Damn! There’s such a major drought at my local 16-screen Regal Cineplex. Question: Why produce a movie when there’s no cash left in the wallet to PROMOTE it? I still really enjoy the Big Screen experience, but it’s absolutely paramount that I’m made aware of a film’s existence BEYOND its title!
This morning, I looked over the current reviews from the critics at RogerEbert.com, recognizing only ONE title of the 12 reviewed. That lone title was MICHAEL.
Following the quick scroll of unfamiliar titles, my thumbs decided to stop by my nearby Regal website to see what was being offered— The recognizable titles odds were a bit better— THREE of the 13 offered. Known properties were the following— PROJECT HAIL MARY, MICHAEL, and THE DRAMA. The remaining 10 offered zero hope…. due to no marketing.
Do you notice this, also? Having no knowledge of a movie’s premise beyond the title? If this strange oddity were a film, it would be called, “Non Attack of the No Names!!!”
Feel free to share your thoughts.
1 person likes this
Hey Bill, this is Ashley from the Stage 32 team. I just wanted to let you know I moved your post from Anything Goes to Distribution, as it fits much better there. Let me know if you have any questions, and all the best to you!
1 person likes this
Is it possible there is marketing, but it’s aimed at a different demographic in different media?
1 person likes this
Bill Brock Marketing has evolved into the fragmented social media demographic and on the other hand into targeted messaging everywhere. You haven't seen the advertising because some AI or automated targeted marketing algorithm decided your web footprint isn't in their ideal demographic. Proving once again that film marketing and distribution is done by out of touch and slow thinking groups.
1 person likes this
Shadow Dragu-Mihai Wow, Shadow. That’s an excellent point worth considering. Something that wasn’t even on my radar. It certainly makes perfect sense. Ughhhhhhhh! Why must A I ruin EVERYTHING???!!!
I notice it too. Studios cut marketing budgets first and rely very heavily on the starpower or IP power to bolster their audiences which works but isn't sustainable for the future!
Bill Brock my son went to see Project Hail Mary Bill, and said his only complaint was that it wasn’t long enough!
Hi Bill,
You’re pointing to a very real gap—and I’d argue it’s not just a marketing problem, it’s a story-positioning problem upstream of marketing.
Because even the best campaign struggles if the film itself doesn’t communicate a clear, immediate audience hook.
From a script doctor’s perspective, I often see this disconnect early:
films are developed to be interesting, but not always to be instantly legible to an audience outside the creative circle.
So by the time they reach distribution, the marketing team isn’t amplifying a signal—they’re trying to invent one under pressure.
A few things tend to separate the titles you recognize from the ones you don’t:
Clarity of concept: can the premise be understood—and felt—in one sentence?
Defined audience promise: does the viewer know what kind of experience they’re buying into within seconds?
Market-aligned storytelling choices: not compromise, but awareness of how the film will be positioned from day one
When those elements are embedded in the script and development phase, marketing becomes translation, not rescue.
When they’re not, even a finished film can feel invisible—no matter how good it actually is.
So I’d reframe your question slightly:
it’s not just “why produce without marketing?”
It’s:
Geoff Hall Hey, Geoff. Here’s how DESPERATE I am to see a film of high quality. I’m NOT a Ryan Gosling fan AT ALL….. but went to see PROJECT. The film was EXCELLENT. Your kid wanted MORE of it? 2 hours and 20 minutes is LONG enough! My favorite part of the film was its music score. It was PHENOMENAL!!!! My only reservations: Too many flashbacks! I counted ELEVEN. Pacing was fine, but a good 15 minutes could’ve easily been shaved off this film. Gosling did a great job. I warmed up to him, but left the theater…. still not a fan.