Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Status:
"Pickleball-Free American"
(set 23 days ago)
Location: St Simons Island, GA
23,523 posts, read 44,204,364 times
Reputation: 16926
Advertisements
I think consensus would be that a trailer can have an impact on your expectations of an upcoming film, whether deserved or not. One that has set me up with high expectations is the (umpteenth) retelling of the classic film Nosferatu. I'm an enthusiastic fan of the original (silent) version as well as the 1979 remake (with Klaus Kinski) and Shadow of the Vampire (Steven Katz's clever spin on the original).
Ordinarily, I would dismiss yet another run at the story out of hand, but the recently released trailer...wow. I'm totally in.
A great movie teaser trailer has become a lost art. You want to "tease" the audience into wanting to see your movie. Give them just enough to make them hungry for more, but don't give us the whole movie in the preview. Most movies do exactly that. They either don't sell the movie they want you to see (every trailer for THE FALL GUY), or they just summarize the movie's plot (nearly all movies).
The last trailer I remember seeing that I thought was a true work of art, that put the theme of the movie on display without spoiling the movie, was this one:
And then there are really truly great trailers that made me crave to see a movie that turned out to be not so great. Even if you hate the movie, these were great trailers:
Back in the early 1970s, I saw more teasers and trailers then you could shake a stick at. It was all part of making up the trailer reel at the beginning of a show and deciding what worked, what was demanded by film companies, and what might get accidently lost or damaged...
There is no question that AT THE TIME the 30 second "Star Wars" (Episode 4) trailer stood out. The cutting was good, and it gave just the right hint that the special effects might not be the schlock that had dominated the genre for years. Looking at online versions of it today, it no longer has any special power.
"Masters of the Universe" had a surprisingly good trailer.
One of my pet peeves of the time was that there were often trailers made during production that included entire scenes that never made it to the finished product.
... and who can ever forget the iconic "In a world..." intro?
You probably know that when Psycho opened, no one, truly no one, knew what to expect, and in the showing for the critics, someone said he'd never heard reviewers screaming like that in his life.
You probably know that when Psycho opened, no one, truly no one, knew what to expect, and in the showing for the critics, someone said he'd never heard reviewers screaming like that in his life.
You make a good point on the "reveal too much" aspect. And yeah. Hitchcock wasn't called a master for nothing.
Now you have me wondering what would have happened if Rod Serling had the backing to do his work big budget. (Yeah, I know about the chopper disaster when it was tried)
@Mark S, thanks for posting those. Even the older movies could have gotten away with trailers half the length. Most of them are around 1.5 to 2 minutes, but really one minute is enough to get the message across. Less is more? Make it brief and tantalizing. I find trailers without outside narration to be more effective. The visuals are enough to intrigue me.
When I watch movies on DVD sometimes the trailers are like mini-movies. Skip, skip, skip. I skip through all of them, sometimes they're 3 minutes long or more.
@Mark S, thanks for posting those. Even the older movies could have gotten away with trailers half the length. Most of them are around 1.5 to 2 minutes, but really one minute is enough to get the message across. Less is more? Make it brief and tantalizing. I find trailers without outside narration to be more effective. The visuals are enough to intrigue me.
When I watch movies on DVD sometimes the trailers are like mini-movies. Skip, skip, skip. I skip through all of them, sometimes they're 3 minutes long or more.
Those long trailers got to be crazymaking in theatres in the 1990s. Every blessed distributor decided that "In order for you to show our next blockbuster movie this summer, you HAVE to play these trailers in front of... (name the biggest films of the era)." Disney was INFAMOUS for that arm-twisting. "Wait, you want us to show a trailer for your G-rated kid film in front of the hard R rated film at 9 PM???" What kind of nut ARE you? Are you thinking about kids at all and who you are advertising to? There are many reasons I hate that mouse, that is just one. Some circuits just tried to comply, but there was another problem. Many of the films of that time had demands that they have five or more shows per day.
You CANNOT have 25+ minutes of trailers from demanding a**holes, ten minutes of paid ads, a required PSA, as well as a film running 2 hrs and 10 minutes, and get in five shows a day unless you have zero clean-up time and allow stay-overs at a film where you are not allowed to do so or the checkers will ding you. Science doesn't allow such timewarps.
As a circuit, we set a rule: ONE distributor required trailer on the film by that distributor. PERIOD. Three other trailers MAX, but they had to fit within the time frame. The b'n and moaning was intense at first. Then, with some strong "This is the reality, fruit-loop!" explanations, the whining died down. Hollywood is all about "Push, push, then push and demand more. Eventually, it won't work, but you have to try." You HAVE to push back or die. Ever wonder where some of my outspokenness comes from?
The DVDs of the era were full-on stupid. First, the anti-piracy spiel, then the company logo, then the logo of the company that bought them out, then the logo of the company that bought THAT company out, then the statue of the girlfriend of the guy who designed the last logo, then four different trailers of whichever directors and producers had attended the last Christmas party, then - if you were lucky - the film.
The DVDs of the era were full-on stupid. First, the anti-piracy spiel, then the company logo, then the logo of the company that bought them out, then the logo of the company that bought THAT company out, then the statue of the girlfriend of the guy who designed the last logo, then four different trailers of whichever directors and producers had attended the last Christmas party, then - if you were lucky - the film.
It's just not from 1990s era movies, I see this all the time with movie DVDs from all eras - I think it all has to do with the production company and the release date of the DVD, whether the movie is fifty years old or five. I suspect some producers are worse than others when it comes to excessive trailers and production branding crap. I skip through all of them by default, so their efforts are lost on me.
Status:
"Pickleball-Free American"
(set 23 days ago)
Location: St Simons Island, GA
23,523 posts, read 44,204,364 times
Reputation: 16926
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cida
You probably know that when Psycho opened, no one, truly no one, knew what to expect, and in the showing for the critics, someone said he'd never heard reviewers screaming like that in his life.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
