Not a summer blockbuster (or supposed to be), but I thought Challengers was marketed poorly. From the trailer and the advertising campaign, I thought it would be some serious sports drama/psychosexual sports drama, but It's such a melodrama. It's really not serious at all, other than the characters taking themselves very seriously, which I found campy. (I don't think I'm quite smart enough to know if it was actually camp). I'm a bisexual, recreational tennis player (i.e., the target audience) and the trailer felt kinda "enh" and I ended up not seeing it in theaters. According to my google, it was considered a "modest" box office success. But what if it had been advertised as being fun? I remember all the "tennis threesome movie" chatter, but even that was like, but it's a threesome for ART. which does not sound as interesting as a threesome for FUN.
Great thoughts here Paul, interesting topic. Would enjoy some more talk around Star Studies and Richard Dyer's work on the impact of star performers on budget, fiscal success/box office, cultural impact, etc. You can't separate Adam Sandler from $5 billion in receipts anymore than the T-800...
I think it goes to the RIPD example. It’s not enough to just have faces on something. We have really lost the star who guarantees a giant opening. Or maybe we have whittled them down to one you can count on one hand.
Great post that I will re-read before every screenplay or pilot spec I write.
Great read!
Not a summer blockbuster (or supposed to be), but I thought Challengers was marketed poorly. From the trailer and the advertising campaign, I thought it would be some serious sports drama/psychosexual sports drama, but It's such a melodrama. It's really not serious at all, other than the characters taking themselves very seriously, which I found campy. (I don't think I'm quite smart enough to know if it was actually camp). I'm a bisexual, recreational tennis player (i.e., the target audience) and the trailer felt kinda "enh" and I ended up not seeing it in theaters. According to my google, it was considered a "modest" box office success. But what if it had been advertised as being fun? I remember all the "tennis threesome movie" chatter, but even that was like, but it's a threesome for ART. which does not sound as interesting as a threesome for FUN.
Anyways, super fun and interesting read!
Great thoughts here Paul, interesting topic. Would enjoy some more talk around Star Studies and Richard Dyer's work on the impact of star performers on budget, fiscal success/box office, cultural impact, etc. You can't separate Adam Sandler from $5 billion in receipts anymore than the T-800...
I think it goes to the RIPD example. It’s not enough to just have faces on something. We have really lost the star who guarantees a giant opening. Or maybe we have whittled them down to one you can count on one hand.