As I was flipping through the television from one channel to the next -  I couldn’t help but hear the Disney execs comment on the total failure of Disney’s $250 MM John Carter Movie. “We thought that the movie would connect with audiences,” they all said.

Did the Disney execs take a look at the trailer that was being run during their thirty/sixty second spots ?  I believe that if they had - they’d have easily foreseen the impending doom at the box office. 

 The issue that I’d like to touch-on in this article is the notion of “connecting with the consumers.”  It’s an omni-present issue, and when you spend 250 MM for the production of the movie - you’d be well advised to check your “connection cables” to insure that it will connect with the audience.

We all know that one of the most important things that we do as experiential marketers is to form a strong “connection” with the consumers.  We do this properly by building a consumer touch-point map and building a well thought campaign that connects and engages the consumers on many levels.  This means that we not only get their attention, but have the ability to hold it for a healthy amount of time. I’m not sure who did the TV spots, but they seemed schizophrenic at best.  I can’t imagine anyone watching one of the ads and saying, “ I can’t wait to see that movie.”  It was impossible to even make out the story lines or potential story lines. 

 In the 30 and 60 second spots for the John Carter movie on TV there wasn’t anything to connect with.  The commercials were simply confusing at best, and a total and complete  waste of money which induced the antithesis effect at worst.  So what can be done to prevent this in the future?

1. Movie executives need to take into account the current financial situation in the world.  This, alone, would be having the studios putting out safer movies.  The risk profile of the John Carter movie was extremely high.  So, in short, green light movies that will appeal to larger audiences and that have MUCH lower production costs
2. “Thinking” that the consumers would connect with the movie seems very thin to me.  Before any brand or movie production house puts that much money into something - they should know that it’s s home run.  This can be achieved by leveraging existing, successful franchises and adapting their stories for the big screen.  Or, better yet, do something so completely unexpected that it earns so much social currency among consumers that it hits a grand slam - ala Blair With Project.  One may say that the Blair Witch project was a fluke.  The reason that I used this as an example is that I really didn’t even particularly care for that movie, but for 250 MM dollars you can make around  300 Blair Witch projects - therefore increasing your likeliness to connect with the audiences.

In short, unless James Cameron walks in with a script that is essentially “money in the bank” - lower your risk profile - truly connect and engage your consumers, and green light projects that appeal to a broader audience.

 Whether is be a film or a new product/service.  It is the company’s responsibility to produce something that creates and sustains demand by the consumers.  An ad shop can only do so much. We can’t make ketchup fly - well, not without our animation tools.;)  

Erik Hauser
http://www.experientialforum.com