Many years ago, back when I still shopped at 2nd & Charles, I noticed some intriguing signage as I was browsing their shelves: If I bought two used horror films, I could get a third for free. I accepted the challenge and began searching.
The sale should've had an exception for discounting films categorized elsewhere if you could provide a good enough argument lol. Forward this to them!!!
I saw this movie when I was 11 years old, and spending the night at a friend's house. Her older sister rented it for us, no questions asked. Thank god for older siblings with access to an adult Blockbuster account.
Also, this is more related to 2nd & Charles than the fluidity of film genres, but when I worked at Books-A-Million (who owns 2nd & Charles) all of those Buy 2 get 1 free promos were to deal with excess stock. The restrictions on them were so specific that it was almost never worth it because you always ended up with at least one book you didn't want. My theory was that they were not only playing on people's interest in a deal, but also their fear of being embarrassed. So if you got a book that didn't qualify for the promo, you'd buy it anyway to avoid an awkward "oh, wait never mind" conversation you'd have to have with the cashier. I was always surprised at the number of times I would tell people a book didn't qualify, and they'd buy all three books anyway.
Also this is valuable insight into the BAM/2&C sale strategy! Human psychology is so fascinating; folks will pay more money to avoid looking foolish. However, I am very comfortable looking foolish, so I told the cashier I'd just put them back. 😂 (I might've actually found and bought two more qualifying discs, but I was real salty about it.)
She was! I'm pretty sure there was some sort of quid pro quo involved (SotL ref fully intended). She rented us the movie, we didn't tell her mom she snuck out to see her boyfriend or that she smoked or whatever it was.
And Sunk Cost Fallacy is a helluva drug, you know?
Nice perspective on this movie, and it's interesting that the director had a good mix of genres beforehand.
I've often wondered why it's Lambs that broke through more than Red Dragon. On paper (no pun intended) the latter would be a better movie. But both adaptations so far missed the essence of that book. Meanwhile, Lambs as a movie elevates the book material. Maybe a left-of-field director was the secret? A bit like Friedkin making Exorcist or Scott making Alien.
Great question! It is pretty interesting that an adaptation of a second novel was a huge hit after the adaptation of the first was largely a flop. It's not like Michael Mann's not capable of elevating good material! Maybe it's just one of those lightning in a bottle scenarios where all the pieces fell into place and created something much more than the sum of the parts.
The sale should've had an exception for discounting films categorized elsewhere if you could provide a good enough argument lol. Forward this to them!!!
I really should! That would've been a great idea. They may have actually altered the terms of the deal since I haven't been in years. 😂
I saw this movie when I was 11 years old, and spending the night at a friend's house. Her older sister rented it for us, no questions asked. Thank god for older siblings with access to an adult Blockbuster account.
Also, this is more related to 2nd & Charles than the fluidity of film genres, but when I worked at Books-A-Million (who owns 2nd & Charles) all of those Buy 2 get 1 free promos were to deal with excess stock. The restrictions on them were so specific that it was almost never worth it because you always ended up with at least one book you didn't want. My theory was that they were not only playing on people's interest in a deal, but also their fear of being embarrassed. So if you got a book that didn't qualify for the promo, you'd buy it anyway to avoid an awkward "oh, wait never mind" conversation you'd have to have with the cashier. I was always surprised at the number of times I would tell people a book didn't qualify, and they'd buy all three books anyway.
Your friend's sister sounds cool as hell.
Also this is valuable insight into the BAM/2&C sale strategy! Human psychology is so fascinating; folks will pay more money to avoid looking foolish. However, I am very comfortable looking foolish, so I told the cashier I'd just put them back. 😂 (I might've actually found and bought two more qualifying discs, but I was real salty about it.)
She was! I'm pretty sure there was some sort of quid pro quo involved (SotL ref fully intended). She rented us the movie, we didn't tell her mom she snuck out to see her boyfriend or that she smoked or whatever it was.
And Sunk Cost Fallacy is a helluva drug, you know?
Okay your friend's sister sounds even cooler now.
Nice perspective on this movie, and it's interesting that the director had a good mix of genres beforehand.
I've often wondered why it's Lambs that broke through more than Red Dragon. On paper (no pun intended) the latter would be a better movie. But both adaptations so far missed the essence of that book. Meanwhile, Lambs as a movie elevates the book material. Maybe a left-of-field director was the secret? A bit like Friedkin making Exorcist or Scott making Alien.
Thanks for the post
Great question! It is pretty interesting that an adaptation of a second novel was a huge hit after the adaptation of the first was largely a flop. It's not like Michael Mann's not capable of elevating good material! Maybe it's just one of those lightning in a bottle scenarios where all the pieces fell into place and created something much more than the sum of the parts.