Over the last decade or so, college attendance has been less about turning out productive citizens with career options and much more of a numbers game. Admissions departments often believe that if they can get a large number of applicants then they will be able to turn more of them down, thereby securing a higher rank on the US News list and other ranking lists. Initially, this may be true, but the ways in which many schools are going about this is wasteful and ineffective.
looking for new students Most schools spend thousands upon thousands of dollars on man hours and direct marketing materials that go to an indiscriminate student population. Pamphlets and visitation booklets that promise things like waived application fees, one-on-one advising prior to admission and other costly items, which, if a student applies, is accepted and then decides to enroll, is a great investment. Let’s face it, ratings are great, but it’s tuition that pays the bills. Colleges that use this strategy actually see a far lower percentage of conversions (students who opt to actually enroll and attend the university). This, in turn, means a far lower amount of money coming in for tuition.
The Need for a Marketing Plan
If you have a very strategic marketing plan that pinpoints those students who are the best fit for your school, you will likely have a lower application rate and a higher acceptance rate, but you will also have a higher conversion rate which translates directly into more tuition to fund your school. When creating your strategy, you will need to keep this in mind and not let those initial numbers scare you away, especially if you are a school that has spent years using the “grab bag” method of sending direct marketing to everyone and their dog (it has actually happened that someone was sent college admissions information for their dog because of a mailing list error). When you focus your marketing you will also be saving money on materials and man hours, allowing you to spend more time working on finding those students who will truly shine at your institution and who will be a greater benefit overall (not just financially).
When marketing to specific students, focus on those things that make your university special and stand out from the others. Focus on the quality of education that you will be able to provide them in their chosen field (if your university if one of the top research universities, focus on the student research positions available on campus). By targeting your marketing, you may receive a lower number of applications, but the applications you receive will be of the highest quality.
Maybe you can see now why those ratings are extremely low, but we haven’t looked at the good side of The Fly 2 and I do think it certainly had its moments. If you’re a gorehound then you have to appreciate the elevator scene and the various vomiting scenes; these really do take some beating, even by today’s standards. It was also a great move to show footage from the earlier remake and to me it was well paced, as a fan of the remake I enjoyed seeing more and the “Dad” encryption near the end was a nice touch. It had a B horror movie quality and I enjoyed the ending. It is just one of those horror films that I would watch over again and I am glad that it was made. Looking at the positives against the negatives, I would call that The Fly 2 was a decent enough horror movie. That 4.4/10 rating is just ridiculous.
The only three characters that you need to be aware of are Martin Brundle (Eric Stoltz), Beth Logan (Daphne Zuniga) and Anton Bartok (Lee Richardson)! Veronica Ronnie Quaife was shown on screen for literally two minutes and was played by Saffron Henderson rather than Geena Davis which was a shame. The very simple premise is that Martin Brundle is born into a world controlled by Bartok Industries. This super intelligent life form accelerates in growth quickly and begins showing signs of his insect heritage. Martin Brundle takes responsibility as he gets older and users his genius mind to try and fix the transportation pods. The romance between Beth and Martin seemed rushed to me and once they become “active” we find out the true dark nature of Bartok Industries. It becomes rather enjoyable watching the demise of certain individuals of this organization… it has to be said!
Summary: Chris Walas made a point that the audience would feel more sympathy for the mutated animal than they would for a human. Notice, a dog suffers and the film develops a large volume of hate… a human being then dies in one of the most disturbing and painful ways imaginable and the same haters don‘t flinch! Sure, The Fly 2 lacked the brilliance of Goldblum and the masterful direction of David Cronenberg, but it’s not nearly half as bad as people make out. It’s one of those horror sci-fi movies that I have on DVD and would watch over again. I know many horror films that I couldn’t watch more than once and so for me The Fly 2 is certainly underrated, it does provides entertainment and I think the entire franchise stands as one the of the greatest in the history of horror. I really enjoyed the theme of science gone horribly wrong - David Cronenberg was well known within this field in his early days and there’s no question that it all started with Frankenstein. Good attempt.