For this synergy-based strategy (convergence) to be successful, media audiences must not simply buy an isolated product or experience, but rather, must buy it in prolonged relationship with a particular narrative universe, which is rich enough and complex enough to sustain their interest over time and thus motivate a succession of consumer choices.
In order for films to be truly successful in the greatest sense, it is no longer a matter of simply having a good run at the box office. A film must be something more than just the film. In other words, there must be many other entities surrounding it. Fans should be moved to buy the soundtrack, posters, video games, post comments online, and buy various memorabilia. It must become it's own phenomenon.
When the first Harry Potter book came out, it was just that, a book. However, as popularity grew and grew, it became an incredible phenomenon. Soon, there was a huge build up for the next book to come out, and then the next, and even the next. When a book does well, it is almost surely to be made into a film. As with The Davinci Code, The Chronicles of Narnia, and The Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter was made into a movie. Not only was it made into one film, but one for each book. Audiences not only await for the books, but for the films! Of course, soundtracks are sold in bulk, video games are sold along with all kinds of memorabilia.
It is quite incredible how quickly something can start in one section of media and quickly bleed into every other aspect of media. I find it interesting that the Harry Potter book covers were changed from their original cover to a cover with the actor who played Harry Potter in the movie. No longer is Harry Potter a book series, it is a complete and utter cultural phenomenon. Like those faithful to the Star Wars and the Lord of the Rings cult, those dedicated to all Harry Potter continue to be, and will be for years to come. Thus, much will continue to be bought and sold.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
I strongly agree with your opinion on fan culture. It’s prevalent in this article how the effects of fan admiration contribute to the development of media, and commercial success of the product. Fan appropriations in many ways in this article are a main instigator in reproduction. Early in the semester we talked a lot about authenticity and how reproduction can destroy an aura. In this context of the article, Film is almost developed for reproductions of certain commodities. Films can also cause and outbreak in fan clubs and subcultures. Through technology film becomes another way to promote ideas to mass culture. Film and media share an inner connected relationship by media promoting the contents of film and film spreading a marginalized morale or principle themes to the masses. Which I think can be further added to your point of why and how star wars and harry potter was so effective on society.
I also agree with this opinion of fan culture. The funny part is that so many people will see the movie before reading the book. Some will not have even heard of the book until there is a movie about it.
I think another interesting thing that makes a movie so popular is how much it is spoofed. The biggest blockbusters throughout time are the ones being continuously ridiculed in comedies, low-budget films, talk shows, etc. An example of Star Wars being turned into a commercial product that's not mentioned in the article is Mel Brooks' Spaceballs. There is even a scene that talks about the merchandising that is done for the film, which includes everything from cereal to flame throwers. The whole movie pokes fun at the whole Star Wars phenomenon from the characters, to the merchandising, to the fact that it's a scripted movie being filmed as we watch it!
John Arida
It's not just films (or at least does not start out as just films) but TV shows that also get this type of fan attention. The Simpsons is something that started out as a cartoon, now has various board games with the simpsons characters (such as monopoly or life), a ride coming out in Universal's Islands of Adventure, toys, a movie, video games, among others. I'm sure there are those who can draw the characters or who may even dress up as the characters to do a "live action simpsons" (and if not, they probably should, it may be comical). I think that while all of these may not be authentic, they carry an aura to themselves. The aura that they carry, which may not be the same as the original, is what makes it so attractive to the fans of a product.
Yeah, it's kind of mind boggling how one book or one movie can seep into so many sectors of our culture. Ugh, But I would never want to buy a Harry Potter book with Daniel Radcliffe's face on the cover! The unique cover illustrations are all part of the charm. Speaking of Radcliffe, though, it's also intense to think of how one book written by one woman living on welfare at the time, that she started notes for on a napkin in a coffee shop has made this woman one of the richest in England, and *also* made total unknown actors into movie stars - Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson... I don't think J.K. was thinking about turning teens into movie stars when she started writing notes for a cute little story about a boy wizard. It's all crazy. The same goes for Star Wars, I guess, but Harry Potter's so much more fun than Star Wars, obviously.. ;p
Convergence in this form has been around long enough to be seen as part of a movement. Were it not for Star Wars and the ensuing craze, the makers of Harry Potter and the engineers of every book and movie explosion may not have happened. Granted the Star Wars universe and the books, toys and games that followed may have been created with $$ in mind, but I feel for George Lucas because who doesn't want thousands (or millions) of people to experience their own version of your fantasy world? Convergence in this way is certainly profitable, but it also helps bring together large groups of people with a shared experience and sort of coronates those who helped make it happen.
I agree that it's no longer enough to have a box office hit- one must have to the tie ins for the toys, video games, books, etc- for a movie to be really successful. This market saturation shows the power of convergence. Companies like News Corp which have stakes in multiple media forms (Fox Films, Myspace, newspapers...) can promote their films through the various outlets to make it that much more successful. On the same note, if a movie fails, it's not just the film makers who suffer but people who invested in all these different products that no one wants.
Your analysis is certainly accurate. Accuracy aside, however, I can't help but feel unsettled by the franchise phenomenons that sweet through pop culture year by year. Call me old-fashioned if you will, but I'm of the opinion that certain works of art ought to remain in their original mediums, if nothing else, in order to maintain their sanctity as art. I always think of the Godfather and Scarface in this discussion. While both have become videogames, I think one would be hard pressed to argue that the Godfather has launched itself into consumer culture the way Scarface has. Thus, I think Scarface has lost something of its integrity. It's a product which, when consumed, is used to describe the personality of the consumer. Liking or buying the Godfather series does not have the same affect.
Although, as I'm typing this, I've just seen the Coen Brothers' No Country For Old Men, which faithfully, though somewhat significantly alters the book, and god damn, that was fabulous. There goes my argument, huh.
Danniel Schoonebeek
this seems very true, that we no longer live in a world where a movie, TV show, book or whatever are based solely on the actual product, but everything that revolves and is based around it. It seems like every character, in movies/TV/comics, have an action figure that goes along with it, and now they all have there own videogames as well. I love the idea of the ninja turtles back when i was a kid, they had there cartoon which i watched all the time. Then there were all the endless toys that i went to Toys R' Us and bought every month. And there were the live-action movies, that i still occasionally watch, and Turtles in Time, the arcade that i think is in the Student Center here. It's an incredible thing that people not only buy all of these products, but all of these products need to be sold in order for a product to be successful.
I think looking at it from the other angle is interesting as well. Sure, the fans buy the stuff assiciated with the movie, but the production feels that they can sell that stuff. Based on the popularity of the Star Wars movies over time, producers learned that novels and toys and videogames and commic books would sell -- not to mention the production of episodes 1, 2, and 3.
What came first: the product or the consumer?
It's true that convergence of media is the key to creating a blockbuster film now-a-days. Most major movies now are coming out with games, toys, comics, and god knows how long the real list of products are.
I find it interesting that the video game industry is slowly picking up this idea of convergence strategy as well. The .hack// series for PS2 used this method and was a decently good hit to the point where it originally started in 2002 and they are still coming out with successful merchandise. Basically each game installment comes with an OVA movie that adds onto the storyline. There is also an anime series, a manga series, and a novel series that further adds onto the storyline as well. In order to understand the full story each medium has a different part of the story that all comes together. A more successful franchise that used the convergence theory of advertisement is Halo. The games were so successful that novels, graphic novels, apperal, and toys were created. There is even talks of Peter Jackson creating a Halo movie.
I also totally agree with what you're saying about fan culture. Its so crazy how things get big nowadays, and it's also crazy that when they get big and make lots of money, people only see them as ways to further their own fortune. When Harry Potter turned out to be a best-selling book, it was immediately adopted into a film, just like DaVinci Code and other books. And then it went on and on and now we have like a million recreations of the exact same thing that consumers automatically buy because of a brand.
It's amazing how far production studios will go these days to maximize their profits. I can't think of a better example than the "upcoming" batman sequel "The Dark Knight." If you haven't been sucked into the buzz of this movie already consider yourself lucky since it comes out in August 2008. For the past two years there has been very controlled little leaks of information to keep the fan-culture interested. First who would play the joker, then pictures that only let you see a small part of him, as well as, countless teasers and fan made trailers.
What I find to be the most absurd and most innovative marketing technique is a slew of websites that host puzzles (created by the joker himself) with directions in every major city in America where you can go to Lexington ave. find a six-sided star, look up and see a hidden Dark Knight photo.
I'm sure with it's release there will be the usual games, toys, burger king deals, t-shirts, etc. and I've also heard that if you go see I am Legend in IMAX you can see the first 6 mins of the Dark Knight. Count me in media machine, Im there.
Post a Comment