Twitter Effect’s Power Overstated when it Comes to Making and Breaking Movies

Written by Sarah Perez / August 28, 2009 7:49 AM

When summer movies like Sacha Baron Cohen’s “Bruno” and “Funny People,” the latest from comedic hit-maker Judd Apatow, tanked, for once people weren’t blaming the quality of the films themselves. They were blaming Twitter. According to multiple reports, it was the early buzz on Twitter – much of it negative – that caused these movies to crash and burn. Similarly, when movies do well, as is the case now with the sci-fi thriller “District 9” and Brad Pitt’s action-filled “Inglorious Basterds,” credit is given to the powerful “Twitter effect” and its ability to make or break a movie. But is Twitter really having this big an impact on the movie industry?

Ugh…thank you *so* much Ms. Perez. Ever since headline jockey Crimson Hexagon came out with their Twitter research/analytics/hyperbole around the positive twatting for Inglourious Basterds (and extending that to assign Twitter a role in the film’s success), I’ve been biting my tongue. It’s nice that the film received positive mentions on Twitter, but that’s a long way off from materially impacting its success or failure. And, of course, “insight” like that provided by Crimson is just going to fuel studios attempts at manipulating the channel. Twitter will not save you.