I should note this is a question no one was asking but which I feel compelled to answer regardless, specifically regarding the After the Campaign feature here.

The notion behind this feature is to write about how well a movie itself measures up to the marketing campaign that helped launch it. Did it intentionally or otherwise missell the movie or in some way deceive the audience? I’m not a film reviewer by nature but it’s my attempt to complete the circle and put a bow on my perceptions of the marketing to evaluate whether it was effective in selling the finished product not necessarily based on box-office take but by a more artistic standard.

When I relaunched Movie Marketing Madness back in September, After the Campaign was something I wanted to do as well. For a while I was trying to see at least one new movie a week in theaters and using it for ATC. Recently though that’s not so much working for me on a few fronts so, as you may have noticed, I’ve shifted to writing about older movies I wrote MMM columns for years ago but never got around to seeing. So I’m catching them on Netflix or borrowing the DVDs and then writing about them. Because why not? Some of these may be five or six year old movies but they’re ones I haven’t seen before so I feel they’re fresh for my takes.

So that’s why you’re seeing ATC columns for X-Men: First Class, Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows, Inglorious Basterds and others. I’m planning on continuing this trend for the foreseeable future. I’m going to be mixing in more recent movies (as they become available on home video in some format or another) and older ones from the previous life of MMM, basically working backward from where I stopped MMM back in 2012.

Questions? Happy to answer them in the comments below.

Comments are closed.