So YouTube launched their original series Living Legends, featuring an introduction from The Rolling Stones (as I was the first to announce here).

So what do I think?

First of all, the art direction on this thing is just not good. If YouTube wants to be a player in the original content space, they are going to have to choose some good fonts and title treatments, and start making these channel pages a whole lot better looking. Ironically, this is something that MySpace is actually doing right. Check out BBC WOrldwide’s channel on MySpaceTV as an example of sub-channeling content and integration of community elements.

Secondly, I’m a huge Stones fan, and it just pains me to see Mick Jagger so obviously reading the simplest of lines from cue cards.

Thirdly, when I click on the ‘Ask a Question’ button, it just opens up a new tab in my browser and reloads the page.

Maybe it’s just me, but if you land the Rolling Stones (even in an obvious shill for their new movie), do it right.

Share on Facebook

I wrote about the possibility of this happening back in December. I said it would happen, and it is happening.

Antigua, because of the US’s pressure on the WTO to make online poker illegal, is threatening to legalize piracy if a swift decision to end the dispute isn’t reached.

Read more about it here and here.

This is the beginning of a veritable you-know-what-storm if Antigua goes ahead with their threat.

Share on Facebook

Lots of talk hit the movie trade rags when The Onion scored a deal for a movie.

That was a long time ago.

They actually did make one, and it will be released on DVD, well, soon.

This is totally reminiscent of one of my favorite flicks, Kentucky Fried Movie, from John Landis and David Zucker. Here’s the trailer for The Onion Movie:

And for posterity’s sake, here’s the trailer for Kentucky Fried Movie (ignore the horrible pre-roll):

Share on Facebook

I watched the true HD version of this in my office, on a big screen, with the lights off, and the sound turned way up.

It was so worth it.

What is it about the character of Indiana Jones that makes Harrison Ford remember that he has a personality? Don’t answer that. Ignorance is bliss.

And hey, Yahoo. I know you’re busy right now, but a way to grab embed code directly from the player above wouldn’t hurt.

Share on Facebook

We’ve done analog advertising before, but this one is just too cool to hold in.

Download our Harold and Kumar Prison Activity Fun Book by clicking here.

Color outside the lines, children. And then when you’re done, you can use it as rolling papers. That’s what H & K would probably do.

And when you’re done with that, you can re-watch Shaq’s Super Bowl spot from our friends at vitaminwater. It’ll be even funnier, if that’s possible.

Share on Facebook

The news is all over the trades today about the new Jackass movie, Jackass 2.5, being launched online.

As the NY Times reports…

Paramount Pictures is lurching onto the Web with its “Jackass” franchise, with what it says will be the first studio-backed feature film to have its premiere online. And the studio hopes the result will be considerably more pleasurable than the old MTV show’s trademark shot to the groin — perhaps by paving the way for more profit-making Web-only material.

On Dec. 19, the studio will make “Jackass 2.5” available in connection with Blockbuster’s Movielink service. The hour-plus film has original material and previously unseen outtakes from the second “Jackass” movie in 2006. The new movie, made for less than $2 million, will stream for free but will have 15- or 30-second commercials before and after it plays.

TechCrunch likes the strategy’s potential…

The move is said in part to be a curtain raiser for the new online home for Jackass, “Jackass World” that will officially launch February 6.

As much as it sounds like a marketing ploy from Paramount, any move to debut a movie online for free has got to be a positive in the overall progression from the traditional media model to one that reflects the realities of the internet age. Of course it will take all of about 5 seconds for the movie to be ripped from the site and put onto BitTorrent, but maybe at least in this example, Paramount, unlike many of its competitors, may not be jackass’s after all.

And I agree. In fact, I agree so much, that Deep Focus has been involved in this effort for quite some time now. We will be handling the online marketing around this effort, and are proud to be involved with the very forward-thinking folks at MTV, Paramount, and Blockbuster, Mr. Knoxville, amongst others.

In the meantime, wet your whistle with this, the trailer for for the new film filled with outtakes and new and deleted scenes from previous Jackass movies. And kids, don’t try any of this at home.

Share on Facebook

According to the new Myers Emotional Connections™ Research Report on Audience Attentiveness to Advertising, websites visited for TV and/or Movie information generate the highest awareness of advertising among all age groups except 55+.

Forty-five percent of teens 15 to 17, 41% of adults 18 to 24 and 33% of adults 25 to 54 who visit websites say they are likely to pay attention to ads appearing at TV and movie sites.

What is also very interesting about this report is that ads on these types of websites perform better attention-wise (31.10%) than those ads on TV (28.40%).

Newspapers rank first in advertising effectiveness, but my hunch is that is because readership skews much older, and less of other media (especially digital) is being consumed.

What does this mean? If your brand is purchasing media, make sure your media buyers have an understanding of the TV/Movie-related online behaviors of your target audiences.

Share on Facebook

The LA Times does a bit of a feature on some of best in 2007 movie marketing tactics online. Check it out by clicking here.

Among the 10 films mentioned in this piece, I’m proud to say that Deep Focus was at least partially involved with of 4 of their online campaigns.

Congrats to all of our clients featured in this piece!

Share on Facebook

Chris Thilk, resident expert at Movie Marketing Madness points out an article on Forbes.com that explores Sony Pictures’ online marketing efforts for Superbad and Resident Evil: Extinction.

It turns out that online media was more successful than traditional media at driving intent.

Chris shares his views on this (and I completely agree with them) here.

By the way…

A prediction? Today’s heads of “new media” at the studios, will be the future heads of studios (if they are masochistic enough). Trust me on that one. Buy stock in guys like Dwight Caines (Sony), Gordon Paddison (New Line), and others now.

They get it.

Share on Facebook

In a Google/Nielsen study of 2,000 US moviegoers, we again confirm what we’ve known for years — online content and advertising impact moviegoing audiences’ moviegoing decisions.

Highlights from the study:

TV and the Web hold almost the same amount of sway over potential moviegoers–as 68% of respondents said that TV was influential in their decision to see the film, while 66% said the same about the Internet.

24% of moviegoers polled said they had watched the trailer for the movie they’d just seen online
91% of these said that it was “very or somewhat” influential in their decision to see it.

Moviegoers who had seen ads and content were:
68% more likely to search for more information on the film
130% more likely to visit the official movie Web site
23% more likely to talk to others about the movie than their info-only counterparts.

Respondents who’d seen both ads and Web info pertaining to the movie were 40% more likely to recommend it to their family or friends.

The report also found that the number of moviegoers who said the Web was their first source of information about the movie they had just seen increased from 8% in 2006, to 13% in 2007–a 63% increase year-over-year.

Here’s the rub, though: No matter how much research comes out saying that online advertising impacts moviegoing, it will always be just part of the equation. A very important part, but a part nonetheless. Television advertising is still (for now) what most directly impacts overall audience awareness for a film.

Why? Because there is such a disproportionate amount money spent on television, that it is impossible for online to make a dent. If you watch television frequently, there is no doubt that you will see the same ad for a film a dozen times. For each one of those ads run above the optimal frequency you could have “owned” the homepages of some of the most popular sites on the web in a way that is more targeted, more relevant, and more engaging.

The problem is that the movie business is such a high-risk business, that there just isn’t that much room for experimentation when there is lots of money involved. And that’s got to change. That might mean minimizing the costs of making a film in favor of using dollars to explore new ways of marketing films.

What’s interesting is that while Hollywood continues to not put enough money on the web, the industry that I’m starting to pay attention to the web the most, is the one that’s Hollywood’s favorite ad dollar receptacle: television.

The television industry sees the writing on the wall. Will Hollywood step up?

Hollywood’s online budgets are bigger than they ever have been. But it’s still not enough. And when they do get the money (they will — it’s inevitable), will they know what to do with it? Will they be able to strike the right balance between paid advertising (without too high of a frequency), content distribution, promotions, and buzz-generating/word-of-mouth-driving/zeitgeist-entering ideas?

I sure hope so. If not, I know someone that can help.

Share on Facebook