SydLexia.com - The Forums :: View topic - Spider-Man 3 (and overall franchise)

Posted: Apr 11 2007 07:06 pm

CoS, I didn't mod your post, so I have no idea what you wrote.

I'm just sick of "my guys in marketing know more than yours" or whatever. Here's my take: if you liked it, great. If you didn't, hooray.

If you're going to pull out "facts" or make bold, sweeping comments, back it up. I don't want to hear what you THINK you know about who saw Spiderman; SHOW ME in print with facts and figures why you are right. Otherwise, you just sound dumb.

"Dude, obviously more men than women watch sports because there are more men in sports. Also, most boyfriends only get blowjobs during halftime or the 7th inning stretch. Trust me, I know this stuff. I have friends who are men, women, and/or boyfriends."

2010 SLF Tag Champ Joined: Jun 07 2006 Posts: 12294

ChildrenofSlayer wrote:

Those box office numbers are tricky, because a lot of the people who went to see Spiderman did so with their significant others. I'm sure there were numerous instances of girlfriends dragging along their men to watch this in cases where the men were originally indifferent. That's obviously speculation on my part, but considering that women I've met rated the film significantly higher than men, it's not an unreasonable one.

At any rate, even if it was split fifty-fifty....do you not realize how unusual that is for an action film? How many action films EVER have had a 50% female audience?!

Quote:

There are flaws in your thinking and perception of what constitutes a demographic.

Enlighten me, then.

Quote:

Additionally, if the audience for Spider-Man was predominately female, Sony would have a completely different marketing strategy.

Completely wrong. A few of my friends work in marketing, and that's just utterly incorrect. Trust me on this.

The primary goal in trailers and any type of marketing campaign is not to wow the target demographics, but rather not to alienate or offend any of them.

If you're arguing that a Spiderman film aimed at women should have had a trailer with sweet orchestral music playing in the background, and long, passionate gazes into one another's eyes between Peter and MJ, realize that doing so would have completely alienated the male target fanbase. (And my jokes to the contrary, I know that they obviously formed a large part of the movie-going audience, although not the dominant one)

Instead, the marketers wisely strafed the middle ground; the trailers didn't contain the badass montage of action scenes which most action films go for (see "Transporter 2", for example), but it wasn't the montage of romantic scenes one typically sees in a chick flick.

Instead, it was the type of trailer for a romantic action film which didn't offend either men or women.

S. McCracken wrote:

CoS, I'm all for you having your opinion of them movie. If you hated it, more power to you. But methinks you're pulling "facts" out of your ass.

Post deleted for failure to respect forum rules. - The Moderators

Now your just grasping at straws

Posted: Apr 11 2007 07:15 pm

ChildrenofSlayer wrote:

Uh, that was pretty obviously a joke, McCracken, and a very tame one at that.

Please reread ATTN: Children of Slayer.

Posted: Apr 11 2007 10:02 pm

ChildrenofSlayer wrote:

That would be me, and the natural question for me to ask at this point is; where do you live, how many other females do you know, and have you ever seen Spiderman in theatres?

I'm from Canada... but I'm sure the fine folks of Wyoming would think you're a complete dick. I know tons of females and even more males, since I hate girls for the most part... this was not a chick flick! If it was, they would have hired someone better than Kirsten-look at my tits-Dunst! She's obviously there for the male audience!

Joined: Mar 24 2007 Posts: 74

So Tebor modded that post, not S. McCracken? Jesus, how obvious do I have to make jokes about people liking Tobey Maguire's sexy body now? Should I append smiley faces to all jokes from here on out, so no one gets offended? I'm just trying to figure this out people. If I need to agree with a bunch of people on any given topic and am not allowed to make any jokes, just tell me that.

Syd Lexia wrote:

With knowledge of these test groups, your theory becomes less credible, as men who were dragged to the movie and didn't enjoy it are not compelled to lie about their enjoyment of the film.

Fair enough....but we all know that the only guys who go to advanced pre-screenings are homosexuals. I'm only half-joking about this; I have no idea where that particular pre-screening was held, but I know that Santa Monica (which has a very large gay community) is a popular place for studios to gauge opinions on upcoming movies.

It all depends on which locale the screening was held in; obviously, it was probably shown in a few different places so that several different key demographics were represented.

Homosexuals are definitely a HUGE demographic that any studio executives worth their salt have to consider, so that's another variable to think about.

At any rate, we can agree on one thing; women made up at least half the people watching this film, which is almost UNHEARD OF for an action film.

Quote:

I would imagine you know more people who like Slayer than who like Dave Matthews; I probably do too. As a result, you might argue that Slayer is more popular than Dave Matthews, but sadly this is not the case.

Sadly, no.....I know a lot more people who like Dave Matthews than Slayer. That's what you get for growing up in an affluent suburb in Northern California.

Quote:

I'm from Canada... but I'm sure the fine folks of Wyoming would think you're a complete dick.

Canada...Wyoming....same thing. They're both the graveyards and backyard junk of America.

Quote:

I know tons of females and even more males, since I hate girls for the most part

And Tebor was accusing me of being mysoginistic?

Also, if you hate girls and don't like being around them (I'm the opposite), then how would you know what girls thought about this film? Are you pulling facts out of your ass, to quote McCracken?

Quote:

... this was not a chick flick!

Even the people arguing this have admitted that half the audience was composed of females. How many action films has this ever been the case for?

Quote:

If it was, they would have hired someone better than Kirsten-look at my tits-Dunst! She's obviously there for the male audience!

So you're saying that men only care about the sex appeal of an actress, and that no women would go watch a film with Kirsten Dunst because they care more about the acting? But wait... you just told us you hate girls, enjoy being around guys more, and have a much more guyish mentality, so how are you qualified to speak about this?

For the record, Kirsten Dunst isn't the hottest or most talented actress around, but I have no problem with her presence in the film.

Posted: Apr 11 2007 10:41 pm

S. McCracken wrote:

Tebor wrote:

Bully for your commitment.

O'Doyle rules!

Post of the day

Posted: Apr 11 2007 10:42 pm

ChildrenofSlayer wrote:

Bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla

1) What does being homosexual have to do with anything? Interests are not determined by sexual orientation from what I can recall... I'm convinced you're just trying to be a complete jerk, and based on the complete lack of quality in your posts, you're succeeding beyond your wildest expectations! Way to show your complete lack of respect toward gay people, people of different opinions than yours, and basically EVERYONE!

2) Do all people who "[grow] up in an affluent suburb in Northern California" act so ignorant? Or is it just you? I'm not trying to be rude or mean, or start fights, but your constant insults make me question your level of socialization.

3) Canada is the junk of America? I don't even need to touch on this bullshit. The only junk here is your post.

4) Just because I hate girls doesn't mean I'm not around them... I have maybe 3 close female friends, but I prefer to associate with guys. My interests generally differ from most females in my surrounding. I like watching wrestling, talking shit about stupid ditsy girls, and I'm not big on things like shopping/chick flicks/pink/etc. I just do better with guys... they tend to be less emotional too.

5) What I'm saying about Kirsten Dunst and sex appeal is that SHE wasn't chosen because she resembled the part or was just the "go to" actress. She was likely chosen for her sex appeal... they had to get it somewhere, because Toby McGuire certainly doesn't have any! If you're going to try to correlate actor choice with audience demographic, they certainly intended for more men to watch the movie. You won't see Toby McGuire win Hottest Male of the Year... Kirsten Dunst on the other hand has made the cover of several magazines, which is due to her looks and popularity with men.

*** I don't have to like girls to understand the general opinions they have ***

Joined: Mar 24 2007 Posts: 74

Is Tish's post going to be modded? I think that's probably more offensive than anything I've ever written here by a mile.

Posted: Apr 11 2007 10:54 pm

I'll do you one better. Here's a fork:

This thread is done.

Posted: Apr 11 2007 10:56 pm

Everyone's already stated their opinions, so this is being locked before it turns into even MORE of a clusterfuck.

#edit: you beat me to posting Syd, but I still physically locked it!