Sarah Palin documentary

[telemann.livejournal.com]

One reviewer commented:

"This Sarah Palin hosanna is done in by the simple fact that its director needs to go back to film school." Robert Levin of the Atlantic.

Comments

[telemann.livejournal.com]

No, that's very typical for any type of "documentary" much less any film. It's released in a few key cities (or even one) before a major push later. By movie industries, it had an extremely weak opening, and it was put in theaters in cities that are favorable to her.

According to pretty much all conventional box-office wisdom, that's a miss. The film averaged only $6,750 per theater, a small number for any limited-release movie. ($10,000 or $20,000 is considered standard, and it's not uncommon for movies to take in $30,000 or more.)

But those behind it had a different take. The distributor, ARC Entertainment, sent out a press release blaring a "strong opening for 'The Undefeated,' with multiple sold-out runs and vocal audience support." In an interview with the Hollywood Reporter, Bannon said that "to characterize ['The Undefeated'] as anything less than a hit would be a mistake."

Their reasons for why the numbers weren't higher was the stuff of box-office contortion, citing everything but Carmageddon. Theaters were too small to accommodate the demand. The marketing spend was minimal. The pre-release preparation period was too short. "We didn't put a nickel of P&A into this and the distributor had the movie for only three weeks.," Bannon said.

But opponents won't find it hard to poke a hole in that claim. The initial release strategy for "The Undefeated" was to take it to places most likely to embrace it. In the Southland, for instance, the documentary played in Orange County before heading to Los Angeles, where it comes this weekend. So for ticket sales to be strong, it would have to perform at least as well in liberal strongholds as it did it in conservative ones.

There may be a simpler assessment for why "The Undefeated" tallied what it did: Movies featuring figures or subjects ripped from cable news generally don't do well. That's true for films across the political spectrum, including conservative ones. "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed," Ben Stein's documentary about intelligent design, averaged fewer than $3,000 when it opened on more than 1,000 screens. Ditto for the Zucker Bros.' Michael Moore satire "An American Carol."

Most recently, the libertarian-themed "Atlas Shrugged: Part 1" -- a movie that was not considered a hit -- took in only marginally less per screen ($5600) despite opening on a lot more screens (300). Political movies that play to the faithful have a hard time because those in their intended audience feel they can (and do) get a strong dose of what the movie offers anytime they click the cable-remote over to their favorite news channel.

And actually, "The Undefeated" may have a larger problem: It doesn’t play that well to the faithful. The New York Post's Kyle Smith, one of the most conservative mainstream print critics out there today, fiercely disliked the film, calling it a "hopeless, sputtering jumble" and saying he'd "sooner have watched a Michael Moore movie." Worse yet, he doesn't even think it serves its propaganda goals. "The busted logic and narrative chop of 'The Undefeated,’" he wrote, “don’t suggest the phrase, 'spirited new defense of Palin.' They say, 'cyclone landed here.’”

[rimpala.livejournal.com]

"Theaters were too small to accommodate the demand. The marketing spend was minimal. The pre-release preparation period was too short."

FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF

The production team should have done their homework! And in the internet age marketing isn't that hard to do, especially when Sarah Palin has both a website and Twitter that gets regular attendance!

Star Wars had minimal marketing when it first came out, cry me a river...

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

This was all by design, though.

[pacotelic.livejournal.com]

Yes, of course. The flop was all according to plan, to maintain Palin's maverick underdog cred.

[telemann.livejournal.com]

lol

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

What flop?

[rimpala.livejournal.com]

But they sound like they're complaining about it. If that is so the whole thing seems like a giant wounded gazelle ploy.

If one doesn't get the turn out because they've chosen to play at small theaters, chosen minimal marketing spend, or chosen to rush it's release...

I better not hear anyone blame it on Hollywood Liberals.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

The only people complaining seem to be lefties.

[rimpala.livejournal.com]

I'm just saying the film distribution must be accountable, as is the rest of the production weather the film succeeds or not.

And criticism has come from at lease one conservative critics being Kyle Smith from the New York Post. Film review is not a partisan game, it has to be reviewed on it's own merits as a film not solely on it's subject matter. Sorry, to do otherwise would not be fair.

[telemann.livejournal.com]

Sounds like Sarah.

:-)

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

If the film doesn't do well, it doesn't expand, that's all.

By "movie industry standards," it held a $6500 per theater average (http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=undefeated11.htm) - hardly a weak opening by any metric.