I'm Back and so are Reality TV shows

Sorry for the absence - I've been celebrating the end of my 3rd year at USC and needed some R&R. However, I am back and ready to continue providing cool articles on what is happening in the future of entertainment.

I will make this next blog short and sweet - TV networks are rapidly switching places for 1st.

Back in the hey day of my youth (10 years ago I think will do it), NBC was king of the sitcoms and had it all - Friends, Fraiser, Seinfeld... Nothing could compete. More recently, CBS has had their CSI spinoffs and have been number one for years. ABC has enjoyed success with Ugly Betty and Desperate Housewives. However, a distant 4th was always FOX. Not any more - guess whose number one - FOX.

HOW COULD THIS HAPPEN? A network that came out of no where 20 years ago is now the number one network? This is simply because people no longer watched sitcoms or tv shows live. They wait for when they are available and simply play it on their DVR. Fox however has EVENTS and not shows. You don't watch the American Idol Finale 2 weeks later and still get the same excitement - everyone around the water cooler has already spoiled the ending. You have to watch it then and there. That is was Fox does right - event television. They got the Emmy's this past go around, they have American Ido and Top Chef and with Fox Reality creating a slew of new television shows on the cheap, Fox will remain number one for years to come.

NBC, the perennial favorite from youth does have the Olympics coming up and those will be a huge help to the struggling network, but I think it is fair to say that FOX, once touted as a joke of network without any quality programming, is now the network to beat. What is ironic is that the same quality of programming is being pumped into FOX, it just turns out that people's tastes are evolving and now FOX provides mostly content that must be viewed then and there - it cannot wait a couple weeks.

With this, I want to write a dirge for all network programming. Days will go away when quality shows like Lost, 24 and others were free. They are simply too expensive for the ratings they deliver. Soon, everything we watch for free will be reality and the only sit-coms, serials or dramas that we can get are on pay cable. I'm sad, but not surprise - it is the nature of the beast - technology makes everyone able to produce shows and with that unlimited ocean of choices, not enough eyes hit the good stuff.

DON'T EVEN GET ME STARTED ON THE RATINGS SYSTEM PROVIDED MY NIELSEN - (a show like ARRESTED DEVELOPMENT gets cancelled, when millions probably watched but just weren't a 'Nielsen Family').

Until next time - God Speed.

C-Wickity

New Ways of 'Reaching' Your Audience

Precursor: This blog is about technology and its affect on entertainment. Technology is not just new computers and gagets, but rather technological advances can be in the form of new techniques. That is what this blog will focus on - the new techniques employed when marketing a film.

FIRST OFF: Reach, in marketing terms, refers to how many people have literally scene/heard your ads. You want your reach to be as high as possible and be as cheap as possible - these two ideals rarely are attained simutaneously.

To reach an audience with a tentpole film back in 1995, the most expensive marketing campaign was for Toy Story (35 million dollars total). There were some just below that number, but the majority of films were much lower. This summer will see the total money spent on marketing come within striking distance of being the same as the film's entire production budget.

For example, the tentpole films of Indiana Jones, Speed Racer and the Dark Knight could all see their marketing budget be exactly the same as their 150 million production budgets. Now this drastic leap from 35 million to 150 million in just over a decade may sound crazy and simply a waste of money, but the new technology being employed is SUBTLE PRODUCT PLACEMENT.

Sex and the City, a movie that is expected to bring women to the theaters in droves, has deals with Mercedes Benz, Skyy Vodka and Vitaminwater. These deals are not small ventures, but rather multi-million dollar partnerships that translate into marketing budgets that seem astronomical. It simply is not the case.

I posted earlier in March about Speed Racer and its marketing budget exceeding 150 million. Well, after further examination, I have to disagree with my initial assumption that this amount was absurd for a movie that, I felt, would not make that money back. The budget for marketing has increased because the international community has increased (foreign box office is key for a films success and thusly you must spend lots of money on advertisements) and product placement deals have inflated all the marketing budgets to levels that would seem crazy to anyone who does not see the fine print.

I will end with one of the greatest stories I remember over the past year involving product placement. Rolex was James Bond's watch for years. Omega wanted the title. For Casino Royale, the newest Bond film, Omega paid millions of dollars to have this campy dialog.

HOT BOND BABE: (woman is insulting James, looks at his watch) "Rolex?"


BOND: "Omega"


HOT BOND BABE: "Gorgeous..."


Barely recognizable, but that brought the marketing campaign well over 2-3 million dollars from Omega alone. The Bond Franchise should of just had the entire script filled with these references (sarcastic comment -- they did...)

That is all, -- back to the final papers of my 6th college semester year...

QUOTE OF THE WEEK

This quote describes the future of cash flow for entertainment and I LOVE IT:

“The axiom in Hollywood is that content is king, but those who control access to the king, control the kingdom,” Verrone continued. “Because of federal regulations -- or lack thereof -- that control is in the hands of neither the consumer nor the content creators, but the distributors.”

VERRONE is president of the Writer's Guild of America West.

VIDEOGAMES KILL

Short post.

I was reading about the April launch of the highly anticipated Grand Theft Auto IV - a titled that has long been delayed.

This title is shipping to stores 3 days before Iron Man (and although industry pundits predict movie goers will be willing to part ways from the game to see the first superhero movie in almost a year), they are worried that the game could cause a ripple effect that will destroy TV and Film revenues.

When Halo 3 launched, TV shows were coming back from Summer hiatus. The only demographic that was down - THE ONLY ONE - was men 18-24. Why? Because they were all cooped up at home with a tub of red vines and a 24-pack of mountain dew trying to frag all their friends in Slayer-mode.

When Super Smash Bros launched a couple months back, the male 18-24 demographic dramatically dropped due supposedly to these men playing the game.

With over 400 million expected to be made by Take-Two (The publishers for GTAIV) in the first week alone, this revenue is seen as a golden ticket for the gaming industry -- I myself have no system but am considering buying one so I can play this game...

Basically, TV and Film executives have new trouble in town - once seen as a passing fad in the 80's when pong and pac-man were hits, videogames now can be considered almost as big a threat to film/tv revenues as piracy. DUNT DUNT DUNT.

I must be going now - I need to finish my brickbreaker game (going for a high score).


IF YOU ARE INTERESTED - MARY THURTLE, a USC Major in Dance and Baller of Choreography, wrote similar statements in a thesis for WRIT-340 for USC - see below:

"Another budding factor that affects crowds at the box office is > the segmentation of the entertainment industry to include > untraditional media, such as video games. The online video gaming > industry is particularly becoming an industry that, like movies > seen at the theaters, creates a communal experience for its > participants. Therefore video games are capturing an audience that > has similar interest in experiencing entertainment in a group. > Although video games have existed for decades, only recently have > users been able to virtually connect and network through > established online communities. For example, Xbox 360, enabled with > Xbox Live’s online virtual networking, is a new console that > captures a young audience who had previously opted to the cinema > for a group activity. > > > This correlation between choosing to play video games instead of > going to the movie theater is quite apparent. As case in point, > many film executives believe the September 26th release of the Xbox > 360 game, Halo 3, was a factor in declining theater attendance the > weekend of October 5th (Brodesser-Akner). The Heartbreak Kid, > produced by DreamWorks Pictures, was expected to gross $20-25 > million opening weekend, but instead earned a mere $14 million. > Further displaying the irregular decline in ticket sales the > October 5th weekend, the movie industry as a whole made 27% less > revenue compared with the same weekend in 2006 (Brodesser-Akner). > To get a sense of how extremely Halo 3 consumes the young target > movie-going audience, consider the facts that “(Halo 3) players > racked up more than … 40 million hours by the end of the first > week… (totaling) more than 4,500 years of continuous game > play” (Brodesser-Akner). Now that video games are equipped to > coordinate huge virtual communities, the shared experience that was > once unique to going to the cinema now applies to more forms of > entertainment."

Gossip Girls are TOO POPULAR

That's right.

Gossip Girls, the Josh Schwatz series on the CW is too popular... well online at least.

The show is lagging in the Nielsen Ratings - the entire bread and butter for a show. Without high Nielsen Ratings (or Jericho fans with bags of peanuts) a show simply cannot survive. As of right now, the main views for Gossip Girls are with online streaming - this alone will not pay for the bills.

In fact, the next 5 episodes will NOT be aired online. The VP's of the CW say this is an experiment. With all the fans and their desire to see the show, execs hope that viewers will transition from watching the streaming content to the network broadcast. Only time will tell if this approach will work. At the same time, execs are nervous that the truly avid fans will simply use bitTorrent (or any other download service) to download the episodes once they have aired on TV.

It is interesting seeing a show NOT use streaming for their marketing -- but Gossip Girls cannot survive if they continue streaming their content (a new issue in this constantly evolving media environment).

Time to go back to the mailroom - tootles.

Blockbuster's attempt to stay affloat

Oh, how the mighty have fallen...

Just 5 years ago, when I was in high school (gulp I am getting old), I remember having a very limited list of activities one could do. You could go cruising (get in your car and simply drive around), go to the theater and see a new release or - last but not least - check out your local video store for some good quality VHS/DVD goodness. I didn't even have a blockbuster until Junior year of high school. I had a video store called Video Update (with a special section curtained off in the back -- only later did I learn that this section was the most profitable...)

Blockbuster was the keystone for any youth trying to find something to do. "What do you want to do?" -- "We could go rent a movie". Those days are far gone. The new conversation, "What do you want to do?" -- "We could rent a movie". No longer do you have to GO anywhere.

This lack of 'going' has caused the once mighty Blockbuster (10 billion market cap at its peak) to plummit to a paltry 600 million market cap today. Blockbuster is trying to save its EXPLETIVE and is doing so by throwing its eggs, not into one basket, but just everywhere it thinks a basket might exist.

At the beginning of this week, Blockbuster and Circuit City (both struggling companies) announced they have been in talks to merge for about 2 months. Blockbuster has been struggling with onDemand and iTunes and Netflix. Circuit City simply cannot compete with Amazon and Best Buy and Walmart and Frys. If my ship is going down and I'm a weak swimmer, I don't try and find another weak swimmer to hold onto when we hit the water. I need to find a strong swimmer to lead me to safety. APPLE, for example, is a very strong swimmer, but sadly, Blockbuster's management thinks it is wise to pick a fight with this entity rather than try and join its bandwagon.

Blockbuster is said to be announcing next week a set top box where people can download movies straight to their computers. No Way!?!? What an amazing idea -- Download movies to a set top box and watch them on your television. Oh that's right, it was an amazing idea when onDemand came out years ago. It was an amazing idea when Apple released AppleTv. It is not so exciting anymore. I think Blockbuster needs to realize that all it has are connections to the film industry and a name that is recognizable to my generation (however, I doubt any youngster requests to go to Blockbuster -- they simply netflix).

THEY HAVE NEVER BEEN FIRST MOVERS ~ BUT NOW THEY ARE TRYING TO BE.

In order for this struggling company to survive, it needs to relize its heydays are over. If it wants to survive, it needs to check its EGO out at the door. I feel like they are an old, washed up athlete trying to pretend the glory days are far from over. THEY ARE OVER. If Blockbuster wants to be an online service - it needs to say goodbye to its brick and mortar business of retail. Otherwise, it is just canibalizing its main area of business.

IN CONCLUSION - BLOCKBUSTER WILL COLLAPSE IF THEIR MANAGMENT CONTINUES THEIR PRESENT PATH OF SELF-DESTRUCTION-- LONG LIVE APPLE.

3D IS THE FUTURE

I have mentioned this before. I will mention it again. 3D is the future. However, let us learn a new way to use our cinema lexicon. Instead of saying 3D, James Cameron - the man responsible for some of the biggest special fx breakthroughs in modern cinema (Titanic, Aliens, True Lies, Terminator 1 & 2), thinks it best to say, "stereo". This is short for stereoscopic. Cinema is no longer going to be strictly filmed with one camera, but rather will be shot with 2 cameras to create the effect that the audience is actually inside the film.






The big topic revolving around Avatar, James Cameron's big-budget 3D action film, is where can it be played? The film costs roughly 200,000,000.00 and in order to recoup that amount, there need to be theaters that can support the technology. Luckily, with the emergence of digital projectors and digital distribution (largely supplied by Deluxe), most theaters are able to support 3D pictures. Once Avatar is ready for wide release in 2009, over 2,000 screens in the United States will be available for 3D films. While 2,000 screens may sound like a lot, by comparison, Spiderman 3 openly in approximately 4,000 screens. So with this large gap -- how will Cameron recoup his investment?

Cameron knows there are not enough theaters out there with 3D capabilities, so he is shooting the film in a way that it will still be a great film in 2D theaters. Most 3D films (especially the gimicky ones of the 1950's) were merely weak stories with cool special effects. These effects distracted you between terrible plot twists and all your entertainment was coming from the novelty of 3D. Cameron is not about repeating the mistake of the 1950's era 3D. He wants to fully immerse you in the story, because after all, he is a story teller. The ability of using 3D simply helps bring you deeper into the story than ever before. It is not there to be a gimmick, but rather an assistant in reaching into the mind and heart of the audience.

Cameron also points out that with decreasing costs of home entertainment systems, people need a reason to go to the theaters again. 3D is just that ticket according to many industry insiders. Sure, I could watch the 2D Avatar illegally on my computer the day it hits theaters, but I want to see it in 3D. Also, Cameron points out that ticket prices are rising, but the movies have stayed pretty much the same over the last few decades (minus some breakthroughs in special fx). He says there needs to be a reason for audiences to pay more for this entertainment.

Lastly, with Disney Digital 3D pushing 3D (ex. it is reformatting the original Toy Story films for 3D) and Lucas Films reformatting the six Star Wars films for 3D, everyone better prepare themselves for the future of film. No longer will you simply watch passively, but you will be sucked into the screen.

The next steps beyond simply visual 3D:

SMELL-O-VISION: Theaters in Japan synced visuals with smells for the film The New World starring Colin Farrell. The company in control of this was NTT Communications Corp.

RUMBLE SEATS: DisneyWorld's attraction Alien Encounter (based off of Cameron's Alien films) has an alien creature actually breathe down your neck and shake your seat.

WATER EFFECTS: Shrek 4D at Universal Studios, Hollywood has effects that go beyond merely 3D effects, but rather include water effects (Donkey sneezes on the entire audience).


SIDE NOTE: There are even companies out there that will be selling designer 3D glasses. No longer will you have to use those cheap plastic glasses they provide, but you can go to the theaters in style... I wonder what else can be marketed with this new craze for 3D.