Masters of Arts in Marketing Communications Dissertation

Middlesex University Business School

Academic Year: 2010-2011

KAMNA MOHAN
M00323572

Can Marketing Strategies

Improve the Current Consumer
Perception of Independent Cinema?

Supervisor: Karen Richards

October 2011

Project submitted in part fulfilment of the Degree of Master

of Arts in Marketing Communications

i
 Declaration

I, Kamna Mohan (M00323572), hereby confirm that this work submitted for

assessment is my own and is expressed in my own words. Any uses made within

it of the works of other authors in any form (e.g. ideas, equations, figures, text,

tables, programmes) are properly acknowledged at the point of their use. A full

list of the references employed has been included.

Signed: .

Date: .

ii
 Executive Summary

There is little research conducted about the consumer perceptions of independent

cinema. Independent cinema, as a research topic itself, has scarce information.

This is because of the trouble defining it, and having a consensus on its

definitions and conventions. Thus the central aim of the study was to find out if

marketing strategies could help improve consumer perception of independent

cinema.

Extensive secondary research was done on the definition and history of

independent cinema, the effectiveness of film marketing, consumer perception

theories, consumer selection of film and segmentation. There was also an outline

of all the gaps of previous research.

This secondary research was used to formulate the primary descriptive research.

This was in the form of questionnaires, which were answered by a sample of 112

students, or young adults living in the UK. The results were then analysed in

SPSS, and then formulated in data analysis and findings.

It was found that people were positive towards independent films but more

awareness needed to be created. Students were definitely a possible audience

segment and the research outlined several points that independent films need to

emphasise before using marketing strategies.

iii
 Acknowledgements

I would like to thank my supervisor, Karen Richards, for her guidance in topic

selection and her support throughout the dissertation. Her assistance in my

understanding of the independent film industry with a marketing perspective is

much appreciated

Dedication

This dissertation is dedicated first and foremost to my parents, who have been

endless sources of comfort and support, even when times were tough. Secondly I

would like to say a special thanks to my housemates, who really offered all kinds

of help and guidance during the process. My colleagues in the Marketing

Department of Middlesex University displayed great camaraderie during this

time, and it helped give me the character to complete the project.

iv
 Table of Contents

Declarationii

Executive Summaryiii

Acknowledgements and Dedicationiv

Table of Contents..v

List of Tables..viii

List of Figures.x

CHAPTER 1: Introduction..2

1.1: Background to the Study2

1.2: Aims and Objectives.8

1.3: Importance of the Study9

1.4: Structure of the Dissertation.9

CHAPTER 2: Literature Review11

2.1: Introduction.11

2.2: Definition and History of Independent Film..11

2.3: Principles and relevance of film marketing theories16

2.4: Consumer Perception Theories..21

2.5: Consumer Selection of Films...22

v
 2.6: Segmentation24

2.7: Gaps in the Research24

CHAPTER 3: Methodology.26

3.1: Introduction.26

3.2: Research Design...26

3.3: Target Population...27

3.4: Sampling Methods and Sampling Size27

3.5: Primary Instrument (Questionnaire) Design.28

3.6: Pilot Testing.32

3.7: Research Procedure...32

3.8: Limitations.................33

CHAPTER 4: Data Analysis and Findings.34

4.1: Introduction..34

4.2: Finding 1..34

4.3: Finding 242

4.4: Finding 3.52

4.5: Summary of Findings and Data Analysis..60

CHAPTER 5: Conclusion, Recommendations and Limitations62

5.1: Conclusion.62

vi
 5.2: Recommendations..63

5.3: Limitations.64

Appendix 1: Questionnaire65

Appendix 2: Pilot test questionnaire.70

Appendix 3: Data Analysis.75

References82

vii
 List of Tables

Table 1.1 Country of origin of films released in the UK and Republic of Ireland,

2010

Table 1.2 Box office results for the top 20 UK independent films released in the

UK and Republic of Ireland, 2010

Table 1.3 All time top 20 independent UK films at the UK box office

Table 1.4 Box office results for the top 20 films released in the UK, January-June

2011

Table 1.5 Top 10 independent UK films released in the UK and Republic of

Ireland, January-June 2011

Table 4.1 Are you familiar with the concept of independent films? Frequencies

Table 4.2 What do you think makes a film independent? Frequencies

Table 4.3 Why have you watched Independent Films Frequencies

Table 4.4 Deterrent for independent films frequencies

Table 4.5 Deterrent for mainstream films frequencies

Table 4.6 Modes of Q8, Q9, Q11, Q13 and Q14

Table 4.7 Cross-tabs of Occupation and Awareness of Independent Film

Table 4.8 Chi-Square Test

Table 4.9 Symmetric Measures

Table 4.10. Crosstabs of age and number of independent films seen

Table 4.11 Correlation between age and number of independent films seen

Table 4.12 Multiple Response Table for genre

Table 4.13 more likely to watch independent films if aware about them

Frequencies

viii
Table 4.14 Mean and Standard Deviation for Q16

Table 4.15 How many times a month do you visit the cinema? Frequencies

Table 4.16 Mean and Standard Deviation for Q2

Table 4.17 Which of these factors prevent you from increasing your visits to the

cinema? Frequencies

Table 4.18 Does the promotion of an upcoming film create interest? Frequencies

Table 4.19 Ranking of effectiveness of promotional tactics

Table 4.20 Ranking of motives to see films at the cinema

Table 4.21 Descriptives for Q17 and Q18

Table 4.22 Appeal of promotional incentives Frequencies

Table 4.23 Dissuasion through over exposure Frequencies

ix
 List of Figures

Fig. 1.1 Proportion of box office by genre for all films, UK films and UK

independent films, 2010

Fig.4.1 Are you familiar with the concept of independent films? Pie Chart

Fig. 4.2 What do you think makes a film independent? Pie Chart with only the

valid percent values

Fig. 4.3. Why have you watched Independent Films Bar Chart

Fig. 4.4 Deterrent for independent films Bar Chart

Fig. 4.5 Deterrent for mainstream films Bar Chart

Fig. 4.6 Clustered Bar Chart for Occupation and Awareness of Independent Film

Fig. 4.7 Clustered Bar Chart for Age and number of independent films seen

Fig. 4.8 more likely to watch independent films if aware about them Bar Chart

Fig. 4.9 How many times a month do you visit the cinema? Bar Chart

Fig. 4.10 Which of these factors prevent you from increasing your visits to the

cinema? Pie Chart

Fig 4.11 Does the promotion of an upcoming film create interest? Pie Chart

Fig. 4.12 Appeal of Promotional Incentives Bar Chart

Fig. 4.13 Dissuasion through over exposure Bar Chart

x
 Chapter 1: Introduction

1.1 Background to the Study

This section of the chapter will explore a brief history and understanding of the

independent film industry and the issues it faces today.

The independent film industry is not a new sector of the film industry; it has had

its roots in America since the early 1900s, due to the development of the Motion

Pictures Patent Company. Antagonists of the company, who opposed the idea of

a monopoly over motion pictures, started to produce films that did not subscribe

to any of the required conventions (Acheson and Maule 1994). These were the

start of the first independent films, and this was a trend that continued, in order to

rebel against the formulaic films that were essentially made for profits (Acheson

and Maule 1994; Squire 2006).

However despite the long tradition of independent films, there is no consensus on

the research conducted on the established definition of independent cinema, or

whether it belongs to a genre of its own. This will be discussed in Chapters 1.3

and 2.1.

Essentially the cinema admission figures for the UK have been decreasing. In

2010, 169 million cinema tickets were sold, which represented a decrease of

2.4% in 2009 (BFI 2011a). An analysis of the UK box office provides an

evaluation of the origin of the films released. This is depicted in Table 1.1:

2
Table 1.1 Country of origin of films released in the UK and Republic of Ireland,
2010

(Source: BFI 2011a)

As it can be seen from the table above, USA releases clearly dominated the box

office, but UK films (both studio-backed and independent) are second best. This

indicates growth in the market for the British Film Industry.

In Britain, the viewership for independent films has increased greatly,

particularly for 2010. This has been reflected in official statistics from BFI

(2011a) which showed that the top 20 independent UK films had a combined

gross of 55 million, which was 5.4% of the total UK box office returns for that

year. This was a greater proportion than in previous years (BFI 2011a). This has

been depicted in Table 1.2 on the next page.

3
Table 1.2 Box office results for the top 20 UK independent films released in the
UK and Republic of Ireland, 2010

(Source: BFI 2011)

Table 1.3 is a list of the all time top earning independent UK titles and their

performance at the UK box office. The highest grossing independent British film

is Slumdog Millionaire (31.7 million) followed by Four Weddings and a

Funeral (27.8 million) and Trainspotting (12.4 million). It is important to note

that two 2010 releases, StreetDance 3D and Kick-Ass have been able to secure a

place in the list at number six and number seven respectively with grosses of

11.6 million. Each of the top 11 independent UK films have earned more than

10 million at the UK box office, and all the top 20 independent UK films have

earned 6 million or over (BFI 2011a).

4
Table 1.3 All time top 20 independent UK films at the UK box office

(Source: BFI 2011a)

It is important to note the genres of film that have been successful in the UK box

office last year. Table 1.4 demonstrates these results below:

Fig. 1.1 Proportion of box office by genre for all films, UK films and UK
independent films, 2010

(Source: BFI 2011a)

5
However a positive trend has been noted in the beginning of 2011, with The

Kings Speech, a UK independent film that is critically acclaimed and the current

winner of the Academy Award for Best Picture, topping UK box office results

for all films. This information is depicted in Table 1.5 below:

Table 1.4 Box office results for the top 20 films released in the UK, January-June
2011

(Source BFI 2011b)

6
The top 10 UK independent films for the beginning of 2011 are depicted below,

in Table 1.6:

Table 1.5 Top 10 independent UK films released in the UK and Republic of

Ireland, January-June 2011

(Source: BFI 2011b)

According to BFI (2011b), independent UK films market share for the first half

of 2011 was just under 13% which is the highest amount recorded in recent

years. In the meanwhile UK-qualifying studio-backed titles (i.e. financed by US

studios but passing the UK cultural test and featuring UK cast, crew, locations,

facilities, post-production and often UK source material) shared 19.5% of the

box office. Therefore, total UK share of the UK theatrical market in the first half

of 2011 was 32.3%. (BFI 2011b).

7
1.2 Aims and Objectives

Given the concerns and issues expressed in the previous sections of this chapter,

the following aim as well as the central research problem of the dissertation is

discussed in this section.

The aim of this dissertation is to determine whether marketing strategies can

have an impact on the current consumer perception of independent cinema.

Thus the overall objectives can be perpetrated for this study:

1) To understand the current consumer perceptions of independent cinema

2) To ascertain whether segmentation can be employed for independent

cinema, and what these segments can be

3) To evaluate the effectiveness of film marketing strategies, and if they can

be related to independent films

These objectives were chosen to accurately answer the aim of the dissertation.

By understanding the current consumer perception of independent cinema, it is

possible to explore the relevance of independent films amongst todays

cinemagoers. Their opinions can be learnt and therefore a base upon which to

improve can be created. Segmentation is one of the key tactics used to designate

an audience for a product, and establish supply and demand. By creating

segments for independent cinema, a marketable audience can be determined in

order to boost viewership and sales figures for independent cinema. By assessing

how effective film marketing strategies are, it can be learnt whether they will

help contribute to the central aim of the study, which is to improve consumer

perception.

8
1.3 Importance of the study

These objectives are important to formulate the importance of the study. By

explaining the reasoning behind the central aim and the objectives that link to it,

it can be concluded that the independent film industry is an area with several

gaps in research. Not only are its definition and importance to genres of film

unresolved, but also its contribution to the general film industry as well as what

the average cinemagoer thinks of it. Thus the purpose of the study is to help fill

in these gaps as well as to pave forward new realms of research areas.

Additionally the overwhelming positive response to The Kings Speech has

certainly paved the way for other independent features in the UK. The statistics

clearly show a demand for the kind of unique and quality cinema that

independent films provide. This furthermore indicates the necessity to prove the

aims and objectives provided in this study.

1.4 Structure of the dissertation

This section will outline the structure and what are in the main contents of the

chapters to follow. This section has provided an introduction to the industry of

independent films as well as addressing the key issues faced in the marketing of

films. It has demonstrated the aims and objectives of the dissertation as well as

the importance of the study in helping to fill some of the gaps encountered in

secondary research.

The next chapter will be the Literature Review, which is essentially a collection

of the theories and existing research conducted. The subject areas focused upon

in the literature review are definitions and history of independent cinema, film

9
marketing theories, consumer selection of film, consumer perception and

segmentation. There will also be a section outlining the main gaps in the

research, which the primary research will attempt to fill.

The third chapter is the research methodology, in which all the methods used for

primary and secondary research are justified. The approach, design and methods

are discussed as well as a detailed analysis of the primary research design tool.

The fourth chapter is the data analysis and findings where the findings of the

primary research will be presented. These will be closely linked to the aims and

objectives as well as the summary of the literature review, and will help answer

the central aim of the dissertation.

The fifth and final chapter will contain the conclusions, recommendations and

limitations of the dissertation. The conclusion will be a basic summary of the

dissertation and will incorporate the main points of the previous chapters and tie

them together. The recommendations will be suggestions made for the future,

based on the research findings observed and recorded in this dissertation. Lastly

a brief outline of the limitations involved with the study will be presented.

There will also be a complete list of references and bibliography, as well as an

inclusion of the appendices.

10
 Chapter 2: Literature Review

2.1 Introduction

This chapter of the dissertation will focus on the collection of theories and

existing research conducted about independent cinema. It will also include

theories of consumer perception as well as segmentation; this is in order to

provide a link to the aims and objectives outlined in Chapter 1.

2.2 History and definition of independent cinema

Since the beginning of the twentieth century, films have evolved into a primary

source of entertainment and a formidable industry, even today (Squire 2006).

The chief development of this industry had its roots in America. Although

motion pictures as a technological form were innovated in the later part of the

nineteenth century, it was only in the 1910s and 1920s that a few companies

started to base their production in southern California and their distribution in

New York, thus cementing the foundations of domination of the world film

industry (Gomery 2008). Although several studios would later follow the studio

system and its business model, Adolph Zukor became the pioneer at the forefront

of the revolution. He developed a system of manufacturing popular full-length

films, distributing them across the world and presenting them in cinema theatres

(Gomery 2008). This mass production of films was the beginning of the

Hollywood Studio System, which continued to dominate the industry from the

1920s to the 1960s (Squire 2006; Gomery 2008).

11
In the later part of the twentieth century and until the present day, the studio

system did not deteriorate but amalgamated into a smaller set of corporations that

still follow the same principles producing, distributing and presenting films for

profit (Gomery 2008). The differentiating factor today is each film corporation is

a part of a bigger media conglomerate which is also involved with the mass

creation of a wide variety of other media products and services (Gomery 2008).

Todays equivalent of the studio system is what is known as the Big Six

which are the film corporations responsible for financing and distributing the

majority of the world films. They are:

Disney

Universal Studios

Paramount Pictures

Twentieth Century Fox

Columbia Pictures

Warner Bros

12
Table 2.1 Annual market share for the Big Six

Corporation Market Share Notable films

Warner Bros. 19.7% The Harry Potter Series, Superman,

Star Wars
Paramount Pictures 15.5% Star Trek, Transformers, War of the
Worlds
Disney 15.3% Pirates of the Caribbean, National
Treasure
Columbia Pictures 12.9% Casino Royale, The Da Vinci Code,
The Spiderman series
Universal Studios 12.2% The Bourne series, Knocked Up
Twentieth Century 11.9% X-Men, Mr. and Mrs Smith
Fox
(Valoure 2008)

So where does independent cinema factor in all of this? In order to assess its

relevance today, it is important to understand that independent cinema emerged

out of a need to contest the set of norms and conventions that were associated

with mainstream cinema. (Holmland 2005; Gomery 2008). As the primary

objective of firms involved in the studio systems was to generate profits while

keeping costs low, films had to maintain standards with genre, plotline and other

creative elements in order to attract a sustainable audience (Gomery 2008, Wyatt

1998). Thus any film that could not adapt to these expectations had to be

produced independently (Wyatt 1998).

A simplified version of a definition of independent cinema, or indie films, is

that they consist of any film which is not financed or produced by the major

studios (Levy 1999; Hillier 2001; Tzioumokis 2006).

13
When it comes to placing a film in the genre of independent cinema, some

definitions base it on the industrial orientation of the film, which means strictly

budget, and finances, while others rely on the aesthetic elements such as the

storyline and innovative narrative techniques. There are still a group of theorists

who combine both.

When it comes to the industrial orientation of the film, there are four basic

phases involved: development, financing, production and distribution (Squires

2006). What constitutes different definitions of independent cinema is dependent

on which phase is focused on. Merritt (2000) looked closely at the financing and

production stages and affirmed that an independent film was any motion picture

financed and produced completely autonomous of all studios, regardless of size.

Merritt (2000) also believed in the existence of what he referred to as semi-

indies, which are films made by smaller studios or given a distribution by one of

the major studios. Another theorist, Holmlund (2005) emphasises on copyright

ownership and states that independent films are among those, which are not

released by the six major studios. Generally the industry follows the definition

set out by the Independent Film and Television Alliance (IFTA). The official

website of IFTA states that a film can be referred to as an independent film if

more than fifty per cent of its financing comes from sources other than the

major US studios.

However Cones (2008) contests this definition by adding further parameters to

the definition of independent film. He states that if the main responsibility to

raise funds to develop, produce and distribute a motion picture is held by the

14
independent producer than this film is truly justified as an independent film. On

the other hand if an independent producer has been in charge of the finance

phase of the film but has used the assistance of a major studio/distributor or one

of its subsidiaries in financing the production phases in addition to the

distribution of the film, it would not be accurate to call that an independent film

(Cones 2008). Conversely if an independent producer has only taken the aid of a

major studio/distributor or an affiliate or subsidiary of one to merely release the

picture, this may be considered an independently produced film that was merely

released by a major studio/distributor, affiliate or subsidiary (Cones 2008).

Another set of definitions involves defining independent cinema based on its

content, more specifically the experimental aesthetics of the film, thus leading to

several independent films being called art-house cinema. This is largely

because independent films are often characterized by alternative points of view

regardless of whether in experimental approaches or through crowd-pleasing

comedies (Holmlund 2004). Hillier (2001) substantiates this view by suggesting

independent cinema is purely different from the mainstream, both in economic

or aesthetic terms.

King (2005) states that the extent of independence of a film varied in both form

and degree. According to him there were three orientations of independent films:

its financing, form and the social issues pertinent to it, and that several

independent films were different in these orientations (King 2005). They ranged

from the extremely radical and unconventional to those who maintained a closer

similarity to Hollywood films (King 2005).

15
Regarding the history of independent cinema, Tzioumakis (2006) goes on to

ascertain that the discourse of independent cinema appeared perhaps for the first

time in 1908-9 with the formation of Motion Picture Patents Company and its

antagonists, which became known as independents. This was a company that

comprised of several prominent film production companies at the time, as well as

the largest film stock supplier Eastman Kodak and the largest distribution

company, George Klein (Tzioumakis 2006). This was essentially an attempt to

create a monopoly over the film industry (Connelly 2007). However certain

filmmakers believed in holding on to their artistic integrity and creativity and

saw the problems with one corporation trying to be in command of their work,

thus several filmmakers began to move their work away from all of this

(Connelly 2007).

In Britain, the independent film movement began with the establishment of the

London Film Society in 1924. Some of the founding members of the London

Film Society included H. G. Wells, George Bernard Shaw, Anthony Asquith,

Maynard Keynes, Sidney Bernstein, Augustus John and Ivor Montagu (Connelly

2007). Their main objective was to highlight artistic achievement in filmmaking

and they were the first society to preserve its artistic integrity (Connelly 2007).

2.3 Principles and relevance of film marketing theories

This section of the chapter will look at the importance and relevance of film

marketing theories. As film is an intangible product, it comes with its own sets of

issues and concerns marketing it. The main definition of film marketing is any

activity that assists a film in reaching its target audience at any time throughout

16
its life (Durie et al. 2000). This definition aptly defines the unique nature of film

as a product because film consumption does not end as the ending credits of the

movie roll up (Kerrigan and Yalkin 2009). If cinemagoers have liked a film they

are keen to engage with it more after viewing it, by spreading positive reviews,

searching for information about the film and others like it, or appreciation of its

cast (Kerrigan and Yalkin 2009). Thus it is a fair statement to say that film

marketing is a never-ending process, and there are ways to keep the target

audience involved even after a film has been viewed. It is also often a cyclical

activity, being either the product of other cultural products or leading to more

consumption of cultural products (du Gay et al. 2000). An example of this is

when films are inspired from books, and thus lead cinemagoers to go out and

purchase the book in question.

In general the marketing mix comprises of the four Ps: product, price,

promotion and place (Culliton 1948). This has largely been the trusted model for

evaluating and creating successful marketing strategies. In contrast, film, which

is an intangible product, has a slightly different marketing mix, which involves

different areas to be looked at which influence the marketing. According to

Kerrigan (2010), the film marketing mix comprises of:

The actors

The creative team

The script/genre

Age classification

Release strategy

17
Each of these areas will be discussed in greater depth. The actors are considered

to be the most marketable commodity related to films and a variable factored into

direct analyses of box office numbers (Kerrigan 2010). A popular cast has been

known to bring in large box office crowds. When evaluating factors influencing

film choice, Jacobs (1968) determined that the principal stars were seen as the

most important factor to attract an audience.

The creative team involves the other stars of the project who are not the actors

(Kerrigan 2010). Typically it is the attachment of directors with a certain style

and genre who inspire a particular intended audience. Nowell-Smith (1981)

refers to the ability of particular directors to establish a particular style of film,

as seeing the authors style as inscribing itself in the text of the film resulting

in the provision of a coherent device which allows the audience to recognize the

film as authored discourse. Also film consumers must interpret the cultural

codes, which are communicated through the marketing process in order to make

a choice to view a film based on the ability of the director (Kerrigan 2005).

In order to successfully attract a target audience, the process of genre

classification is very important. Stringer (2001) identifies it as a process that can

be observed and this observation can be very revealing about the audiences for

film and the social and cultural nature in which the film is positioned. Ultimately

audiences want to see a good story, and in this case the script is the virtual

bloodline of the film (Kerrigan 2010).

18
Age classification is an often-overlooked area of the film marketing mix

(Kerrigan 2010). However it is essential as this segregates the age of the target

population who is ultimately allowed to see the film. In recent times, films have

been toned down from including more R-rated content to cutting it down to a

PG-13 rating in order to be accessible to a larger audience.

Release strategy determines the release mode of a film. Typically this starts with

a theatrical run at the cinemas for a determined period, then it moves on to

availability and release on DVD and then contractual agreements to television

channel (Kerrigan 2010). Several theorists state that the scheduling and release

patterns of a film do have an effect on its box office returns. This is where

distribution has a key impact.

These are the aspects of the film marketing mix, and they play a role as the

depending factors of a films marketing campaign. Now it is time to examine the

marketing materials used for film. According to Kerrigan (2010), traditionally

they involve the following:

Film Trailers

Film Posters

Publicity Stills

Television Advertising (such as TV Spots or Programs dedicated to

upcoming films)

Press Coverage (such as articles, reviews or interviews)

19
Each of these promotional materials is effective in its individual way. Trailers are

typically seen in cinemas in the weeks before a film is released. They are

particularly useful for viewers to understand the tone and essential concept

behind the film (Kerrigan 2010). They are also particularly helpful to establish

the conventions of the genre of the film and highlight the most appealing factors.

Kernan (2004) states that most trailers use an introduction or conclusion to

address the audience and provides information about the film with the use of the

films narrative. Generally it is said that audience expectations about a film are

established within the first 30 seconds of the film trailer (Kerrigan 2010).

Posters are often located in outdoor advertising and tend to feature the essential

information with the use of design conventions to send messages to the audience.

Film marketing still continues to use a central focus on the film poster and it is

one of the oldest methods incorporated in film marketing. It typically features a

tagline which is used as a common link between all promotional materials

and the protagonists as well as helping to define the conventions of the genre.

Publicity stills are often images released by the studio, and they can be used on

websites, magazines and databases. They are sometimes a still from the actual

film as opposed to posters, which are typically created for promotion and

thus result in giving an authentic feel to the target audience (Kerrigan 2010).

The widespread use of television in homes, offices and public places makes it a

key tool in film promotion. Particularly advertising in times of popular live

broadcasts makes a huge impact on how a film is perceived (Kerrigan 2010).

20
Television advertising either consists of broadcasting trailers or programs

featuring the film in question with either celebrity interviews or critic reviews

(Kerrigan 2010). Television has the advantage of reaching a wider audience, and

especially a variety of different segments. Press coverage is also a useful tool to

spread awareness about a film. Since most magazines and newspapers are

targeted towards certain audience types, press coverage of a film is usually

guaranteed to reach their target audience. The variety of content press coverage

promotion provides (such as celebrity interviews and gossip, critics reviews and

general articles about the film) is also appealing to their target audiences

(Kerrigan 2010).

2.4 Consumer Perception Theories

Perception is defined as the process by which an individual selects, organises

and interprets stimuli into a meaningful and coherent picture of the world

(Schiffman et al. 2008). Essentially two individuals may see the same thing but

the way they perceive it can be totally different, dependent on the individuals

themselves. Thus it is important for marketers to understand what consumer

perceive about existing products in order to readjust the perceptions to their

advantage.

For films, simple sensory stimuli are not enough to create an accurate perception;

a concept known as perceptual organisation is more suited to describe the

process. Hoyer and McInnis (2007) define this as a complex collection of

numerous simple stimuli that consumers must organise into a whole, unified

21
concept. The interpretations and assumptions that associate itself with sensory

perceptions stem from schema which is an organised collection of feelings and

beliefs (Solomon et al. 2010). Thus to create effective positioning about certain

things, perceptual mapping can be used, which identifies two different

dimensions and then compares different brands or products in order to answer

strategic questions (Hoyer and McInnis 2007).

Not all stimuli is noticed by potential consumers but it is essential for marketers

to guarantee that their products gets in the perceptions of their target audience.

With the area of films, this might be difficult to obtain, but the next section

discusses in greater depth consumer selection of films.

2.5 Consumer Selection of Films

This section will outline some of the main theories that were researched around

the process of consumer selection of films. Elliot and Hamilton (1991) have

suggested that while box office may prove to be the factor in understanding how

consumers react to stimuli, often consumer satisfaction is linked to several

cultural products which in turn lead to other choices. Even though it may appear

that consumption of leisure activities is based on simple constructs, it may also

depend on more complicated factors such as the level of engagement made with

that leisure product Elliot and Hamilton (1991).

Wohlfeil and Whelan (2008) claim that consumption of mainstream cinema is on

a collective consumption basis while connoisseurs regard it as an act for

22
individual satisfaction. This distinguishing between film consumption as an

individual or collective act has links to theories about independent and

mainstream cinema. Critical reviews also have an impact upon film selection;

Eliashberg and Shugan (1997) found that within four weeks of a films theatrical

release, the influences of critics reviews could be seen. Holbrook and Addis

(2008) state that the critical and commercial fall under separate dimensions, as

industry recognition and market performance seldom go hand in hand. Buzz for

a film is often only generated based on either its artistic merit, or the efforts that

have gone into its marketing (Holbrook and Addis 2008).

Durie et al (2000) believe that word of mouth is particularly relevant in todays

market and can easily make or break a films performance at the box office.

Anderson (1998) describes word of mouth to be informal communications

between private parties concerning evaluations of goods and services.

Particularly in the case of films it can be difficult, sometimes practically

impossible, to control word of mouth. However Kerrigan (2010) suggests that

identifying the most probable audience to a film and concentrating on bringing it

to their notice can be quite a positive step for ensuring affirmative word of

mouth. Social networking websites and the use of the internet can be a key way

of doing this.

However there are several factors that prevent the active consumption of films.

These include alternative media forms, uncomfortable environments to view

films in, and above all film piracy, which poses a great threat (Kerrigan 2010).

23
2.6 Segmentation

Segmentation is the process of identifying groups of customers whose demands

vary from other areas of the market (Johnson and Scholes 2007). It is also the

procedure of analysing and finding a target group that is most likely to be

receptive to the product being sold. However with something as complicated as

film marketing, it can be difficult to determine whether segments can be created

and if they can, how effective they will be in increasing viewership figures.

Because of the range and nature of the segments available to film, it would be

best to follow a target marketing approach, where key target segments are

identified and then marketing programmes are customised to the needs of these

segments (Wilson and Gilligan 2007). For a film audience, this process would

involve understanding what the consumer perceptions are, then cross-sectioning

the target population to decipher which segment maintains the appropriate

convictions.

2.7 Gaps in the Research

The issue with independent film is that, because it is so hard to define, there is

hardly any research on its impact with viewers. There is hardly any information

on what the average cinema-goer thinks of independent films. Theorists have

described its content and the nature of independent cinema globally, but there is

very little to support it with a marketing background. Viewership has never been

a prime concern with independent filmmakers, but the fact that consumers seek

more from mainstream film indicates a huge demand for independent film and a

high chance of potential growth. Also there is very little theory around the bases

24
of marketing an independent film. This has a great amount to do that in previous

years independent films have been self-financed, which does not leave much

room for a marketing budget. However the popularity of films like The Kings

Speech and the acclaim several other films have obtained from film festivals and

award ceremonies have led several to believe that the industry is on the threshold

of great change. Whether independent films will help influence this change will

be examined in the following chapters of this dissertation.

25
 Methodology

3.1 Introduction

This chapter will include a detailed analysis of all the research methods used for

the purpose of achieving the aim of the dissertation. A justification is provided

for all the methods used. A specific section is dedicated to the design of the

questionnaire, which was the primary data instrument used.

3.2 Research Design

In order to achieve the objectives set out in Chapter 1, this dissertation adopted a

descriptive approach. This approach is used when the aim of the research is to

describe something (Parasuraman et al. 2004). In this instance the aim of the

research was to decipher consumer perceptions, hence the respondents needed to

describe their perceptions.

The descriptive approach is typically associated with quantitative research.

Quantitative research is simply data that can be quantified and measured (Cooper

and Schindler 2006). The characteristics of quantitative data, according to

Malhotra (2010) are that it is easy and quick to collect, simple to measure and

numbers can be used to achieve a consensus in the findings. Also it is quick and

efficient to reach a large group of respondents and it is cost effective and saves

time (Bradley 2007). Thus questionnaires were used as the primary instrument of

data collection.

26
3.3 Target Population

As this was a study based in the UK, it was important that the target population

represented average cinemagoers prevalent in the UK. The UK is also very

relevant to independent films, as there is a growing viewership present as well as

the existence of established institutes such as the British Film Institute.

3.4 Sampling and Sample Size

Thus the decided sample was students and young working adults, preferably

between the ages of 20-35. This is primarily because a link to younger audiences

and independent cinema has been found in the BFI statistics yearbook (2011a).

The sampling method was chosen to be non-probability sampling, more

specifically quota sampling, because the respondents were chosen based on the

location they were based in and their ages and occupations (Chisnall 2005). This

was advantageous because of the cost, speed and simplicity factor (Chisnall

2005).

The size was chosen to be around 125 respondents, primarily students from

Middlesex University, as well as young working adults in their twenties from the

London region of the UK. International respondents were deemed invalid,

because they could not accurately contribute to consumer perceptions in the UK.

27
3.5 Primary Instrument (Questionnaire) Design

As mentioned in the sections before, questionnaires were utilised because they

employed the most convenient characteristics of quantitative research. This

section will explain the reasoning behind each question provided in the

questionnaire.

This questionnaire was composed of 23 questions in four different sections. The

questionnaire began with the disclaimer that the survey was only issued for the

purpose of research and that their responses would be kept confidential.

The first section of the questionnaire was titled General Film Viewing Habits.

It was a combination of questions about film viewing habits as well as questions

about film marketing theories and their effectiveness.

The first four questions involved nominal variables and were:

Q1) What is your preferred film viewing experience?

Q2) How many times a month do you visit the cinema?

Q3) Which of these factors prevent you from increasing your visits to

the cinema?

Q4) Does the promotion of an upcoming film create interest?

The first question was a way of assessing how important the cinema experience

was to the sample, and whether they preferred it the most or not. The second

question was also a way to find out how popular cinemas were and how often the

sample visited them, and the third question was designed in order to find out the

28
deterrent factors against cinemas. These questions were all linked to the statistics

shown in the BFI statistical handbook (BFI 2011a) that indicated that cinema

admissions had declined from previous years. Thus these questions were asked in

order to determine whether these statistics applied to the sample and, if they were

not visiting the cinema, what the reasons were. The fourth question was to

investigate whether the sample was susceptible to film promotion. The responses

created for that question were yes, no, and sometimes in order to accurately

gauge if film promotion was effective or if the population was indifferent to it.

The next question in the section dealt with the ranking of the promotional

materials, and the options provided were ordinal variables researched from

Kerrigans determination of promotional tools (2010). They were: Film Trailers,

Film Posters, Publicity Stills, Television Advertising (such as TV Spots or

Programs dedicated to upcoming films) and Press Coverage (such as articles,

reviews or interviews). By asking the sample to rank them in order from

effectiveness from 1 to 5, this displayed the accurate importance of each tool in

the film marketing mix.

Then a multiple response question was asked, which interrogated which genres

of film the sample was interested in. The responses were compiled with reference

to the British Film Institutes official classification of genre (BFI 2011a). This

was in order to be able to create segments to answer the objectives stated in

Chapter 1.

Another ordinal ranking question was posed and the sample was asked which

component of the film marketing mix would make them more likely to see a film

at the cinema and in what order. The options were obtained from Kerrigans

29
chapter on the Film Marketing Mix (2010). By posing this as an ordinal question,

the samples opinions on criteria for film viewing at the cinema would be

learned.

The second section of the questionnaire was titled Awareness of Independent

Film. Up till this point all the questions were marked with an asterisk, which

meant that they were required and had to be answered. However the eighth

question asked the sample if they were aware of the concept of independent film

or not. The responses provided were Yes and No and if the respondents

answered No they were meant to skip to the next section. This is because the

whole section was about independent films, and if they were unaware of

independent film, then they would not be in an accurate position to answer those

questions. Their responses would misconstrue the whole consumer perception,

and it was necessary to sift out the people who had no knowledge of independent

film.

The next question then dealt with what the sample thought made a film

independent: its production, distribution or aesthetic values. This was asked to

attempt to provide a consensus on the debate in Chapter 2 about the conclusive

definition of independent cinema. Then they were asked how many independent

films they had seen in the last year, because 2010-2011 is meant to be a

landmark year for UK independent releases (BFI 2011a). This would prove

whether this had an impact on the average cinemagoer. The next question

involved the reason why consumers watched independent film and the last

question in the section asked them the genres of independent films they had seen.

These questions were relevant to formulate the appeal of independent films

amongst people who were aware of them.

30
The third section was called Consumer Perception and sought to derive the

existing consumer perceptions. The first two questions measured deterrent

factors for both independent and mainstream cinema. These two questions tied in

with each other as the responses were linked. These questions were asked in

order to find out if the deterrent factor in one type of cinema would result in

appeal for the other type.

The next four questions in the section employed the use of the Likert scale,

which ranged from Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree. They also used the

first person in them in order for the respondent to identify with the question

better. The first question in the group enquired if people enjoyed discussing films

after they viewed them. The second asked if they were more likely to watch

independent films if they were more aware of them. These two questions were

posed to the respondents to correctly identify the consumer perceptions of

independent cinema. The next two questions dealt with promotion; the first asked

about whether certain films were affected by over exposure and extensive hype

and the second enquired about the appeals of promotional incentives for films.

These were posed to the respondents to find out of there was a link between

promotion and increased viewership of independent cinema, and if marketing

could help bridge this link.

The last section was on demographics, in order to establish the gender, age,

occupation, level of education and income of each respondent.

31
When designing the questionnaire, it was important to stick to Leitzs

conventions of questionnaire design (2010). This meant to make sure that the

questions were short in length and simplistic in grammar. The order was also

important, and demographics are preferred if they come last (Leitz 2010).

3.6 Pilot Testing

Before the questionnaire was launched, a pre-test procedure was conducted with

a small sample of 10 students. This was in order to determine if the questionnaire

was easy to understand and whether the sample would provide responses that

would work with the aims and objectives.

In the initial draft of the questionnaire, all the questions were cited as required.

However it was established that if people did know what independent films were,

their responses to certain perception questions would be misleading and would

not be an accurate representation. Thus certain questions were listed as not

required and these amendments were made to the final questionnaire.

3.7 Research Procedure

After extensive secondary research using books and databases on film marketing,

consumer behaviour and the film industry, the questionnaire (Refer to Appendix

1) was launched. This was done mainly through the distribution of paper

questionnaires as well as the use of an online survey software called Survey

Gizmo. The online survey was distributed largely through social networking

while the paper questionnaires were often delivered in person. The URL of the

online survey is given below:

32
http://edu.surveygizmo.com/s3/648768/Consumer-Perception-of-Independent-

Cinema

Thus the questionnaire was launched and sent out to the designated sample of

UK based students and young working adults. The initial aim was to collect 125

respondents, so a total of 127 questionnaires were sent out. However some

responses were not collected, and some were declared void or partial because

they did not fill in the required questions or incorrectly answered the optional

ones. Therefore the total amount of responses obtained were 112.

Once all the data was properly collected, it was inputted into the SPSS software.

This software helped keep a record of each respondent and their responses so that

the final data analysis and findings could be carried out easily.

3.8 Limitations of the Methodology

There are several limitations with the research methodology, which will be

summarised in this section. Firstly as this is a student research project, there were

several hindrances in time and money which may have compromised the quality

of the research. Secondly in order to obtain accurate consumer perceptions, focus

groups were considered as a possible option; however this plan had to be

scrapped because a suitable sample could not be found for the focus group, and it

took too much time to be organised. Lastly the sample size proves to be a

limitation as it is only a small percentage of the population in 112 respondents so

the research may not be as reflective of general perceptions as it ought to have

been.

33
Chapter 4: Findings and Data Analysis

4.1 Introduction

This section of the dissertation will illustrate the results obtained by the research

methods used. This is the analysis of the data formulated by the responses to the

questionnaires. This section is closely linked to the Research Objectives

specified in Chapter 1, as well as the gaps in previous research outlined in

Chapter 2.

4.2 Finding 1: To understand the current consumer perceptions of

independent cinema.

As indicated in Chapter 2, there is a gap in the research conducted about what

average consumers think about independent films. Thus this research sought to

identify some of the common perceptions linked to independent films amongst

the set sample of 112 people (consisting mostly of students).

To identify perceptions, the following questions from the questionnaire were

analysed:

Q8. Are you familiar with the concept of independent films?

Q9. What do you think makes a film independent?

Q11. Why have you watched independent films?

34
 Q13. What is the main factor that deters you from viewing a mainstream

film?

Q14. What is the main factor that deters you from viewing an

independent film?

The results from these questions were evaluated as follows:

Table 4.1 Are you familiar with the concept of independent films? Frequencies
Are you familiar with the concept of independent films?

Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent
Percent Percent
Yes 72 64.3 64.3 64.3

Valid No 40 35.7 35.7 100.0

Total 112 100.0 100.0

Fig.4.1 Are you familiar with the concept of independent films? Pie Chart

36%
Yes
64%
No (if No, please go to
the next page)

As it can be seen from the results of this question, 64% percent of the sample

were aware of the concept of independent film as opposed to 36% who were not

aware. This shows that a vast majority of the sample were familiar enough with

the term independent film to separate it from general mainstream cinema.

35
 Table 4.2 What do you think makes a film independent? Frequencies

What do you think makes a film independent?

Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent
Percent Percent
Its production 26 23.2 36.1 36.1
Its distribution 3 2.7 4.2 40.3
Its aesthetic values (for
Valid
eg storyline, 43 38.4 59.7 100.0
cinematography)
Total 72 64.3 100.0
Missing System 40 35.7
Total 112 100.0

Fig. 4.2 What do you think makes a film independent? Pie Chart with only the
valid percent values

36%
Its production
Its distribution
60%
Its aesthetic values
4%

Following on from the previous question of awareness of independent cinema, it

was then necessary to understand what parameters people used to define

independent cinema once they were aware of it. People who responded with No

in Q8 were not allowed to answer Q9 - Q12 because if they were not aware of

independent cinema, then their understanding of the definitions and conventions

would not be relevant to this study.

36
As stated in Chapter 2, there is considerable conflict over what constitutes the

definition of independent films. There are debates over whether the production of

the film should be taken into consideration or should its distribution or aesthetic

values not be overlooked? (For further elaboration, look at chapter 2).

The industry relies on the definition set out by IFTA, which states that the

principal funding (more than 50%) has to come from a source other than the six

big studios. However when the question and its options were posed to the target

sample, the greater part sided with the view that independent cinema is defined

by the aesthetic values associated with the film, such as its plotline,

cinematography, subject content or narrative. This viewpoint contradicts the

views of several theorists and agrees largely with those who consider

independent films to be synonymous with art cinema.

The percentages were 60% for aesthetic values, 36% for production and 4% for

distribution. These figures are indicative of the responses from 72 participants in

the survey, as opposed to the whole sample of 112 people. As stated before, the

answers of 40 respondents are recorded as missing because their answers will not

properly reflect the perception of independent cinema.

This observation proves that this particular sample of viewers are more interested

in the overall finished effect of a film, rather than considering the behind the

screen components.

37
 Table 4.3 Why have you watched Independent Films Frequencies
Why have you watched independent films?
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent
Percent Percent
Innovative and unique
37 33.0 51.4 51.4
storyline or plot
Different narrative
17 15.2 23.6 75.0
techniques
Valid Choice of subject rarely
covered in mainstream 14 12.5 19.4 94.4
films
Talent of the cast 4 3.6 5.6 100.0
Total 72 64.3 100.0
Missing System 40 35.7
Total 112 100.0

Fig. 4.3. Why have you watched Independent Films Bar Chart

60
50
40
30 51.4%
20
23.6% 19.4%
10
5.6%
0
Innovative and Different Choice of Talent of the
unique narrative subject rarely cast
storyline or techniques covered in
plot mainstream
Iilms

This question evaluates the predominant reason why people choose to watch

independent films. It refers to the independent films they have watched, hence

helping to create and understand the average consumer perceptions of

independent films. As seen in the table and graph above, the innovative and

unique stories and plots of certain independent films are what have made the

38
people in the sample choose to watch them. 51.4% of respondents picked this

reason as opposed to 23.6% for narrative techniques, 19.4% for subject matter

and 5.6% for talent of the cast.

Table 4.4 Deterrent for independent films frequencies

What is the main factor that deters you from viewing an independent film?
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent
Percent Percent
Complex storyline or
19 17.0 17.0 17.0
themes
No promotional hype 21 18.8 18.8 35.7
No interest in subject
Valid 37 33.0 33.0 68.8
matter
Lack of knowledge about
35 31.3 31.3 100.0
the cast or filmmakers
Total 112 100.0 100.0

Table 4.5 Deterrent for mainstream films frequencies

What is the main factor that deters you from viewing a mainstream film?
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent
Percent Percent
Clichs involved in the
22 19.6 19.6 19.6
genre
Too much promotional
19 17.0 17.0 36.6
hype
Valid Formulaic and predictable
54 48.2 48.2 84.8
plotline
No affinity towards the
17 15.2 15.2 100.0
cast or filmmakers
Total 112 100.0 100.0

39
Fig. 4.4 Deterrent for independent films Bar Chart

35
30
25
20
33% 31.3%
15
10 17% 18.8%

5
0
Complex No No interest in Lack of
storyline or promotional subject matter knowledge
themes hype about the cast
or Iilmmakers

Fig. 4.5 Deterrent for mainstream films Bar Chart

50
45
40
35
30
25 48.2%
20
15
10 19.6% 17% 15.2%
5
0
Clichs Too much Formulaic and No afIinity
involved in the promotional predictable towards the
genre hype plotline cast or
Iilmmakers

These questions evaluate the deterrent factors for both independent and

mainstream movies. By analysing them together, it is possible to see what drives

people away from one type and what propels them toward another. The reasons

chosen for each question are counterparts for the other question as they are key

attributes that differentiate the film types.

40
Thus it can be seen that the sample is likely to be swayed away from independent

films if they are not interested in the subject matter of the film itself. Another key

reason is lack of knowledge about the cast or filmmakers. These reasons have

similar percentages; the former is 33%, while the latter is 31.3%. Consequently

the two less chosen answers, which are complex storylines and themes and lack

of promotion, are also quite similar, being 17% and 18.8% respectively.

However for mainstream films, the key deterrent, which is formulaic and

predictable plotline, stands out clearly from the other reasons. Nearly half the

respondents (48.2%) have chosen this reason as opposed to the other reasons.

this indicates that the sample is receptive to unique storylines and plots.

Table 4.6 Modes of Q8, Q9, Q11, Q13 and Q14

Are you What do you Why have What is the What is the
familiar with think makes a you watched main factor main factor
the concept film independent that deters that deters
of independent? films? you from you from
independent viewing a viewing an
films mainstream independent
film? film?
N Valid 112 72 72 112 112
Missing 0 40 40 0 0

Mode Yes Aesthetic Innovative Formulaic No interest

values and unique and in subject
storyline or predictable matter
plot plotline

Because these questions all included nominal variables, the mode, or the most

occurring value was extracted to give the average response. Table 4.6 thus sums

up the consumer perceptions of independent cinema.

41
4.3 Finding 2: Determining if there is an audience for independent films

This finding is linked to the second objective outlined in chapter 1 which was to

ascertain if a specific audience could be found for independent cinema. It also

has relevance to the section on Audience in Chapter 2, the literature review.

One key purpose of conducting this research was to identify whether a possible

audience could be created for independent films so that this could be relevant to

possible branding and segmentation strategies which could be implemented in

the future of film marketing. In order to achieve this purpose it was necessary to

cross-analyse questions so that possible segments could be obtained for the

benefit of segmentation, targeting and positioning.

One method of cross-sectioning the data was to investigate whether there was a

relationship between occupation of the sample and awareness of independent

cinema. Therefore the following null hypothesis was developed:

There is no association between occupation and awareness of independent

film

Thus a cross tab was run to determine which demographic answered yes or no

on the awareness question. The results are displayed on the next page:

42
Table 4.7 Cross-tabs of Occupation and Awareness of Independent Film

Are you familiar with the Total

concept of independent films
Yes No
Occupation Student 39 8 47
Employed 19 17 36
Self Employed 8 10 18
Retired/ Unemployed 6 5 11
Total 72 40 112

While it can be seen that the greater amount of yes responses are largely in the

category of students, the usage of crosstabs is not enough to prove a relationship

between occupation and awareness of independent film. Therefore it is necessary

to run a statistical test to prove that one item influences the other. Since both

questions contain nominal variables, it is necessary to use the chi square test. The

Chi square test is used to prove associations between two nominal variables

(Janssens et al 2008). The results are displayed below:

Table 4.8 Chi-Square Test

Chi-Square Tests
Value df Asymp. Sig.
(2-sided)
a
Pearson Chi-Square 12.771 3 .005
Likelihood Ratio 13.424 3 .004
Linear-by-Linear 8.360 1 .004
Association
N of Valid Cases 112
a. 1 cells (12.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum
expected count is 3.93.

After the test was conducted in SPSS, it is necessary to evaluate whether to

accept or reject the null hypothesis. The first step to do that is to look at the

significance value of the Pearson Chi Square. As shown in the table above, this

43
value is 0.005. Since the significance value is less than 0.05, the null hypothesis

is then rejected and it is proved that there is an association between occupation

and awareness of independent film, which is the alternative hypothesis.

Table 4.9 Symmetric Measures

Symmetric Measures
Value Approx.
Sig.
Nominal by Nominal Phi .338 .005
Cramer's V .338 .005
N of Valid Cases 112

When it comes to testing the strength of the association, it is essential to look at

Cramers Value (indicated in the table up). The Cramers Value typically lies

between 0 and 1, with the higher number depicting stronger relationships. In this

case the value is 0.338, which does indicates a slightly weaken association

between the two nominal variables.

Since the chi square test proved an association between occupation and

awareness of independent film, the results of the crosstab were displayed in a

clustered bar chart, to help portray the association visually.

44
Fig. 4.6 Clustered Bar Chart for Occupation and Awareness of Independent Film

39%
40
35
30
25
19%
20 17% Yes

15 No
10%
8% 8%
10 6% 5%
5
0
Student Employed Self Retired/
Employed Unemployed

Thus it can be clearly seen that students were the occupation group most aware

of independent films, because they had the highest number of yes responses.

Therefore it is fair to say students can be a possible segment for the marketing of

independent films because they display a considerable amount of awareness for

these types of films.

Another way the data was cross sectioned in order to find probable segments was

to find a relationship between the ages of the respondents and the amount of

independent films they had seen in the past year. A crosstab was run on the

responses to these questions and the results are as follows:

45
Table 4.10. Crosstabs of age and number of independent films seen
Age * In the last year, how many independent films have you seen? Crosstabulation
Count
In the last year, how many independent films have you seen? Total
Less than 10 10 - 15 16 - 20 More than
20
Age 18 - 22 6 0 1 2 9
23 - 26 13 4 6 0 23
27 - 30 17 0 0 0 17
31 - 35 5 2 0 0 7
Over 14 1 0 0 15
35
Total 55 7 7 2 71

From the table it can be seen that more independent films were viewed by the

younger part of the sample in the past year. However this is not conclusive to

prove a substantial relationship between age and the number of films seen in the

past year.

So the following null hypothesis was used:

There is no relationship between age and number of independent films seen

in the last year

Thus the correlation test was used. Correlation is used to prove the statistical

relationships or dependence between two random variables (Janssens et al 2008).

Therefore it provides a legitimate mathematical reasoning and proof of

dependence. The results are shown below:

46
Table 4.11 Correlation between age and number of independent films seen

Correlations
In the last Age
year, how
many
independent
films have
you seen?
**
In the last year, how Pearson Correlation 1 -.361
many independent films Sig. (2-tailed) .002
have you seen? N 71 71
**
Age Pearson Correlation -.361 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .002
N 71 112
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

When analysing the correlation matrix, the first thing to look is the significance

of the correlation. If it is less than 0.05 the null hypothesis is rejected. Since the

value is 0.002, the alternative hypothesis is accepted, thus proving that there is a

relationship between age and the number of independent films seen.

Now that there is proof of the existence of a relationship, the next aspect to look

at is its strength. This determined by examining the Pearson Correlation value.

This value typically lies between 0 and or 0 and -1, with the higher numbers

denoting a higher strength and the sign indicating whether the relationship is

progressive or regressive. In this case, the value is -0.361, which means that there

is a relationship but it is of medium strength. Since the value is negative it proves

that the relationship is of a regressive nature, which means as one variable rises,

the value of the other falls. The variables are thus inversely proportionate. For

47
this case it means that as the age of the respondents increase, it is more likely that

they will have seen fewer independent films in the last year. Likewise, the

younger they are, it would be more probable that they have seen more

independent films in the last year.

A clustered bar chart was then used to visually represent the data:

Fig. 4.7 Clustered Bar Chart for Age and number of independent films seen

18
16
14
12 Less than 10
10 10 - 15
8 16 - 20
6 More than 20
4
2
0
18 - 22 23 - 26 27 - 30 31 - 35 Over 35

This graph proves that even though the highest response for each age group was

less than 10, the other response sets are much higher with the younger age

groups. Thus it can be fair to say that a younger population is an ideal segment

for independent films.

In order to define more segments in an independent cinema audience, it is also

necessary to know what genres the independent films they have seen lie in. Thus

the multiple response question was posed to them:

48
 Q12. Of the independent films you have seen, which genres do they lie

in? (Tick more than one if they apply)

Thus the responses to the question were composed in the following multiple

response table:

Table 4.12 Multiple Response Table for genre

Frequencies

Responses Percent of
N Percent Cases
a
$indgenre Action 11 5.7% 15.3%
Animation and Fantasy 8 4.1% 11.1%
Comedy 23 11.9% 31.9%
Documentary 39 20.2% 54.2%
Drama 45 23.3% 62.5%
Horror 9 4.7% 12.5%
Musical 6 3.1% 8.3%
Romance 20 10.4% 27.8%
Science Fiction 15 7.8% 20.8%
Thriller 17 8.8% 23.6%
Total 193 100.0% 268.1%
a. Dichotomy group tabulated at value 1.

Thus it can be seen that the five most popular genres are: - Drama, Documentary,

Comedy, Romance and Thriller. Thus it could be said that the segments of the

population who watched these genres in a mainstream format, would be

interested in viewing them in independent films.

To prove that there is a relevance researching audience segments for independent

film, the following question was posed to the sample:

Q16. I am more likely to watch independent films if I am more aware

about them

49
The answer to this question was displayed as follows:

Table 4.13 more likely to watch independent films if aware about them
Frequencies
I am more likely to watch independent films if I am more aware about them
Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
Valid Strongly Agree 34 30.4 30.4 30.4
Agree 60 53.6 53.6 83.9
Neutral 15 13.4 13.4 97.3
Disagree 2 1.8 1.8 99.1
Strongly Disagree 1 0.9 0.9 100.0
Total 112 100.0 100.0

Since this question was on the Likert scale, the mean was extracted in order to

find the average response value to this question.

Table 4.14 Mean and Standard Deviation for Q16

Statistics
I am more likely to watch independent
films if I am more aware about them
N Valid 112
Missing 0
Mean 10066.89
Std. Deviation .764
Minimum 10066
Maximum 10070

As indicated in the table above, the mean is 10066.89, which is represented in the

coding as being between the responses Strongly Agree and Agree. This

means that people are generally open and more positive to viewing independent

films if they had more awareness of them. The answers ranged between

Strongly Agree and Strongly Disagree, however the standard deviation is

0.764, indicating that most of the answers were clustered around the mean and

that there was less dispersion over the overwhelming response.

50
This bar chart visually represents the amount of positive responses:

Fig. 4.8 more likely to watch independent films if aware about them Bar Chart

60 53.6%

50

40 30.4%

30

20 13.4%

10 1.8% 0.9%

0
Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly
Agree Disagree

51
4.4 Finding 3: To investigate the effectiveness of film marketing strategies

This finding ties in with the third objective put forward in Chapter 1, which was

to investigate the effectiveness of film marketing within the sample, particularly

in relevance to independent films. This finding is also linked to the section

evaluating film marketing theories in Chapter 2.

In general the first section of the questionnaire was adapted to include the

audiences receptiveness to film marketing techniques. The particular questions

pertaining to film marketing were:

Q2 How many times a month do you visit the cinema?

Q3 Which of these factors prevent you from increasing your visits to the

cinema?

Q4. Does the promotion of an upcoming film create interest?

Q5 Rank the following promotional/marketing tactics in order of

effectiveness.

Q7 Rank the following characteristics in order of what would make you

more likely to see a film at the cinema.

Q17 Over exposure and extensive promotion can dissuade me from

seeing certain films.

Q18 Promotional incentives (such as Orange Wednesdays) make it more

appealing for me to visit the cinema.

52
The results of these questions were analysed as follows:

Table 4.15 How many times a month do you visit the cinema? Frequencies
How many times a month do you visit the cinema?
Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
Valid 1-2 times 83 74.1 74.1 74.1
3-4 times 10 8.9 8.9 83.0
5-6 times 2 1.8 1.8 84.8
7 times + 0 0 0 0
Never 17 15.2 15.2 100.0
Total 112 100.0 100.0

The greater percentages are in the lower categories of responses indicating that

this sample visited the cinema on a lesser basis. Since these were interval

variables, the mean or average was extracted to indicate the average response to

the question:

Table 4.16 Mean and Standard Deviation for Q2

Statistics
How many times a month do you visit
the cinema?

N Valid 112

Missing 0
Mean 10005.73
Std. Deviation 1.439
Minimum 10005
Maximum 10009

Since it can be seen in the table above, the mean, or average response for the

question is 10005.73. This number lies between the values 1-2 times and 3-4

times. The minimum and maximum responses are 1-2 times and Never

respectively. The standard deviation, at 1.439, is quite high, indicating a greater

53
dispersion of responses because the sample has selected a variety of response

options.

Fig. 4.9 How many times a month do you visit the cinema? Bar Chart

74.1%
80

70

60

50

40

30
15.2
20 8.9%
10 1.8% 0%

0
1-2 times 3-4 times 5-6 times 7 times + Never

In order to learn what were the factors that led to a decrease in cinema

admissions, the following question was posed:

Q3 Which of these factors prevent you from increasing your visits to the

cinema?

54
 The results were displayed as follows:

Table 4.17 Which of these factors prevent you from increasing your visits to the
cinema? Frequencies

Which of these factors prevent you from increasing your visits to the cinema?
Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
Valid Price of tickets 31 27.7 27.7 27.7
Lack of Time 68 60.7 60.7 88.4
Location and accessibility 10 8.9 8.9 97.3
Uncomfortable 3 2.7 2.7 100.0
Environment
Total 112 100.0 100.0

Fig. 4.10 Which of these factors prevent you from increasing your visits to the
cinema? Pie Chart

8.9% 2.7% 27.7%

Price of tickets

Lack of Time

Location and
accessibility
Uncomfortable
60.7% Environment

The primary reason was lack of time, which was chosen by 60.7% of the

population and the secondary reason was price of tickets. This could be because

the sample comprised mainly of students and therefore factors like time and

money were particularly relevant.

55
Next it was important to deduce if the promotion of a film has an effect on the

average viewer or if they are indifferent to it. The results are shown below:

Table 4.18 Does the promotion of an upcoming film create interest? Frequencies
Does the promotion of an upcoming film create interest?
Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
Valid Yes 44 39.3 39.3 39.3
Sometimes 61 54.5 54.5 93.8
No 7 6.3 6.3 100.0
Total 112 100.0 100.0

Fig 4.11 Does the promotion of an upcoming film create interest? Pie Chart

6.3%

39.3%
Yes
Sometimes
No
54.5%

Thus it can be seen that the sample is somewhat on the fence about film

promotion. But the minority of negative responses to the question indicate that

they are somewhat positive.

Once their responses to the effectiveness of film promotion were realised, it was

then important to see which tactics were more effective than others. For this the

56
ranking ordinal variables were used. In order to determine the order, the

frequencies of each category were measured and the mode was found. Then they

were put into the following order:

Table 4.19 Ranking of effectiveness of promotional tactics

Promotional Tactics
Film Trailers Film Posters: Publicity Stills Television Press
Advertising Coverage
N Valid 112 112 112 112 112
Missing 0 0 0 0 0
Mode 1 4 5 2 3

Thus it can be seen that film trailers are most effective, followed closely by

television advertising, then press coverage and lastly film posters and publicity

stills. Thus it is fair to say these are the most effective channels, which could be

used for marketing of independent films as well.

In order to prove the value of cinema attendance and what lures the masses to the

cinema, a ranking question of important motives was posed to the respondents.

The results are as follows:

Table 4.20 Ranking of motives to see films at the cinema

Reason to see films at the cinema
Strong Plot Impressive Reputed Genre Promotional
and Storyline cast Director Tactics
N Valid 112 112 112 112 112
Missing 0 0 0 0 0
Mode 1 2 3 4 5

57
A strong plot and storyline were the most important reason to see a film at the

cinema, followed by an impressive cast. Then came a reputed director, then

genre and lastly promotional tactics.

Then the descriptive statistics were analysed for the questions about promotional

incentives and over exposure. The results were as follows

Table 4.21 Descriptives for Q17 and Q18

Descriptive Statistics
N Minimum Maximum Mean Std.
Deviation
Promotional incentives 112 10076 10080 10077.54 1.030
(such as Orange
Wednesdays) make it
more appealing for me to
visit the cinema
Over exposure and 112 10071 10075 10072.64 .957
extensive promotion can
dissuade me from seeing
certain films
Valid N (listwise) 112

Since these were scale variables the means were extracted. According to the

coding, the means lie somewhere between Agree and Neutral. This means

promotional incentives do make it more appealing to visit the cinema, but over-

promotion can sometimes detract viewers from certain films. The standard

deviation for the promotional incentive is 1.030 which means that a range of

responses were chosen but for the over-promotion question, it is 0.957 which

means that the range of responses is closer to the mean response. The

frequencies are analysed below, and bar charts were added to represent the

responses visually.

58
Table 4.22 Appeal of promotional incentives Frequencies
Promotional incentives (such as Orange Wednesdays) make it more appealing for me
to visit the cinema
Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
Valid Strongly Agree 17 15.2 15.2 15.2
Agree 41 36.6 36.6 51.8
Neutral 36 32.1 32.1 83.9
Disagree 13 11.6 11.6 95.5
Strongly Disagree 5 4.5 4.5 100.0
Total 112 100.0 100.0

Fig. 4.12 Appeal of Promotional Incentives Bar Chart

36.6%
40
32.1%
35
30
25
20 15.2%
11.6%
15
10 4.5%

5
0
Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly
Agree Disagree

Table 4.23 Dissuasion through over exposure Frequencies

Over exposure and extensive promotion can dissuade me from seeing certain films
Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
Valid Strongly Agree 8 7.1 7.1 7.1
Agree 50 44.6 44.6 51.8
Neutral 32 28.6 28.6 80.4
Disagree 18 16.1 16.1 96.4
Strongly Disagree 4 3.6 3.6 100.0
Total 112 100.0 100.0

59
Fig. 4.13 Dissuasion through over exposure Bar Chart
44.6%
45
40
35 28.6%
30
25
16.1%
20
15
7.1%
10 3.6%
5
0
Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly
Agree Disagree

4.5 Summary of the findings

The summary of each finding is described in this section:

In general the sample was aware of the concept of independent films.

They believed what made a film independent was its aesthetic values

rather than anything else. They appreciated the innovative and unique

storylines and plots. If they were not interested in the subject matter, they

would not check out an independent film. They were often deterred by

the formulaic and predictable plotlines associated with mainstream films.

Overall the general perception was quite positive but a lot more

awareness needed to be spread.

It was proven that students were most likely aware of the concept of

independent cinema. It was also proven that younger people were more

likely to have seen more independent films. The most genres of

independent cinema were Drama, Documentary, Comedy, Romance and

Thriller. In general the sample was more inclined and receptive to watch

60
 independent films if they were more aware of them. Thus a segment for

independent cinema should definitely include students and people in their

twenties.

The sample did not visit the cinema frequently, even though it was their

preferred way to view films. They cited lack of time and price of tickets

as key factors that hindered them. They were sometimes interested in the

promotion of a film and film trailers were the most effective promotional

tool. A strong storyline or plot often motivated them to see a film at the

cinema. Promotional incentives did lure them to the cinema, but they

were sometimes dissuaded by excessive hype, so a balance between the

two would prove the most effective.

61
 Chapter 5: Conclusions,

Recommendations and Limitations

5.1 Conclusion

As proven in the dissertation, independent cinema is an area of the film industry

where very little research has been conducted. Although there are figures to

prove that the viewership of independent films is increasing, the difficulty in

defining it, and the issues whether it belongs in a genre of its own has led to

several gaps in research. Therefore the aims and objectives were established to

prove whether marketing strategies could improve consumer perception of

independent cinema. Other sub-objectives include understanding the current

perception of independent cinema, determining whether there could be target

segments for it, and evaluating the effectiveness of film marketing.

The secondary research conducted has proved that there are conflicts in the

definition of independent cinema and no consensus could be reached. The film

marketing mix was analysed as well as the difficulties in marketing an intangible

product like film. The promotional tools of film marketing were determined as

well as their effectiveness in different ways. Then the theories of consumer

perception were introduced such as organisational perception, which links better

to film because the visual stimulus is accompanied by other associations. The

motives outlining consumer selection of film were discussed briefly, as well as

the process of segmentation and the gaps in the research were discussed.

62
When the questionnaires were evaluated, it was found that there was generally a

positive perception of independent cinema, but more awareness needed to be

spread. People were generally more agreeable to watch independent films if they

knew about them. They had started to reject the conventions of mainstream

cinema and were looking for something extra in their film entertainment. A

younger audience, possibly students, needs to be incorporated into the audience

segments. Film marketing tools must be considered carefully when marketing

independent film because their effectiveness is questionable.

5.2 Recommendations

Obviously it is necessary for independent films to continue thriving because their

uniqueness and quality is needed and appreciated by a growing audience. Thus

the recommendations would be summarised as follows.

It is necessary for independent films to employ more marketing, in order to

create buzz or word of mouth. However if there are budget constraints, this

should be restricted to the target audience to gain positive reviews with them and

hope for this to spread to others. Marketing strategies must incorporate the

unique and innovative storyline in their trailers, as this is what viewers are

looking for. The target audience should definitely cut into segments like students

and young working adults, because there are the most likely population groups to

express an interest independent films. Since the sample thought independent

films were defined by their aesthetic values, these are the qualities that must be

emphasised in the marketing strategies. Promotional incentives could be used but

sparingly, because this could affect the perception and bring it closer to

63
mainstream cinema. Ultimately this dissertation has proved that there is plenty of

scope for improvement in consumer perception of independent cinema, it just

needs marketing to be employed the right way.

5.3 Limitations

This research project has some limitations attached to it. The first is to do with a

small sample population, which might not aptly describe the results for the whole

of the UK. Secondly if more time and money could be contributed to the study, it

would have made it a more effective one. Lastly, the lack of research in the

subject area creates problems when trying to reach a consensus. Hopefully if

more gaps are filled, then the aim of the study will be better fulfilled.

64
 Appendix 1
Consumer Perception of Independent
Cinema

Hi everyone! Please take this survey for my dissertation on Consumer

Perception of Independent Cinema. It will only take a couple of minutes of
your time. This questionnaire is strictly for research purposes and all your
responses will be kept confidential. Thanks!

Section 1: General Film Viewing Habits

1) What is your preferred film viewing experience?*

o Cinema o Television o DVDs o Internet

2) How many times a month do you visit the cinema?*

o Never o 1-2 times o 3-4 times o 5-6 times o 7 times or more

3) Which of these factors prevent you from increasing your visits to the
cinema?*

o Price of tickets
o Lack of Time
o Location and accessibility
o Uncomfortable Environment

4) Does the promotion of an upcoming film create interest?*

o Yes o Sometimes o No

65
5) Rank the following promotional/marketing tactics in order of
effectiveness (1 = most effective, 5 = least effective)*

_______Film Trailers
_______Film Posters
_______Publicity Stills
_______Television Advertising (such as TV Spots or Programs dedicated to
upcoming films)
_______Press Coverage (such as articles, reviews or interviews)

6) Which genres of film do you particularly watch? (Tick more than one if
they apply)*

o Action o Horror
o Animation and Fantasy o Musical
o Comedy o Romance
o Documentary o Science Fiction
o Drama o Thriller

7) Rank the following characteristics in order of what would make you more
likely to see a film at the cinema. (1 = most important, 5 = Least important)*

_______Strong Plot and Storyline

_______Impressive cast
_______Reputed Director
_______Genre
_______Promotional Tactics

Section 2: Awareness of Independent Films

8) Are you familiar with the concept of independent films*

o Yes o No (if No, please go to Section 3)

9) What do you think makes a film independent?

o Its production o Its distribution o Its aesthetic values (for eg.

storyline, cinematography)

66
10) In the last year, how many independent films have you seen?

o Less than 10
o 10 - 15
o 16 - 20
o More than 20

11) Why have you watched independent films?

o Innovative and unique storyline or plot

o Different narrative techniques
o Choice of subject rarely covered in mainstream films
o Talent of the cast

12) Of the independent films you have seen, which genres do they lie in?
(Tick more than one if they apply)

o Action
o Horror
o Animation and Fantasy
o Musical
o Comedy
o Romance
o Documentary
o Science Fiction
o Drama
o Thriller

Section 3: Consumer Perception

13) What is the main factor that deters you from viewing a mainstream
film?*

o Cliches involved in the genre

o Too much promotional hype
o Formulaic and predictable plotline
o No affinity towards the cast or filmmakers

67
14) What is the main factor that deters you from viewing an independent
film?*

o Complex storyline or themes

o No promotional hype
o No interest in subject matter
o Lack of knowledge about the cast or filmmakers

15) I enjoy discussing films after I watch them.*

o Strongly Agree o Agree o Neutral o Disagree o Strongly

Disagree

16) I am more likely to watch independent films if I am more aware about

them.*

o Strongly Agree o Agree o Neutral o Disagree o Strongly

Disagree

17) Over exposure and extensive promotion can dissuade me from seeing
certain films.*

o Strongly Agree o Agree o Neutral o Disagree o Strongly

Disagree

18) Promotional incentives (such as Orange Wednesdays) make it more

appealing for me to visit the cinema.*

o Strongly Agree o Agree o Neutral o Disagree o Strongly

Disagree

Section 4: Demographics

19) Gender* 20) Age*

o Male o Under 18
o Female o 18 - 22
o 23 - 26
o 27 - 30
o 31 - 35
o Over 35
68
21) Highest Level of Education Obtained*

o 12th grade or less

o Graduated high school or equivalent
o Some college, no degree
o Associate degree
o Bachelor's degree
o Post-graduate degree

22) Occupation*

o Student
o Employed
o Self Employed
o Retired/Unemployed

23) Monthly Income (if a student or unemployed, please select your

household income)*

o Under 500
o 600 - 1000
o 1100 - 2000
o 2100 - 3000
o Over 3000

Thank You!
Thank you for taking this survey. Your response is very important.

* = Required Question

69
 Appendix 2
Consumer Perception of Independent
Cinema

Hi everyone! Please take this survey for my dissertation on Consumer

Perception of Independent Cinema. It will only take a couple of minutes of
your time. This questionnaire is strictly for research purposes and all your
responses will be kept confidential. Thanks!

Section 1: General Film Viewing Habits

1) What is your preferred film viewing experience?

o Cinema o Television o DVDs o

Internet

2) How many times a month do you visit the cinema?

o Never o 1-2 times o 3-4 times o 5-6 times o 7 times or

more

3) Which of these factors prevent you from increasing your visits to the
cinema?

o Price of tickets
o Lack of Time
o Location and accessibility
o Uncomfortable Environment

4) Does the promotion of an upcoming film create interest?

o Yes o Sometimes o No

70
5) Rank the following promotional/marketing tactics in order of
effectiveness (1 = most effective, 5 = least effective)

_______Film Trailers
_______Film Posters
_______Publicity Stills
_______Television Advertising (such as TV Spots or Programs dedicated to
upcoming films)
_______Press Coverage (such as articles, reviews or interviews)

6) Which genres of film do you particularly watch? (Tick more than one if
they apply)

o Action o Horror
o Animation and Fantasy o Musical
o Comedy o Romance
o Documentary o Science Fiction
o Drama o Thriller

7) Rank the following characteristics in order of what would make you more
likely to see a film at the cinema. (1 = most important, 5 = Least important)

_______Strong Plot and Storyline

_______Impressive cast
_______Reputed Director
_______Genre
_______Promotional Tactics

Section 2: Awareness of Independent Films

8) Are you familiar with the concept of independent films

o Yes o No (if No, please go to Section 3)

9) What do you think makes a film independent?

71
o Its production o Its distribution o Its aesthetic values (for eg.
storyline, cinematography)

10) In the last year, how many independent films have you seen?

o Less than 10
o 10 - 15
o 16 - 20
o More than 20

11) Why have you watched independent films?

o Innovative and unique storyline or plot

o Different narrative techniques
o Choice of subject rarely covered in mainstream films
o Talent of the cast

12) Of the independent films you have seen, which genres do they lie in?
(Tick more than one if they apply)

o Action
o Horror
o Animation and Fantasy
o Musical
o Comedy
o Romance
o Documentary
o Science Fiction
o Drama
o Thriller

Section 3: Consumer Perception

13) What is the main factor that deters you from viewing a mainstream
film?

o Cliches involved in the genre

o Too much promotional hype
o Formulaic and predictable plotline
o No affinity towards the cast or filmmakers

72
14) What is the main factor that deters you from viewing an independent
film?

o Complex storyline or themes

o No promotional hype
o No interest in subject matter
o Lack of knowledge about the cast or filmmakers

15) I enjoy discussing films after I watch them.

o Strongly Agree o Agree o Neutral o Disagree o Strongly

Disagree

16) I am more likely to watch independent films if I am more aware about

them.

o Strongly Agree o Agree o Neutral o Disagree o Strongly

Disagree

17) Over exposure and extensive promotion can dissuade me from seeing
certain films.

o Strongly Agree o Agree o Neutral o Disagree o Strongly

Disagree

18) Promotional incentives (such as Orange Wednesdays) make it more

appealing for me to visit the cinema.

o Strongly Agree o Agree o Neutral o Disagree o Strongly

Disagree

Section 4: Demographics

19) Gender 20) Age

o Male o Under 18
o Female o 18 - 22
o 23 - 26
o 27 - 30
o 31 - 35
o Over 35
73
21) Highest Level of Education Obtained

o 12th grade or less

o Graduated high school or equivalent
o Some college, no degree
o Associate degree
o Bachelor's degree
o Post-graduate degree

22) Occupation

o Student
o Employed
o Self Employed
o Retired/Unemployed
23) Monthly Income (if a student or unemployed, please select your
household income)

o Under 500
o 600 - 1000
o 1100 - 2000
o 2100 - 3000
o Over 3000

Thank You!
Thank you for taking this survey. Your response is very important.

* = Required Question

74
 Appendix 3

Statistics
What is your preferred film
viewing experience?

N Valid 112

Missing 0
Mode 10001

What is your preferred film viewing experience?

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent

Valid Cinema 63 56.3 56.3 56.3

Television 21 18.8 18.8 75.0

DVDs 13 11.6 11.6 86.6

Internet 15 13.4 13.4 100.0

Total 112 100.0 100.0

75
 Case Summary

Cases

Valid Missing Total

N Percent N Percent N Percent

a
$genre 112 100.0% 0 .0% 112 100.0%

a. Dichotomy group tabulated at value 1.

$genre Frequencies

Responses Percent of
N Percent Cases
a
$genre Action: 53 11.9% 47.3%

Animation and Fantasy: 31 7.0% 27.7%

Comedy: 81 18.2% 72.3%

Documentary: 28 6.3% 25.0%

Drama: 55 12.4% 49.1%

Horror: 19 4.3% 17.0%

Musical: 21 4.7% 18.8%

Romance: 66 14.8% 58.9%

Science Fiction: 35 7.9% 31.3%

Thriller: 56 12.6% 50.0%

Total 445 100.0% 397.3%

a. Dichotomy group tabulated at value 1.

Statistics
I enjoy discussing films after I watch
them

N Valid 112

Missing 0
Mean 10081.81
Std. Deviation .754
Minimum 10081
Maximum 10084

76
 I enjoy discussing films after I watch them

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent

Valid Strongly Agree 43 38.4 38.4 38.4

Agree 48 42.9 42.9 81.3

Neutral 20 17.9 17.9 99.1

Disagree 1 .9 .9 100.0

Total 112 100.0 100.0

Statistics

Monthly Income
(if a student or
unemployed,
Highest Level of please select
Education your household
Gender Age Obtained Occupation income)

N Valid 112 112 112 112 112

Missing 0 0 0 0 0
Mean 10086.54 10091.29 10103.47 1.9375 10113.39
Std. Deviation .500 1.430 .930 .98896 1.448
Minimum 10086 10089 10100 1.00 10111
Maximum 10087 10093 10104 4.00 10115

77
 Gender

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent

Valid Male 51 45.5 45.5 45.5

Female 61 54.5 54.5 100.0

Total 112 100.0 100.0

Age

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent

Valid 18 - 22 11 9.8 9.8 9.8

23 - 26 32 28.6 28.6 38.4

27 - 30 20 17.9 17.9 56.3

31 - 35 12 10.7 10.7 67.0

Over 35 37 33.0 33.0 100.0

Total 112 100.0 100.0

Highest Level of Education Obtained

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent

Valid Graduated high school or 4 3.6 3.6 3.6

equivalent

Some college, no degree 3 2.7 2.7 6.3

Associate degree 1 .9 .9 7.1

Bachelors degree 32 28.6 28.6 35.7

Post-graduate degree 72 64.3 64.3 100.0

Total 112 100.0 100.0

Occupation

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent

Valid Student 47 42.0 42.0 42.0

Employed 36 32.1 32.1 74.1

78
 Self Employed 18 16.1 16.1 90.2

Retired/ Unemployed 11 9.8 9.8 100.0

Total 112 100.0 100.0

Monthly Income (if a student or unemployed, please select your household income)

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent

Valid Under 500 15 13.4 13.4 13.4

600 - 1000 18 16.1 16.1 29.5

1100 - 2000 27 24.1 24.1 53.6

2100 - 3000 12 10.7 10.7 64.3

Over 3000 40 35.7 35.7 100.0

Total 112 100.0 100.0

79
80
81
 References

Acheson, K. and Maule, C.J. (1994). Understanding Hollywood's organization

and continuing success. Journal of Cultural Economics. 18 (4), p271-300.

Anderson, E.W. (1998). Consumer satisfaction and word of mouth. Journal of

Services Research. 1 (1)

BFI (2011a). 2011 BFI Statistical Yearbook. London: British Film Institute.

BFI (2011b). The UK box office, first half year (H1) 2011 . London: British Film
Institute.

Bradley, N. (2007). Marketing Research Tools and Techniques. Oxford: Oxford

University Press.

Chisnall, P. (2005). Marketing Research. 7th ed. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill

Education.

Connelly, M.P. (2007). When was the independent film industry born?.
Available: http://www.makeindependentfilms.com/history.htm. Last accessed
14th August 2011.

Cones, J.W. (2008). 43 ways to finance your feature film : a comprehensive

analysis of film finance. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.

Cooper, D. and Schindler, P. (2006). Business Research Methods. 9th ed. New
York: McGraw-Hill Education.

Culliton, J.W. (1948). The Management of Marketing Costs. Boston: Harvard

University.

82
du Gay et al. (2000). Doing Cultural Studies. London: Sage.

Durie, J. et al. (2000). Marketing and Selling Your Film Around the World. Los
Angeles: Silman-James Press.

Eliashburg, J. and Shugan, S.M. (1997). Consumer choice tactics and leisure
activities. International Journal of Advertising. 10 (3)

Elliot, R. and Hamilton, E. (1991). Consumer choice tactics and leisure activities
. International Journal of Advertising. 10 (1).

Gomery, D. (2008). The Hollywood Studio System: A History. 2nd ed. London:
British Film Institute.

Hillier, J. (2001). American independent cinema: a sight and sound reader.

London: British Film Institute Publishing.

Holbrook, M. and Addis, M. (2008). Art versus Commerce in the Movie

Industry. Journal of Cultural Economics. 32 (11)

Holmlund, C. (2005). From the margins to the mainstream. In Contemporary

American independent film, ed. C. Holmlund and J. Wyatt, 1-16. London; New
York: Routledge.

Hoyer, D. and Maclnnis, D. (2007). Consumer Behaviour. 4th ed. U.S.A:

Houghton Mifflin.

IFTA. (2010). About IFTA. Available: http://www.ifta-online.org/. Last accessed

2nd August 2011.

Jacobs, L. (1968). The Rise of the American FIlm. New York: Teachers College.

Jaeckel, A. (2003). European Film Industries. London: British Film Institute.

83
Janssens et al. (2008). Marketing Research with SPSS. Harlow: Pearson
Education Ltd.

Johnson, G., Scholes, K., (2007). Exploring Corporate Strategy. 7th ed. SPain:
Pearson Education Limited.

Kernan, L. (2004). Coming Attractions: Reading American Movie Trailers.

Houston: University of Texas.

Kerrigan, F. (2010). Film Marketing. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Kerrigan, F. and Yalkin, C. (2009). Revisiting the role of critical reviews in film
marketing. In: Hemmings Wirten, E. Mashing Up Culture: The rise of user
generated content. London: Uppsala University.

King, G. (2005). American independent cinema. Bloomington: Indiana

University Press.

Lietz P. (2010) Research into questionnaire design. International Journal of

Market Research [serial online]. March 2010;52(2):249-272. Available from:
Business Source Complete, Ipswich, MA. Accessed April 29, 2011.

Levy, E. (1999). Cinema of outsiders: the rise of American independent film.

New York: New York University Press.

Merritt, G. (2000). Celluloid Mavericks: A history of American Independent

Film.
New York: Thunders Mouth Press.

Nowell-Smith, G. (1981). Six Authors in Pursuit of The Searchers. In: Caughie,

J. Theories of Authorship. London: Routledge and Keegan Paul.

Parasuraman, A. et Al. (2004) Marketing Research, U.S.A.: Houghton Mifflin

Company.

Peter, J.P. et al. (1999). Consumer Behaviour and Marketing Strategy.

Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Education.

84
Schiffman, L., Kanuk, L., Hansen, H. (2008). Consumer Behaviour - A European
Look. UK: Prentice Hall.

Solomon et al (2010). Consumer Behaviour: A European Perspective . 4th ed.

Harlow: Prentice Hall.

Squire, J.E. (2006). The Movie Business Book. 4th ed. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill
Education.

Stringer, J (2005). Putting Korean Cinema in its Place. London: Routledge.

Tzioumakis, Y. (2006). American independent cinema: an introduction. New

Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press.

Valoure, S. (2008). The Big Six - Top 6 Major Film Studios in the Movie
Business. Available: http://ezinearticles.com/?The-Big-Six---Top-6-Major-Film-
Studios-in-the-Movie-Business&id=1750590. Last accessed 5th August 2011.

Wilson, R. Gilligan, C. (2005) Strategic Marketing Management-Planning,

Implementation and Control, third edition, Oxford: Elsevier Butterworth-
Heinemann

Wohlfeil, M. and Whelan, S. (2008). Confessions of a movie fan: Introspection

into the experimental consumption of Pride and Prejudice. European advances in
Consumer Research. 8 (3).

Wyatt, J. (1998) The Formation of the major independent: Miramax,

New Line and the New Hollywood, in Smith, N. et al, Contemporary
Hollywood Cinema, Routledge: London.

85


86