MovieChat Forums > Clubland (2007) Discussion > Another Marketing Mistake

Another Marketing Mistake

posted 17 years ago by StephenTX
10 replies | jump to latest

Like the recent Georgia Rule, Introducing the Dwights, IMO, was marketed as a fun comedy when in fact it is a dramatic film with some humor. Both of these R-rated films are moving and worthwhile, but I generally feel that people may not endorse them simply because they're disappointed based on what they were expecting (see each film's trailer and US poster art). Another comparison with Georgia Rule is that both of these films contain fairly frank sexuality; again, probably not something you'd expect from the marketing and, for some, not at all what they wanted to see. There were a couple of walkouts in my audience.

The performances are very good. Brenda can be a little over the top but you can't look away; she's very commanding. Emma Booth is beautiful and reminded me of a young Sissy Spacek.

[–] Dave-137 17 years ago

Like the recent Georgia Rule, Introducing the Dwights, IMO, was marketed as a fun comedy when in fact it is a dramatic film with some humor. Both of these R-rated films are moving and worthwhile, but I generally feel that people may not endorse them simply because they're disappointed based on what they were expecting (see each film's trailer and US poster art). Another comparison with Georgia Rule is that both of these films contain fairly frank sexuality; again, probably not something you'd expect from the marketing and, for some, not at all what they wanted to see. There were a couple of walkouts in my audience.

Excellent points, Filmgoer123, and you're right on. The movie should not be considered a "fun comedy," but rather a dramatic film with comedic elements. We thought it would be lighter than it was ... although we were forewarned a bit by your post ... :-)

Despite the R rating, some folks won't be prepared for the nudity and sex. I understand the scenes' comedic and "coming of age" theme development purposes, but I think the film devotes too many minutes to these scenes -- minutes that could have been spent more productively developing the many characters in the story, and establishing better credibility for the ending sequences.

All in all, though, this is a well done and very enjoyable film. We thought Richard Wilson's performance as Mark Dwight was exceptional and that the role provides much of the Dwight family glue -- an essential role that the marketing seems to totally ignore.

[–] krasny 17 years ago

trailers lie

there should be a rating system for trailers, ranging fron (U)nvarnished truth to (P)ack of lies that contains shots not even in the movie

Despite the R rating, some folks won't be prepared for the nudity and sex. I understand the scenes' comedic and "coming of age" theme development purposes, but I think the film devotes too many minutes to these scenes -- minutes that could have been spent more productively developing the many characters in the story, and establishing better credibility for the ending sequences.

i thought the sex scenes were an essential part of character development and were bloody well done as well, without them the realtionship between tim and jill would have been rather hollow

as for people not being prepared for nudity etc, f uck them retards, if they're going to get upset about nudity then try reading up on the goddamn movie prior to going to see it

Don't Care What The Governments Say
They're All Bought And Paid For Anyway

- Sun Green

[–] Dave-137 17 years ago

i thought the sex scenes were an essential part of character development and were bloody well done as well, without them the realtionship between tim and jill would have been rather hollow

I probably wasn't very clear in the paragraph that you are commenting on. I was trying to make two separate, but related points. I should have broken down my thoughts into at least two paragraphs.

My first point was simply that some people, in especially prudish America, will not be ready for the sex scenes. They're okay as far as I'm concerned, although I think they don't add much value to the story. It might be a matter of being probably a bit older, but over-emphasis on sex seems like a less important (and more hollow) thing that many other more subtle things in the relationship. If, on the other hand, this film was intended to focus on the sex, well, it could have done better at that part as well.

Consequently, and ergo, my second point was that assuming a certain amount of time to work with in the film, I personally would have preferred/suggested that seconds should have been transferred from the sex scenes to spend on better and further development of all of the characters, and better set up the finish. You can turn this around and my criticism is that these two elements -- character development and setting up a believable finish -- could have been a bit stronger. And where could the filmmaker have drawn the time from inside the film to do a better job on character development and the finish? (Although I understand that success would not be measured only by time, I think the time could have been used more productively in such a way.)

These are probably sort of technical comments. Overall, I enjoyed the film, but it could have been better.

[–] krasny 17 years ago

My first point was simply that some people, in especially prudish America, will not be ready for the sex scenes. They're okay as far as I'm concerned, although I think they don't add much value to the story. It might be a matter of being probably a bit older, but over-emphasis on sex seems like a less important (and more hollow) thing that many other more subtle things in the relationship. If, on the other hand, this film was intended to focus on the sex, well, it could have done better at that part as well.

first off may i say what a pleasure it is to chat to someone about a worthwhile movie, rather than some monosyballic teenage/christian retard, who are mainly interested in dissembling

i don't really care what prudish america thinks about this movie. i've seen sex scenes in movies intended for prudish america, and for me they very nearly spoiled the movies they were in

should the director make the movie prudish america wants or the movie she wants?

i really loved the sex scenes on many levels, they were warm, errotic and very well done

sex scenes in movies tend to suck (if you will pardon the pun) and this movie was a refreshing change from the plethora of cheesey and prudish misrepresentations of sex

the sex scenes took at most 5 minutes of a 90 minute movie, could those 5 minutes have been spent developing tim & jill's relationship as effectivly? i don't think so

and besides what is wrong with (well done) sex scenes in a movie anyway? bad sex scenes (not scenes of bad sex like in 2/3 of the sex scenes in 'monsters ball') can wreck a movie by ruining the verisimilitude of the movie

i agree the movie's other characters needed developing, especially mark, but this could have been done without taking the sex scenes out

Don't Care What The Governments Say
They're All Bought And Paid For Anyway

- Sun Green

[–] bernie-122 16 years ago

@krasny:

I agree with your viewpoint, but what have you got against capital letters?

[–] krasny 16 years ago

I was going through a phase of not using capitals.

Don't Care What The Governments Say
They're All Bought And Paid For Anyway

- Sun Green

[–] Storm_Mickche 16 years ago

i absolutely agree. Its facinating to compare the australian trailer under "clubland" and the american trailer under "introducing the dwights."
You'll swear that they're two different films

[–] crittervan 16 years ago

I absolutely agree with this issue. I love all movies and appreciate a good film whether it be dark or light or both. I recently watched Margot at The Wedding and knew what I was getting into. I knew the Margot character was loathsome and self-centered. The overall film adds a voyeuristic feel to a dysfunctional family.

I had heard about Introducing The Dwights and knew the plot line. However, this film was definitely marketed as a comedy. I saw the trailer in a movie theater last year and I thought, "a great Aussie film" and I hadn't seen one for a wee while.

It turned out to be another amazing turn for Brenda but the character was also loathsome and definitely self-centered. The difference is that I did not know that this was to be the case. It became an exercise in psychology and I did not care about this a-hole woman. The supporting characters saved the day, just like in Margot at The Wedding. My partner and I just wanted to unwind and enjoy a comedy with brains(i.e. non-Hollywood) and instead I think it just kept us late and made us both feel side-swiped.

So, the moral? ALWAYS check IMDB first! LOL

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] et_tu_Brute 13 years ago

": Another Marketing Mistake
by - subculturemedia on Tue Jan 6 2009 23:35:15
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Can I point out it was only promoted as a comedey in America. In Australia is was promoted as a drama and kept its name Clubland. But then after how America stuffed up the promotion of The Castle... it really didn't surprise me. "

Nothing unusual about that. The film was created for a different geographic/demographic and then presenteed to American marketing people to "sell". "

As soon as I saw the US title, I automatically groaned - 'kiss of death'. And wtf, they market it as a comedy - no wonder it was doomed.

I get so fed up with this nonsense marketing. These non-US films froom English-speaking, but culturally different countries like the U.K., Ireland, Australia etc. should be marketed and presented as they are, not something that has to be re-incarnated into a superficial clone usually dumbed down for a fickle US market.

The reverse does not happen for U.S. films, so why bother doing it with these films.

Enough already!

ciao

et tu, Bruté?

Locked my wire coat-hanger in the car - good thing that I always carry spare keys in my pocket :)