We seem to live in an age of adaptations many of the most memorable TV shows and movies come from books. One of the most recent examples being Bridgerton which is a new Netflix hit based off a series of books. the books themselves were not particularly successful or innovative following many of the cliches of the romance genre. They also had truly little marketing due to their main target market being the cheap disposable summer holiday books. However, the involvement of a TV show or movie changes the marketing strategy of a book dramatically. The books bat inspired the TV show or movie gain new covers often with a picture of the actors on the front. Whilst having images of recognisable people on the cover is not new as many biographies and cookery books use this technique it was not as commonly used for books until franchises became more accessible chi wider audiences in the 2000s. classic novels and films did not change their marketing strategy for the covers instead relying on the book or movie making the claim that it was based off the books. under walls this technique has been around for about 20 years it has not always been as popular as it is currently with books like Harry Potter and Twilight which were extremely popular a decade ago avoiding this. However, inspired by the success of these franchises have more creators linked their works to books and market that they were linked to books the books then gained new covers.

 

So, which is more attractive, well it is all opinion. What I might think is a good cover may be different to someone else and as such the wider answer to this question is difficult to find out. Personally, I usually find the original covers more appealing, they feel more organic and creative then the movie/ tv versions. On top of this a movie cover does not automatically make me want to read a book, so for me it is not a highly effective marketing strategy. But this strategy is not really aimed at me as I constantly buy and read new books, it is aimed at movie watchers, the people who are more likely to avoid reading. It is an enticement to them saying if you liked the film, you would like this too. Speaking to friends and family the avid readers also find tv cover less appealing for the same reason I do but it is the opposite for movie/ tv watchers who like the like back to the product that originally got them involved with the franchise. There are however exceptions to the rule one of them being Bridgerton, as I hate the covers and find the lack of originality of the tv cover to be far more appealing.

 

So, whilst these covers sometimes work it is only when the original is awful or when it is aimed at a different audience to me. The Bridgerton tv covers may be effective but I had no appeal towards the Witcher’s tv cover when compared to the original or with the Divergent series. For me, the marketing strategy of tv/ movie book covers is both ineffective and unappealing, with only the Bridgerton covers being an anomaly.