While film distributors have long since used marketing to drive awareness of films and have used strategic distribution to make the business profitable, they have been traditionally used to marketing films, rather than themselves. Harold Vogel noted the distinct difference between film distributors and household products like ‘laundry soaps or cigarettes,’ in that the former’s brand name is largely irrelevant, with the potential exception of Disney. This was certainly true for a time, but in recent years companies like A24 have emerged unprecedently as a ‘film distributor-turned-lifestyle brand.’ It has drawn comparisons to its 1990s predecessor, Miramax (later rebranded as the infamous Weinstein Company) which was one of the first distributors to strategically acquire films that would deliver Academy Awards nominations and wins following extensive marketing campaigns, adding further value to the Miramax brand.
Crafting a Narrative – The evolution from the Weinstein Company to A24
Cast your mind back to 2011. A year in which the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences gave a coveted nomination for the top prize to The Social Network. David Fincher’s analysis of renowned tech entrepreneur, Mark Zuckerberg. It was considered to be a fitting contender for Best Picture, documenting the origins of Facebook in a Harvard dorm, effectively honouring the birth of a new communication method for our civilization. When Steven Spielberg emerged on the night with an envelope to announce the winner for Best Picture however, it was The King’s’ Speech, backed by the Weinstein Company which clinched the top prize. To the dismay of many, Academy members had scored an historical story about King George VI higher than that of one of the first dramatic showcases of technological innovation and the advent of social media in our society.
Members are swayed by narratives, and the Weinstein Company was one of the first to show how a distributor could strategise to do just that. The major marketing campaign differences between the two are easier to pinpoint in hindsight. Firstly, The King’s Speech’s screenwriter, David Seidler, had been inspired by his own speech impediment to write this story, aligning a human parallel with an historical story. This was reiterated in press briefings and interviews, praising Seidler for crafting a script in which he creatively linked a weakness of his to the character on screen. Secondly, its messaging appealed to a wider audience with the hopeful communications deployed, which broadened its overall appeal. ‘Let courage reign,’ ‘God Save the King,’ and ‘Find your voice,’ were the taglines that the cast were tasked with expanding on in the lead up to the awards. Campaign messages for The Social Network included taglines such as ‘You don’t get to 500 million friends without making a few enemies,’ and ‘Punk, genius, traitor, billionaire,’ with the focus remaining on Zuckerberg’s character, an isolated genius who stepped on numerous toes to create one of the largest American multinational companies to ever exist. The Weinstein Company paved the way for film distributors to take matters into their own hands and market a film that would add further value to its distribution arm.
While the Weinstein Company was well-known in the industry and among analysts, the public had much less awareness than they do of A24 now. In fact, it is common among many typical Generation Z kids that wouldn’t consider themselves as cinephiles to utter the paradoxical phrase, ‘I just love A24 films.’ They have managed to do this by tapping in to this audience with clever marketing campaigns, including an online shop with niche merchandise from the film’s for sale. Film distributors have long since been the invisible link in the film value chain, but A24 has propelled itself from its place as an invisible distributor to viable and very visible mini studio by choosing to distribute vastly different, but crucially distinct films that will enhance the A24 brand.
The emergence of an ‘A24 film’
The US-based company started out life as a typical distributor, acquiring unique, ‘commercially adjacent’ films, but the crucial difference in its remit was using digital marketing to connect with audiences and driving awareness and anticipation early on. Its initial acquisition strategy hinged on the ‘indie’ label which has become a brand itself and is a short cut to marketing unique stories to a mass audience. This cemented its status early on as a specialist distributor that deliberately attracted and curated a slate of marketable arthouse films. The digital market is saturated and it’s increasingly difficult to cut through the noise, with the need to provide sharper, clearer marketing that ‘differentiates from the masses.’ A24 followed this early on, and was acutely aware of how ‘marketing muscle,’ could be used to promote further growth. A24 has enabled independent filmmakers to engage with the end consumer from the outset, rather than just at the end of the chain and that is exactly what A24 has done in cultivating a loyal audience.
The attractiveness of a distributor-turned-studio has baffled many in the industry, even A24 collaborator Barry Jenkins whose Academy Award winning film Moonlight was A24’s first foray in film lifecycle production and promotion. Jenkins believes that the notion of an ‘A24 film’ is in itself ‘a misnomer,’ as the company’s wide array of films vary dramatically, rather, he claims that it is the ideas allowed to flourish under the A24 brand that has been the most attractive aspect to the public. A24’s ready-made consumer audience is a prime value-driver for streamers and Warner Brothers Discovery have made this clear with their recent agreement with A24 to stream the distributor/production company’s full slate. This deal is a clear example of the value attached to A24 and is an exemplary demonstration of a distributor paving its own way in a new world.
FILM FOR THOUGHT 
1 comment