MovieChat Forums > Dark City (1998) Discussion > Was Dark City Unmarketable?

Was Dark City Unmarketable?


Was watching Proyas on the DVD talking about the difficulties New Line had on deciding how to market this film, and it occurred to me that it WOULD be rather difficult. The film crosses several genre boundaries for one thing, but more troublesome is that, rather than being a film with simply a surprise or, 'twist' ending, Dark City has a false plot acting as a facade to the true one.To the best of my knowledge, there was only ever one trailer, and while its an awesome one if youve already seen the movie, I feel it gives away too much for those who havent.

This then begs the question, though --- if marketing the true plot gives away too much, are you missing your intended audience (sci-fi, fantasy & philosophy buffs) by advertising the false plot (a film noir murder mystery)?

How could this be resolved? How would YOU have sold this film to the public?

reply

As a sci fi mystery, with hints of a big plot twist.

reply

Yeah glad it wasn't my job!

reply

You almost cant even advertize it as sci fi , because only a small part wich is basically spoilers involves sci fi.

It would be interesting to see a trailer that billed it like a dark and gritty serial killer/is this memory loss guy the killer. And hint that theres more to it with a few hard to explain things like strangers floating, Murdock seeing strangers interacting with sleeping people, etc.
It would only spoil in a way that the strangers were up to something, and something supernatural might be involved.

It is tough cause if you don't tease the sci fi , people would not like the 'hokey' stuff, but if you do other people would not like that there wasn't enough of it

reply

Should have played up Jennifer Connellys presence a bit more. Lots of dudes who grew up gazing at her.. um, 'talents'... on the poster for 'Career Opportunities' could have been easily drawn in...

'Will this damsel in distress get saved?' could have been a good hook.

reply

This is one where my trailer would have been a scene from the beginning of the film -- the scene when John first wakes up in his bathroom, tries to figure out who he is, saves the goldfish.

That scene is so damn perfect, and so intriguing as to what is going to happen next.

As a trailer, obviously it would not give away any of the amazing plot developments that come later.

reply

Yeah it's a shame you can't just advertise a movie by saying 'this 1 has an awesome story so come see it!' - I guess we all need more than that. D.C. deserved to do way better than it did but at least it's still awesome.

reply

They used the goldfish in the trailer.

reply

The film isn't unmarketable, it was just marketed poorly. You could make a trailer showing the Stranger in the child's body, the world being tuned, the spirals, the clocks, and the syringe going into the man's forehead when he and his wife are eating dinner, set to Jennifer Connelly singing, and these things would all be intriguing to a general audience. They would wonder what it's about and want to see the movie. Just telling the plot flat-out in this case gives mixed signals about what to expect. The best trailers for cerebral movies are ones like "the Exorcist" or "the Shining", that use evocative images and sounds to show the atmosphere of the movie without telling you the plot, so you'll have no explicit expectations prior to watching it and finding out what it is.

reply

Might've done better in the fall or winter.

I would've sold it as any other mainstream sci-fi with a pulse, concentrating also on the cast.

reply

It came out in winter of 1998.

Requiescat in pace, Krystle Papile. I'll always miss you.

reply

On the spring end of winter, when everything already gets brighter and people don't feel like darkness anymore, especially when considering that such a movie is a rather slow burn opposed to the spectacle everybody want to watch the first weekend (because that is part of the spectacle).

reply

I don't think marketing was an issue, the fact that it came out the same weak as Titanic is probably what killed it.

reply

Titanic certainly would have 'sunk' it so to speak...Heh Heh....
...But back then I was a projectionist and barely remember the title let alone watching it.

I've just watched the first hour and it looks pretty much a 7/10 so far.
Gunna watch the rest tonight.

A lot of good ideas in this thread for a trailer including the one by JeffBladeRunner about pressing that Jennifer Connelly is in it (as well as few other 'bigger' names), mostly the only thing big about her were her boobs in Labyrinth with David Bowie, but was Dark City made before or after she appeared at the Oscars nominated for Best Actress (I think for A Beautiful Mind), because at the Oscars that lovely chest had drooped to her knees, she should have done herself a favour and used a push up bra or some 'Hollywood Tape'!
-B!LL!


reply

Maybe the film needed a better title.

It's that man again!!

reply

As mentioned elsewhere, the title and artwork made people think this was a simple horror/gore/torture movie, which it most certainly is NOT.

Because this movie was so ground-breaking, there's really not a lot to compare it to for marketing purposes. The only thing I can think of with some parallels is Rod Serling's original Twilight Zone show (1959-64). Everything else similar came out AFTER Dark City, and was very likely influenced by it.

reply

You got it:
Title: Twilight Zone - The Motion Picture (built in audience of fans and casual viewers who understand whats in store)
Poster artwork: Pictures of the great cast - give nothing away
Trailer: just use parts from the opening scene as a hook - and some quick shots of the great cast - no spoilers

reply