During this awards season, many Oscar-contending films open with limited release screenings, which is a very standard Oscar campaign strategy. In the past, for Hollywood, limited releases had a more important role in guiding distribution.
As early as decades ago, major theaters across North America had already implemented differentiated releases. For producers, limited releases not only served marketing and media strategies but also played a significant role in shaping the distribution plan and execution. For example, by analyzing post-screening data, they could identify the target audience, determine whether the film was suitable for mainstream market release, decide how many screens to use, and formulate strategies for cooperation with various theater chains.
However, now with highly developed media and the existence of the Internet a medium where information spreads at lightning speed since the 1990s, limited releases have become less relevant to distribution strategies for films with wide release plans.
Today, when we talk about limited releases, the first things that come to mind are art films and award hopefuls.
For art films, using very few screens for limited release helps control the audience group. In the early stages, only enthusiasts are drawn into theaters, which makes it much easier to build extremely positive word-of-mouth. This can be said to be a major reason why art films often enjoy high ratings.
No one can deny that when the quality of films is roughly the same, the fewer people watch it, the higher the average evaluation tends to be.
Award contenders and commercial blockbusters are two completely different entities. Their publicity and distribution strategies differ entirely. Reputation and ratings from various media outlets and film critics are of great importance to Oscar contenders.
Limited releases also offer a chance for some films that don't want to be widely released before the New Year to compete for the Oscars. A basic requirement for Oscar eligibility is that the film must be released before the New Year.
Compared to gaining high acclaim, this was actually the most important reason Gravity opted to open with limited screenings. The timing was extremely tight. Warner Bros. hadn't finished preparing all the prints for North America, so they had to open the film in limited release in a few of the most well-known cities first.
To put it plainly, for a film like Gravity, which would soon be released on a massive scale, limited release had little real value.
These days, limited release is mostly a strategy used by small-budget independent films.
For example, Duke had done in-depth research on the typical case of Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. Before its release, through surveys conducted during limited screenings, the distributor already understood that the film couldn't be targeted at the mainstream market. Instead, it should focus on a niche audience of genre film lovers and lock them in as the first core viewers.
The initial release scale was very small—only a handful of theaters across the United States. Even though it was technically released, for the larger, gradually expanding release and eventual entry into the mainstream market, it could also be seen as a "pre-release."
Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon used the high praise from the first wave of genre fans and impressive per-theater box office data as promotion. It gradually and systematically expanded its target audience and the number of screens. For example, they marketed toward Chinese and Asian communities in North America. The theaters chosen were located near where these groups gathered, and only after that did they start aiming for mainstream North American audiences, placing ads in relevant media.
Eventually, through an ultra-long theatrical run, the film grossed over $100 million in North America.
This kind of approach was clearly not suitable for Gravity.
Starting from December 26, Gravity began limited screenings in 50 theaters across North America. For a Duke Rosenberg film, a high occupancy rate was almost inevitable. It grossed $1.68 million on that day alone, with a per-theater average of over $30,000!
That's not surprising the showtimes were prime slots, and the screens used for the limited release were all giant IMAX theaters.
Unlike summer blockbusters, a film released during awards season and hoping to succeed at the Oscars must market itself for professional acclaim. But this is just routine work that Warner Bros. does every year. Plus, the quality of Gravity was solid, so reputation marketing wasn't a difficult task.
"Gravity depicts outer space in a breathtaking way, on par with the pioneering visuals of Avatar." — The New York Times
"Words cannot describe the stunning visual presentation of this space opera. Its effects can only be fully appreciated in theaters using 3D." — The Los Angeles Times
Among the 66 North American media outlets that rated it, Gravity received an impressive average score of 93!
While the high rating was one aspect, the buzz generated from the limited release was another. Starting from December 27, even during weekdays, many theaters showing limited screenings in North America were sold out, and the per-theater revenue remained consistently high.
By December 31, when the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences mailed nomination ballots to nearly 6,000 members, Gravity had already earned over $7 million through limited release in North America. Its five-day limited run brought in an astonishing $140,000 per theater.
Also on Friday, December 31, Gravity ended its limited run and began wide release across North America, expanding to 4,120 theaters.
Thanks to the buzz and anticipation built during the limited screenings, the film experienced a massive surge on its wide release day, easily raking in $27.65 million.
Even more importantly, Gravity's word-of-mouth remained strong after the wide release.
CinemaScore audience approval was a whopping 93%, with an average grade of 'A+.' On IMDb, 38,775 users rated it 9.4, with a popcorn score of 92%. On MetaCritic, 77 journalists gave it an average score of 91.
While audience reviews mostly impact box office performance rather than awards prospects, Frank Pierson's commentary in Vanity Fair's New Year's special issue revealed a different perspective.
"Gravity achieves immense innovation and breakthroughs in both form and content within the space genre, using new cinematography, special effects, and 2D-to-3D conversion techniques. This is undoubtedly historic innovation in cinema."
"It offers a never-before-seen viewing and emotional experience completely fresh. This film, having built a new world, goes a step further. It puts you right there. The 3D IMAX effect immerses you as if you're part of it."
"This experience is vastly different from what I felt watching Hubble 3D or International Space Station at the museum. First, there's the genre difference. The movement of the virtual camera creates a strong subjective feeling that documentaries can't provide. At the same time, it's experimental, pioneering, and inspiring for me, it was like seeing Pulp Fiction for the first time. Gravity proves that 'this is also how movies can be made.' Just for that, given its impeccable execution, director Duke Rosenberg deserves to be counted among the masters of cinema."
"Gravity offers great inspiration for all future space films and even other genres. Its form and content are perfectly unified many say the story is thin, but to me, that's just a reactive response to encountering something completely new."
"Several hours after watching this film, I couldn't give any evaluation, simply because I didn't know how to. That was my genuine reaction. Within such a story setting, the current story capacity is just right. From a traditional viewpoint, the story appears simple, but due to the breakthrough in form, the amount of information contained in the film is quite large. The audience is faced with a vast amount of information to process on both the audiovisual and cognitive levels. With the emergence of this new form-content integration, we should also adjust our perspectives to find new ways to understand and appreciate this film."
"So to me, Gravity is a film that is 'completely new' in the history of cinema. I also can't reach any further conclusions about it because its influence on future films has only just begun."
Although quite a few people who watched the film gave it negative reviews, in terms of commercial cinema and the mainstream market, Duke's appeal is undoubtedly massive. The number and reach of the so-called "Duke Fans" have been steadily increasing in recent years. Some media have even claimed he's the first director in history to have superstar-level fans.
Gravity's 3D effects are absolutely outstanding. This alone is enough to attract a large audience.
On the second day of its wide release January 1st, 2011 the North American box office saw another rise, with a daily revenue of $28.54 million. Although the following day experienced a dip, it still pulled in $25.77 million.
Unsurprisingly, Gravity easily took the title of the first weekend box office champion of 2011 in North America, with a stellar performance of $81.96 million.
Adding the revenue from previous preview screenings, Gravity had already earned $89.06 million in North America.
There's also this: Gravity had no opponents of equal scale during this release window. With an expected strong opening weekend and outstanding word of mouth, the film's continued box office run is expected to follow an extremely stable trajectory.
Neither Duke nor Warner Bros. was overly concerned about the film's commercial performance. While maintaining enough market promotion, their main efforts gradually shifted toward Oscar campaign operations.
Even though Duke, Panny Kallis, Scarlett Johansson, Nancy Josephson, and Warner Bros. had already done quite a lot of work, including gaining the support of heavyweight Academy member Frank Pierson, the situation still wasn't optimistic.
The film's late release date was an undeniable objective factor, and it increased the difficulty of Oscar contention.
"We missed a whole series of precursor awards…"
In the guest lounge of the eye-shaped villa, Panny Kallis frowned deeply. The current situation was indeed grim. "This has caused a series of negative impacts on word-of-mouth marketing. Especially for Best Actress Natalie Portman has practically swept all the precursor awards for Best Actress."
.....
Hi For access to additional chapters of
Director in Hollywood (40 chpaters)
Made In Hollywood (60 Chapters)
Pokemon:Bounty Hunter(30 Chapters)
Douluo Dalu: Reincarnated as Yan(40 Chapters)
Hollywood:From Razzie to Legend(40 Chapters)
The Great Ruler (30 Chapters)
Join pateron.com/Translaterappu