T & A -- A Marketing Standpoint

shutterspeedfilms

shutterspeedfilms

Well-known member
We've heard it over and over: Sex sells.

However, how much do you feel the ACTUAL inclusion of nudity/sex in a film helps a film's distribution/rental opportunities (disregarding other factors at this point)?

Wouldn't the INSINUATION/PROMISE of sex/nudity be more relevent?

After someone pays to view the film on the basis of a titilating (love that word) trailer or poster/box cover, doesn't actually see onscreen nudity or sex, is he/she really going to give the film bad word of mouth (again, discounting all other factors for the moment)?
 
shutterspeedfilms said:
After someone pays to view the film on the basis of a titilating (love that word) trailer or poster/box cover, doesn't actually see onscreen nudity or sex, is he/she really going to give the film bad word of mouth (again, discounting all other factors for the moment)?
Click to expand...

I'd be pissed if I saw a Friday the 13th without blood, and yeah, I'd let people know it.
 
The problem is advertising then not delivering. Does T&A help with distribution? I guess that would depend on what genre you're thinking about. Low budget horror/slasher or exploitation, probably.
 
Don't try and be something you're not just to sell a film. I never have nudity in my stuff. I won't shoot it if it requires something sleazy. I just turned down a major taco chain for a commercial because they wanted me to shoot a bunch of chicks wearing nothing but very short football jerseys.

I take Ridley Scott's example. He avoids nudity / sleaziness. Someone asked him about it once and he replied "I think sex is boring unless I'm the one doing it" Which is why you never see crap in his flicks, and he still puts out great stuff, and sells tons.

How many of these films actually need t&a to support the story?
 
I think T&A is just a hang over from the 1980's VHS age. Why would T&A help sell your movie nowadays when anyone of any age can type "free porn" into the search engine of their choice and not have to watch 1hr+ of a movie they might not even like?

T&A might work somewhat if you have a known actress/model/personality who hasn't done it before, but thats it imo.
 
It depends. If it is just gratuitous sex and nudity, I might as well just get a porn and skip the cheesy dialogue and bad plot. If it's integral to the story, and it's hot, sure.
 
taormina said:
Don't try and be something you're not just to sell a film. I never have nudity in my stuff. I won't shoot it if it requires something sleazy. I just turned down a major taco chain for a commercial because they wanted me to shoot a bunch of chicks wearing nothing but very short football jerseys.

I take Ridley Scott's example. He avoids nudity / sleaziness. Someone asked him about it once and he replied "I think sex is boring unless I'm the one doing it" Which is why you never see crap in his flicks, and he still puts out great stuff, and sells tons.

How many of these films actually need t&a to support the story?
Click to expand...

All due respect to Ridley Scott, according to IMDB the 'definitive cut' of 'Blade Runner' had brief nudity.

T&A is never necessary to support the story. Great movies have been made about Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden, as well as Lady Godiva, without showing onscreen nudity. Would 'Titanic' have been any less great if we hadn't seen Kate Winslet nude? Of course not.

Nudity is always about one thing, and only one thing -- making more money. Nudity will bring people to see the movie who would never have come otherwise. It's a hook. As a hook, it can be effective. But in my opinion, it is never necessary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top