Page Summary
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif)
moskvamylove : (no subject) [+0] - eliminationjr : (no subject) [+0]
- moonray31 : Here she goes... [+0]
- janos_papagia : (no subject) [+4]
- nijiironohako : (no subject) [+0]
- swoozie : (no subject) [+1]
- elsabet : (no subject) [+1]
- sexonastick : (no subject) [+7]
- jupiter_hollow : (no subject) [+0]
- yellowdello2112 : (no subject) [+9]
- atomicwhisper : (no subject) [+0]
- orion_boreas : (no subject) [+0]
- petals_ : (no subject) [+4]
- sisterelwood : (no subject) [+1]
- crookedteef : (no subject) [+0]
Designed by chasethestars
chasethestarsProfile
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/sponcomm.gif)
scienceofsleep- The Official Science of Sleep Community
- Official Science of Sleep Website
Comments
hm.. my friend wants to go to chinatown tomorrow, perhaps.
I can't wait to see it...
You are a sponsored community. It does not make me want to talk about you or go see this movie.
LJ crossed the line when they invited you.
Full agreement! Down with sponsored communities!
This film was made independently. It's being distributed by Warners. The only money they've invested into it would be at the very tail end of the project. They've paid for the prints to be made (and only a few, that's why indies get a limited distribution), they pay the theaters to carry it, maybe pay off a few of the music rights, and for marketing. That's it. That's the full extent of how much they care.
Boycotting this film does not hurt a corporation. Again, their financial investment is limited. They didn't pay for the project to be made, they didn't invest hours on a lowered budget like the crew and cast of an independent feature almost always does. They don't care about the product. All they care about is the profit at the end. If there is none, or it's less than they would like, what this tells them is that they should be more careful in choosing independent films for distribution in the future. All this means is that independent films are less likely to reach an audience. That is all a boycott of this particular product can achieve. It doesn't hurt anyone except the people working outside the system. It means nothing to the corporation except a slight change of plans.
It should also be noted that most of the time the people responsible for making the film have no control over the marketing. Seriously. They don't get to approve the trailers, and I seriously doubt they have any clue this is going on. This sponsored community is all Warners. This is marketing. This is distribution. And you can hate it all you like, if it upsets you then that's valid, but responding to it the way you intend to will actually hurt the people least responsible for it. So sure, have a response, be unhappy; but maybe step back, learn more of the facts, and make it a response that actually hurts the people you're angry with instead of the ones who are kind of on your side.
However, I do buy my coffee from Café Direct, which gives the primary producer a better deal.
So one small producer loses out on my money, but another one benefits.
This is true of this current situation as well - one small film maker may get a minute fraction of a penny less - but the small film maker whose film I may well choose to see instead will benefit.
So my decision is coloured by the choice of advertising media - this is as it has always been - I used to choose which film to see by which had the prettiest poster outside the Cinema - now it will include whether or not the distributor chooses to advertise in LJ when we were promised there would never be adverts.
Swings and roundabouts, swings and roundabouts.
Dear Warner Brothers: You can never talk to us as if you were just another fan. To us, something like Batman is a fandom. To you, it is a franchise, a revenue stream. We can't have little heart to heart chats, because we have no common viewpoint. Nor can you successfully use fake LJ users to spread the word. We can hear the bull in their typed words. Also, what you are doing is fantastically redundant. There is nothing this comm can do that a genuine fandom site will not do ten times faster and better.
What I find absolutely hilarious, by the way, is how the Michel Gondry tag is so huge while the Gael Garcia Bernal tag is tiny. It demonstrates what a phony site this is. Most people who see this film will be going because Gael is in it. That lad has quite a following. That the humanoids who post here have emphasized Gondry! Gondry! Gondry! over the real reason to see this film, the sexy and talented Gael, makes me laugh uproariously. Oh, you corporate marketing types. You're so cute when you're wrong.
You want to generate some buzz? Accidentally leak some pics of Gael wearing very few clothes. I offer you this marketing tip free of charge.
I do think you make a really good point about the lack of Gael. I think they're trying to hit on the huge success of Eternal Sunshine, but they're also making the mistake of assuming that most people keep track of directors' names.
In comparison, the Superman Returns comm has 180 members.
Take a look at how many posts are in the superman returns comm compared to this one. Somehow, those 180 people post multiple times daily. Here? It's really really dead.
Who are these 691 members? Why don't they post? How many joined because they are LJ employees?
Put it all together, and it absolutely stinks. Fake membership, fake posts, fake hype, and they can't even figure out we want Gael with very few clothes. I'm trying not to use the word naked.
So while it might not hurt WB, the reception and feedback of the audience here may change their marketing. Which is all we care about, making sure that this sort of marketing fails.
I don't care one way or another if the film fails or not (sorry guys!), but if it succeeds, the messages here will hopefully indicate that it was in spite of the attempts made here, not because of them.
are you freaking out because I did that?
hello... honestly, it did bring me and my dad together!!! we didn't talk for a while and he took me to the movie okay
plus, I've been on livejournal for over a year and sure, i didn't join very many communities... but I'm not ADVERTISING!!!!
get that through your thick skulls
You got caught in the crossfire.
I was worried that people like hated me for saying I thought it was good
So your genuine enthusiasm sounded like their fake interest. That's the problem with having things sponsored like this. No one will know if people genuinely like it, or are being paid to hype it. :/
Sorry your entry is being used to say no, I guess it is your lucky day.
Because I've been looking more closely and I think that at least some of the sockpuppets are real LJ users who are being paid to shill for Warner Brothers.
The germ of distrust was planted between LJ users. *sigh*
I can not believe the immaturity level of you boycotters. I could maybe understand if it was the next Jennifer Lopez movie which will already make a lot of money, but The Science of Sleep...you have to be joking.
Yes, there are people who will get hurt by a boycott. But we get hurt by the shady advertising. And unfortunately, we do have to make a choice to do what will possibly end best for us.
I say if you want to see a movie, find a way to see it that doesn't up their numbers or put money in WB's pocket.
The advertisers...bought an LJ comm.
We are writing on the LJ comm.
To the advertisers.
Mind-boggling, ain't it?
The point is to keep Warner Bros. from advertising HERE, because instead of convincing consumers to pay for their product, they're just irritating the hell out of us and turning us off.
Quite a few movies changed my life. Guess what? They made me decide to become a filmmaker. Something tells me you have serious issues.