Not Comics: NYT Talks Comic-Con And Movie Marketing

There was a slightly curious article yesterday in the New York Times about movie and TV publicity efforts at Comic-Con. It reads like one of those stories where the narrative is super-appealing -- "movie studio interest in Comic-Con may be faltering because it's not the home run that it appears to be" -- and then facts are kind of bent, reeds blowing in the wind style, to fit a "balanced" take on that suggested narrative. For one thing, this is hardly a new idea, and was a focus of very similar articles heading into the 2009 show. For another, it seems to me that the conventional wisdom an article like this seeks to debunk is illusory in the first place, and depends on taking seriously the effusive, earlier statements from many of those now doing the debunking. Surprise, surprise: if you're a PR person taking something to the show it's a great opportunity; if you're one that's skipping CCI, it's maybe not as big a deal as you've heard.

It can't be that simple. My experience on the floor of Comic-Con is pretty limited movie- and TV-wise, but I always hear much more conflicted and complicated statements about presentations and promotions from my film-loving friends on the ground than an article like this ever suggests, a range of attitudes that suggests a vastly more complex landscape than a 1, 2, 3 of hit promotions that then succeed or fail to have X, Y, Z effect on bottom-line box office. Also, CCI's David Glanzer cracked me up with his utilitarian take on things, that not every film studio is going to show material, never has, and there is still plenty of interest in using the place as a PR platform by enough of the film studios that the convention can't really fill all the programming slots. Now there's a reduction into basic terms that makes sense.
 
posted 7:00 am PST | Permalink
 

---

 
Daily Blog Archives
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
 
Full Archives