When you read about it like that you think, wow, now how is a film that is supposed to be so bad, come back with minor changes and suddenly be so good.
Many journalists describe it as a 'good-bad film' !
The overall opinion varies a lot : the Washington post writes 'Snakes' Is Defanged at Box Office, MSNBC writes 'Snakes' slithers to modest weekend at No. 1, RollingStone writes it's "Not even worth a hissss", Nowplayingmag writes "Snakes on a Plane delivers exactly what it promises. Nothing more, nothing less." And finally it gets itself a 6 out of 10 average at Rotten Tomatoes.
However, for a very interesting read, on the title nearly getting axed by the studio, which is part of the 'how' and 'why' the buzz got so big with 'Snakes on a Plane', I recommend you read the Forbes article :
And within days, “snakes on a plane” became a Net buzz word, even taking on a meaning of its own, akin to “What're ya gonna do?” or “That's life.”
“Sorry I'm late, there was killer traffic.”
“Snakes on a plane, man.”
And in "March the studio spent five days reshooting scenes to cater to the fortuitously erupting fan base."
The studio is quoted to have secretly added content to YouTube, pretending that it was content from fans, in order to fuel the whole hype around the film, which is crossing the line and a pretty risky move.
This was probably an attempt to replicate the success of the viral marketing campaign in 1999 for the "The Blair Witch Project". But unlike the smart marketing from Artisan on the Blair Witch Project, Snakes on a Plane buzz came mainly from anonymous fans and bloggers.
The sentence Snakes on a plane has even grown to take on a life of it's own meaning something along the lines of "Whaddya gonna do?" or "Shit Happens" as you can read here at UrbanDictionray.
The release of the film was also just as unusual in that it was not shown to any journalists.
It's usually films that are pretty bad that get this treatment but in view of all the hype around the film it wasn't something you would have expected. Many journalists have criticized this and some believe the film may have done better with journalists backing it. But would they have backed it after seeing it ?
Post A Comment About This Article