No Super Bowl Commercial?

if what you say is true, i am rather dissapointed. it doesnt make much sence to pass that up, tf4 is getting a superbowl trailer,thats going to be one of godzillas biggest competitors. so again, not an opportunity they should pass up

I have to say it: Warner Bros has been kinda stupid with the advertising campaign of their movies.

Pacific Rim being a prime example. Everything's so hush-hush top secret, by the time it comes out, no one even realizes what it is.

You people do know that a lot of studios have been advertising at the Super Bowl less and less each year, right? Warner Bros. isn't advertising any of their movies, because they're one of the studios that realizes that paying $1-$4 million for a 30 second TV spot is insane.

Last year Paramount Pictures admitted that it wasn't worth it and they wish they had not advertised Star Trek during the Super Bowl.

The only reason the Transformers TV spot is a big deal is because it's the movie's first trailer. We've already had a first trailer for Godzilla. (By the way Transformers is NOT one of Godzilla's biggest competitors because its being released over a month after Godzilla.)

Studies have shown audiences are 70% more likely to remember a Doritos commercial during the Super Bowl than a movie trailer.

As for Pacific Rim. The marketing leaders for Pacific Rim were fired late last year. The same people are not promoting Godzilla.

this is what i like about you GMAN2887, your more open minded than most people is see on this site.

Re Pac Rim firings, that's interesting, didn't know that! I just read that Grown Ups 2 is a top nominated Razzie contender. Didn't that movie beat out PR by $2M on opening day? I mean the genre is not everyone's cup of tea, but GTD has a following after the Hellboy films, among others.

^GDT has a strong following, but it's not because of Hellboy. Hellboy II underperformed at the box office which is why we're probably not going to get a Hellboy III.

to bad because millions of people watch the superbowl.

It's always possible that the official TV trailer isn't finished yet guy, keep in mind that it's still in post-production, they MAY get a slot, they may not. Who know's. But I do know the trailer we seen was a mood piece.

GMAN2887 ›

"You people do know that a lot of studios have been advertising at the Super Bowl less and less each year, right? Warner Bros. isn't advertising any of their movies, because they're one of the studios that realizes that paying $1-$4 million for a 30 second TV spot is insane. Last year Paramount Pictures admitted that it wasn't worth it and they wish they had not advertised Star Trek during the Super Bowl. The only reason the Transformers TV spot is a big deal is because it's the movie's first trailer. We've already had a first trailer for Godzilla. (By the way Transformers is NOT one of Godzilla's biggest competitors because its being released over a month after Godzilla.) Studies have shown audiences are 70% more likely to remember a Doritos commercial during the Super Bowl than a movie trailer. As for Pacific Rim. The marketing leaders for Pacific Rim were fired late last year. The same people are not promoting Godzilla."

Wow, I had no idea about that. You actually do make good points. I completely forgot that Star Trek:Into Darkness advertised during the Super Bowl. It goes to show you that the Superbowl is not the best place to advertise. When you think about it, most Superbowl trailers are really not much. I mean, the films get more exposure, but at the same time, most audiences care more about the advertisements than the trailers like you said. It is probably good that Godzilla is not on one of the time slots. Also, I am glad to hear that the marketing team got fired. They should have released alot more content to promote the film. Instead, all audiences got was three trailers and a featurette which were all mostly released online. 

Movies getting more exposure is always a good thing. It would be good for Godzilla as well. But the fact is Super Bowl slots cost an enormous amount of money and there's been no proof, in the last half decade, that they ensure box office success.

We also have to take into account that Legendary has a budget to advertise the movie. Blowing a massive chunk of it on a Super Bowl spot may not be the best use of that budget.

No trailer during the Super Bowl is hardly going to break the movie.

I agree with you. It really makes sense not to do it.

I remember I type an essay on another post with the same topic. So dumb to have a trailer. For the SB. People want stupid commercials like Doritos and Chevy. It'd be a waste of money. People want 15-30 seconds of funny stupidity followed by a logo. Smart move not getting G a slot.

Lets not misunderstand, I'm sure Legendary/WB would promote Godzilla during the Super Bowl if the slots didn't cost such a ridiculous amount of money. The issue isn't that advertising during the Super Bowl isn't good. The issue is that advertising during the Super Bowl is really expensive and there's no guarantee of large return from that expense.

What? A two minute long trailer amongst commercials meant to make you laugh and that's it. You put a dark, realistic and gritty trailer amongst those? It's simple marketing. You don't do that. It's not what people want to see.

What? A two minute long trailer amongst commercials meant to make you laugh and that's it. You put a dark, realistic and gritty trailer amongst those? It's simple marketing. You don't do that. It's not what people want to see.

Personally I think it's not smart to miss premiering a new trailer during the Super Bowl and here's why.  I understand that the Superbowl is extremely expensive.  Further, I also get that most movie trailers during it aren't as well remembered (even though those are the ones I tend to re-watch after the game is over).  However, there are other factors here.  For starters, Legendary only has one other movie coming out between now and Godzilla and that is 300 Rise of an Empire, which comes out barely two months before Godzilla.  Most movies get a full real trailer (not a teaser like we have for Godzilla) several months before the premiere (300 had one months before, How to Train Your Dragon 2 has one already, etc.) and I feel like 300 is a little too late to get one out.  Second, yes while many people don't remember the trailers from the Superbowl as well, that's also because most of the trailers end up being 30 second spots.  If the studio put out more money (and come on, Gareth Edwards did this movie on $40 million less dollars than Pacific Rim was done, they can put out some) and got a minute or even two minute long commercial, like how Chrysler does every year, they would have a longer, more memorable spot that people will remember, again like the Chrysler or Budweiser one each year.  Finally, while many people I know are stoked for Godzilla many more people I've met either haven't seen the teaser or know little to nothing about the film.  Premiering this during the Super Bowl would ensure a large viewing audience to get the word out to.  Showing off, say, the airport scene from CC that's been under wraps or some other amazing footage would be perfect for this opportunity.  Again, though, that's my opinion.

@Linkzilla

The problem is, however, most people don't go revisit movie trailers after the Super Bowl. They revisit the commercials they like most-- Remember, there are awards shows for commercials now and Super Bowl Ads typically head that line-up. Movie trailers are kept at 30 seconds because studios A) Don't want to blow a lot of their promotional money on Super Bowl ads, B) Have a budget to consider for promotion and C) Also have other movies throughout the year to consider promoting.

Also a two minute spot for a movie? That's promotional suicide in this day and age. You might as well ask Legendary's Super Bowl spot to be their last trailer because a two minute spot is close to $10 million for the Super Bowl. That would put Godzilla deeper in the financial hole and there's no guarantee that money will be made back from audiences watching.

This is the problem with Super Bowl trailers I was mentioning. The rate of return has not been proven by Super Bowl ads. Blockbusters like Star Trek into Darkness are proof that it doesn't always work.

Meanwhile, you're asking way too much from any movie to release a two minute ad during the Super Bowl. No studio is going to pay that kind of money for a slot that long. It would be the only promotion the movie gets from here until its release.

Would a Super Bowl ad for Godzilla be good? Yes. It would at least have more exposure. If it doesn't have a Super Bowl ad will it hurt box office returns? No. There is no and has never been any proof of that.

I'm guessing my Linkzilla you mean me lol.  I do get your points and I understand all of that.  However, as I said before when you have car and beer companies doing 1+ minute to even two minute ads during the Superbowl just to promote their brand, not even to promote a new car or beverage, and these are often the highest rated ads in each Super Bowl (look back and you will see that every award show for commercials during the SB has the Chrysler and Budweiser ads near the top) a movie, especially a big name one like this, can do the same.  Yes it would be costly.  As for the rate of return, however, Pacific Rim made I believe it was over $300 million abroad after it's release.  International markets have become just as big as the US market for movies in recent years, and classic names like Godzilla tend to even better nationally.  That's not to say Godzilla won't do well here, in fact, I think it will do better than most of the recent blockbusters.  As long as we're talking about budgets though let's consider this- they JUST came out with the first teaser for Godzilla.  Most of the "marketting" has occured through leaks that cost the studio absolutely nothing as far as advertising goes.  They haven't spent much on it so far and I can't see that increasing anytime soon.  Truth be told, in a market where not as many people are going to movies because of the economy, you have to reach as many people as possible in other ways, and considering we only have one teaser so far for Godzilla, it would make sense to market on TV in the ways that would reach the most possible people- the Super Bowl is that.  Millions of people watching?  Check.  A commercial longer than 30 seconds (which is easy to miss) that will draw people in as it goes on?  Possible.  It's no guarantee for success but it's no guarantee for failure either.  I just think it's a smart decision, one most other studios won't try.  High risk high reward. 

Ever heard of a producer or show runner saying the word, "results"? When they say that, they need hard, factual evidence of something worth spending money on. If there isn't proof of that they typically don't take the risk.

You're right, there's no proof that Super Bowl movie trailers don't help, but there isn't proof that they return what was spent on them either. And that is more important to studios.

I agree the exposure would be great, but it's too costly of a risk to throw a 2 minute movie trailer into the Super Bowl. That's why it's not a smart decision. It puts a movie further down the hole. A movie must make double its budget to be profitable. So Pacific Rim only barely made profit. Had they thrown a 2 minute ad into the Super Bowl with those same final numbers, it may not have broken even.

I'm also curious where you're seeing these 2+ minute ads for other things during the Super Bowl. Maybe a minute at most, but I can't remember any Super Bowl ad that's taken up 2 minutes of time. That's an insane amount of money. I know that plenty of Super Bowl ads are cut down for their time slots and the longer version of those ads are later released online. But 2 minute ads? I think that's a stretch for anyone.

Hey man no need to be a douche.  I know what the word results means and I know how business works.  I also know that sometimes you have to take risks.  No show or show runner EVER has hard factual evidence that they will get a return on what they spend their money on. 

Looking at some blockbuster movies like this lately the amount of money they rake in is in the hundreds of millions of dollars, in some cases surpasing a half a billion dollars.  Let's say an advertiser spent the premium, 4 million dollars per 30 seconds, for air time for a two minute trailer.  That would be 16 million dollars on what could easily be a return far exceeding that if it helps the movie bring in say $500 million or more (and let's face it, many many media outlets are placing this at the top of their most anticipated lists the number of which was last seen with the Avengers which brought in over a billion if I recall correctly).  It's high risk high reward that's the point. 

Oh, and as for those long commercials?  Here are the longest ones, and yes, they were this long when they aired (I remember watching each of these live too.  I love watching SuperBowl ads).  Also note the number of views form people who re-watched them after... one numbers in the millions, the others in the hundreds of thousands.  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKL254Y_jtc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRtvpMPLQ8o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBsWYcWwpr4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTbLBL2P6YA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-SJQdREDKM

I wil grant that the last example is not the best example of a well done as well as long super bowl commercial but the point stands.  The Super Bowl is viewed by over 100 million people.  The point of advertising, as I'm sure you know, is to promote your product to the largest audience possible.  The more you promote a good, strong, message to the more likely you will receive a fair if not excellent rate of return.  Therefore, if you want to get the message out about Godzilla, which is slowly happening but still has a long ways to go as evidence by how many people I know who don't even know this movie is being made, it could make sense to go the Superbowl route.  If all else fails we all know the media will cover whatever the longest commercial was the next day which brings it even more attention. 

Like I said that's my opinion.  I'm trying to be nice so please don't be a douche. 

. 

No show or show runner EVER has hard factual evidence that they will get a return on what they spend their money on.

Very true. That's why the Nielson ratings system exists. It gives them a worked (albiet, flawed) factsheet that tells them if they should continue or not. 

Let's say an advertiser spent the premium, 4 million dollars per 30 seconds, for air time for a two minute trailer.  That would be 16 million dollars on what could easily be a return far exceeding that if it helps the movie bring in say $500 million or more (and let's face it, many many media outlets are placing this at the top of their most anticipated lists the number of which was last seen with the Avengers which brought in over a billion if I recall correctly).  It's high risk high reward that's the point. 

But the problem is there is no way to determine if a Super Bowl ad had anything to do with a movie raking in those kind of numbers. There is no system able to determine if a Super Bowl ad helped a movie get to $500 million or not. In the case of Paramount Pictures, Star Trek into Darkness didn't perform to the expectations they had hoped. There was a Super Bowl ad for that movie and they later admitted fault to spending the dough on that. All it did was put an already expensive movie further into a hole. $16 million is a great deal of money. Some smaller movies are made on a budget like that and it's simply not worth risking that much on something like a Super Bowl ad.

As for those ads, I'll have to take your word for it, but I don't remember them being quite as long. It'll be interesting to see which ads do run long for the Super Bowl this year and how much certain companies spent on them.

The Super Bowl is viewed by over 100 million people.  The point of advertising, as I'm sure you know, is to promote your product to the largest audience possible.  The more you promote a good, strong, message to the more likely you will receive a fair if not excellent rate of return.

Very true, but the fact that 70% of that 100 million remember the comercials you posted over movie trailers in the last year isn't encouraging for film studios and they're going to need harder evidence to make that kind of leap. By all means, I'd love Godzilla to have a Super Bowl trailer, but it's not something that will break the movie. And it's certainly not something that will propel it to boxoffice gold either. At most, it would just raise some awarness and that's just not worth $8-$16 million when that amount could be more appropriately spread to various TV spots and other media promotions closer to its release.

Interestingly, I could see Transformers going for a minute long spot. The difference simply being that Transformers has already proven to make an annoyingly large amount of dough three seperate time and that this is the movies first trailer. That's a much bigger deal than a secondary trailer or TV spot. But again, there are also hard numbers in Transformers favor. Not a lot of risk there.

I feel you are making an odd distinction here... you seem to be assuming that what's good for the goose isn't good for the gander.  What I mean by this is that a company advertises it's product during the Super Bowl to promote it's product and increase it's awareness/popularity/sales/namebrand/etc.  The same could be said to apply to movies.  Movies are products that are sold in the form of tickets.  They are a commodity much like beer, cars, etc.  Showing a memorable enough trailer could do for Godzilla what advertising does for Chrysler, budweiser, etc.  Sure the creators of Star Trek think they made a mistake premiering the trailer there... then again they premiered a very short trailer that didn't show much.  I actually remember the teaser trailer for Transformers 2 premiering during it's Super Bowl and being actually quite impressed with that one.  Now yes you are correct it wouldn't be a premiere... yet they could premiere something big enough to draw attention, such as showing Godzilla or one of the MUTOS or a battle of some sort that would draw more attention.  I agree not having one will hopefully not break the movie... however I'm not terribly sure when they will premiere the actual trailer.  300 seems too far out from now/too close to Godzilla's actual release and I can't think of any other big WB/Legendary movies coming out between now and then so it's going to be interesting... I almost feel like Legendary waited too long to release the teaser that came out with the Hobbit. 

You're right, movies are a commodity to be sold like beer/cars...etc... But it's a product that's not reaching the Super Bowl audience according studies. That's great you remember the trailer for Transformers 2 and that you seem to be a part of the 30% that is taken by movie trailers. I for one didn't even remember Transformers 2 being advertised. Nor do I recall any other trailers outside of Star Trek, but that's because I was looking for it.

Based on that it may not be the most lucrative outlet to advertise films. So what if it's not, as you say, good for the gander? We have to consider the audience and what they cater to. "Millions of people" don't always equate the "target people". You wouldn't advertise Criminal Minds during Power Rangers. Maybe movies aren't the right outlet to advertise during the Super Bowl? There isn't necessarily evidence of that, but there is evidence these spots aren't staying with the Super Bowl audience like other ads. Perhaps those studies are on to something.

In any case I feel like the advertising for Godzilla has been fairly standard just as any other movie. Saving the Godzilla trailer for the end of the year and releasing it after the X-Men and Captain America trailers was brilliant because it sticks out more and overshadows previously released trailers. I think most people are just nervous after what happened to Pacific Rim-- which is understandable, but not entirely warranted. That and there's an arrogant sense of self-entitlment from a large portion of the fanbase. Many of them just want more immediately and others feel Godzilla should get a special treatment because, well, they're fans of it.

@GMAN2887 The main thing here is that this event would get the trailer out to other people. Statistics and studies don't matter. Who cares if they watch it again? The point is to get a large amount of people to acknowledge the movie exists. That's what marketing is about. Playing it safe gets you no where. You have to take financial risks in order to reach new audience. This discussion is closed. You are fighting just to preserve the dominance of your opinion, pitiful. 

I believe batman lol

@The-True-Batman

Actually I'm quite enjoying the discussion; but since you feel the need to chime in and repeat things I've already said, I'll, once again, admit that I completely agree it would raise awareness to the general public. But a trailer that costs that much money needs to do more than simply raise awareness. There needs to be promise of return. You hit a ceiling in promotions depending on the outlet/medium and after a few million, you've very much hit it. I'm sorry you're unable to understand such a concept.

I enjoy that you're telling me what marketing is about considering my work though. That was amusing.