with Lois and Clark, Smallville, the Timmverse cartoons and highly publicized DVD release of the original film), but offer them the promise of something new with the filmmakers behind Batman's rebirth and 300, then I'm sure they'll be interested.

And yes, I know I'll earn a lot of people's ire for saying this, but if they ditched the trunks... although frankly I think that's unimportant because the focus ought to be on making Superman an engaging character as opposed to the icon he was in Returns.

IMHO- Bullsh**

Pirates coming out the next week turned it from a moderatesuccess (still had a good opening box) to a disappointment. It wasn't allowed the longevity it would have had in the theatre otherwise...

Are you aware that outside of all the geeks you and I talk to, a lot of people loved SR?

 

[Alientraveller]

Most people I know weren't bothered to see it.

 

[KrypJonian]

Most people I know weren't bothered to see it.

Maybe they were too busy in the water closet or what?

 

[bgshw44]

you have to, and they will, throw nolan's name all over this. having people like russell crowe doesnt hurt either. i have had a lot of talk with people who would be considered the general public-non fan, and as soon as i say nolan's involvement they say its a must see.

 

[The Sage]

- First picture of Superman, as someone mentioned.

- A teaser trailer that'll leave the audience curious, one that shows some action.

- A viral marketing campaign similar to the Batman movies would help. Thinking about it, if the story is starting with Clark traveling the world as a journalist before becoming Superman, why not start the campaign with having a website for the newspaper(s) he's working for, posting his articles. Maybe even a Daily Planet website.

- The \S/ emblem everywhere.

 

[Mace Bloodstone]

Overall, I think marketing has to be the majority of it (obviously) but I think if you really want to ensure it convince the studio of three very important things.

1. The first image of him. Honestly the reveal of the SR photo was probably at least a 50 million dollar hit, and yes I am serious.

2. After said image of him, you go away. Blips of news and stuff like that is okay, but we don't see anything. Then you convince WB to dump whatever the cost is into a key time of the Super Bowl and you make it close to the longest SB commercial ever (I believe the record is the Detroit Chrysler commercial which runs about 3 minutes). Call it 2:00 and make it the baddest a** 2:00 trailer possible. If WB wants to gripe about the cost, you remind them that 180 million people watch the Super Bowl and tell them to feel free to do the math.

3. Then you go away again. Maybe even as long as Comic Con 2012 where you do some reveal, some peeking and after that promote the heck out of it and do it well (see: Star Trek or Thor).

A carefully orchestrated but well handled campaign would do wonders in getting the GA interested. ESPECIALLY #2. About the only major blockbluster flop that has had a SB commercial unveiling was GI Joe and that still ended up grossing almost $400 mil after international BO and DVD sales.

After all of that of course, the aforementioned word-of-mouth is necessary, but that requires a good movie.

Marketing is very important. Money shots!

 

[The Shield]

For the movie, let Supes open up, let loose, and beat ass! Show him fail hard and over come challenges. Have him be frustrated and and show personality. Let him be charming without being cheesy but witty. And have the people against him be real a$$holes. Pretty much take the best qualities of the stories on the character. From there new readers of the comics will follow.

and awesome photos to start!

 

[GreenKToo]

I haven't read the rest of the responses, this is my own...

Don't make the mistake that WB did on the last superman film...the name superman alone won't sell MOS.

They must show that this film has plenty of action in the teasers/trailers, but don't show it all like GL did. Just quick glimpses that gets the point across that this film has what everyone has been wishing for in a Superman film.

Please dont make it dark..as in the feel/look. Things can get dark of course when the villain does his thing, but Superman should be a beacon of light in the chaos.

Don't be afraid to show off the cast/crew beforehand..Play up the Crowe, Costner, and Nolan angle.

Get the suit right, and show it and cavill often beforehand.

Have Plenty of posters, One with Supes, one with Zod, one with Jor-el and Lara, jonathan and martha, etc etc.

Get the theme out early as well. Give the folks time to get accustomed to it replacing the williams theme.

EDIT: Now that I have read the rest, I want to agree with some ideas..
The first reveal of cavill in the suit. That's very, VERY important.
Viral Marketing.
And let me add, please get the CG right. No cg closeups this time either please.

 

[Lencho01]

Market it as well as Paramount did for Star Trek.

 

[Boosted]

first off, it's superman. kids to grandpa's know and having interest in superman. most important, make a good movie. Thrilling, lots of action, and of course FUN. GL wasn't fun at all, fun is big thing. that's why the last star trek was so good.

 

[Sabaoth]

as we know, "quote=it's pretty much DO or DIE for Superman. He can't have a medicore film performance. HE needs a critically and financially successful one if we are to see him in the films without him taking another two decade break." it's crucial to get the public interested in MOS.

in other word, how to make MOS as movie of the year, a topic of daily discussion? if you don't watch it, you'r outdated/ out-fashion / out of trend, kinda thing.

you know, like it's really an epic of movie like LOTR, people have to go to watch it.

I think WB is pulling out all the stops for this one, and we won't be disappointed.

The first image of Superman and the first trailer are the most important.

They have a very marketable catch phrase, that though classic, has never been used by the WB as a marketing tool, that being Kneel before Zod.

They are going to put Nolan's name left and right on this.
I know some fanboys cry and moan that it is Snyder's flick and not Nolan's. This is true, but they are going to market it as Nolan's flick.
Go ahead and google Superman MoS and you will discover that it is being called Nolan's Superman movie, even though that is only partially true.

This is going to be a big hit.
IMO the only possible snag MOS can hit, besides screwing up the first pic and trailer, would be if somehow, DKR under performs.
DKR not doing awesome would, IMO reduce the public's interest in MOS.
So let's hope DKR is as big as DK!

 

[GreenKToo]

If WB takes care of the marketing the way they should, and if Snyder takes care of the film the way he should, then MOS will take care of it's self.

As for DKR, I don't think it will be as big as TDK, but it will still be a huge hit...TDK was a perfect storm of a film thats not likely to be repeated. Not impossible, but not likely. It's his last one, it has that going for it, so we shall see.

Still, crazy as it seems, if it did 300/350 mill dom, 650/700 mill WW, That would probably be considered a disappointment to fans after the last one.

 

[Sabaoth]

IMO DKR needs to do at the very least 300 domestically. TDK raised the bar. Anything less would be a bad omen for MOS.
If DKR is a huge hit, which I'm hoping it will be, then that will create the right public momentum to see the Nolan influenced MOS.

 

[KyleDW2]

IMHO- Bullsh**

Pirates coming out the next week turned it from a moderatesuccess (still had a good opening box) to a disappointment. It wasn't allowed the longevity it would have had in the theatre otherwise...

Are you aware that outside of all the geeks you and I talk to, a lot of people loved SR?

I'm always fascinated by the Pirates argument. You know, I think everyone has always misinterpreted the Pirates/Superman correlation. I don't think Pirates hurt Superman. I think the poor quality of Superman Returns helped Pirates. Pirates was the only thing that summer that delivered a fun, light, action packed experience. Mission: Impossible III, while good, was the darkest Mission movie, X3 sucked out loud and Superman Returns was dour and dark. In any other summer Pirates would have done good, but not a billion dollars good.

Which, I think, is the biggest thing to make sure of when making a Superman movie. You can tell as deep a story as you want, but at the end of the day, it has to be fun as well. Superman Returns had zero fun.