|
Action Jacktion posted:The first trailer for 1989's Batman was pretty unusual: I think kiimo has said that the person who made this trailer still works there now gets handed all the most important trailers.
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 18:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 15:23 |
|
|
Action Jacktion posted:The first trailer for 1989's Batman was pretty unusual: I think that the general movie goer was like "A movie about a comic book guy?" and comic-book nerds were pissed that a comedic actor had been cast as Bruce Wayne. My local comic book shop had a petition at the front desk to get Keaton's role re-cast.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 18:36
|
|
|
BonoMan posted:They're being pretty hyperbolic when they say that, but their point still stands... revealing major surprises or plot beats of a movie in the trailer can greatly reduce someone's enjoyability of the movie. Not everyone of course, but a lot of us like riding the wave of reveals and momentum of a movie like it's a brand new thing. And sometimes when you know what's going to happen, it just takes the wind out the sails a bit. If it was that important for you seeing the movie then you didn't really want to see the movie anyway.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 18:38
|
|
|
Surlaw posted:Watching a trailer and saying "I guess I've seen the movie now" is like reading a paragraph summary on Wikipedia and saying "I've read this book." I don't know if that that's necessarily a fair comparison. Wiki summaries of books (or movies or anything narrative really) have to be sought out, they aren't forced on you, whereas trailers are pretty much unavoidable if you go see a movie in theaters. Keep in mind I say this as someone who really doesn't care about spoilers at all, and will mouse over black bars at will even for things I haven't seen/read, but from the perspective of people who do care about spoilers, I can see why they may get perturbed by a trailer that gives away so much.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 19:46
|
|
|
computer parts posted:If it was that important for you seeing the movie then you didn't really want to see the movie anyway. Wait... what?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 19:53
|
|
|
BonoMan posted:Wait... what? If seeing the trailer made you say "well I guess I'm not seeing the movie anymore" then you weren't really wanting to see the movie anyway. Cpt. Mahatma Gandhi posted:I don't know if that that's necessarily a fair comparison. Wiki summaries of books (or movies or anything narrative really) have to be sought out, they aren't forced on you, whereas trailers are pretty much unavoidable if you go see a movie in theaters. Keep in mind the BvS trailer everyone is complaining about was never released to theaters.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 20:02
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Keep in mind the BvS trailer everyone is complaining about was never released to theaters. What, the one with Doomsday? I've seen it in theaters twice.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 20:04
|
|
|
Hakkesshu posted:What, the one with Doomsday? I've seen it in theaters twice. Which movies and in which area? I've only ever seen the very very first trailer and I've been in multiple regions of the country over the lifespan BvS's advertising campaign.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 20:05
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Which movies and in which area? I've only ever seen the very very first trailer and I've been in multiple regions of the country over the lifespan BvS's advertising campaign. I'm in Denmark, and I saw it just last week in front of Deadpool. The last time I saw it was in front of Star Wars, so it might actually be three times since I saw SW twice, I don't recall if it was there both times.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 20:06
|
|
|
I remember seeing it before Star Wars, when I saw it on New Year's Eve as well. I'm in Oceania, BTW.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 20:12
|
|
|
computer parts posted:If seeing the trailer made you say "well I guess I'm not seeing the movie anymore" then you weren't really wanting to see the movie anyway. Oh, well that was my point. Nobody is really thinking they aren't going to see the movie anymore.. it's a hyperbolic way of them saying "that trailer spoiled some major moments."
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 20:26
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Keep in mind the BvS trailer everyone is complaining about was never released to theaters. I saw it in Canada ahead of The Force Awakens.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 20:40
|
|
|
Cpt. Mahatma Gandhi posted:I don't know if that that's necessarily a fair comparison. Wiki summaries of books (or movies or anything narrative really) have to be sought out, they aren't forced on you, whereas trailers are pretty much unavoidable if you go see a movie in theaters.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 20:51
|
|
|
AdjectiveNoun posted:I saw it in Canada ahead of The Force Awakens. Interesting, based on this and previous posts it's primarily non-US markets that get it. I was in Texas and Oregon, saw Star Wars both times, at different cinema chains, and got the same trailer both times. Could be marketing research determined that trailer works better in those areas; I know in Japan they do stuff like that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 21:06
|
|
|
Snapchat A Titty posted:I only watch the first half or so of trailers, works pretty well so far. Watching the first teaser/trailer and skipping the second (or even third) works as well. See The Revenant for example (although I know there are probably plenty of people who needed that trailer to be actually get interested in watching the movie). Teaser Trailer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRfj1VCg16Y Trailer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoebZZ8K5N0 Sadly I see so much movies in the theater these days that I can't really take that approach unless I deliberately arrive late, which is not really my style. Mierenneuker fucked around with this message at 22:06 on Feb 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 22:03
|
|
|
Surlaw posted:My comparison was more to say that a two minute trailer does not encompass the quality and overall experience of a film any more than a summary does of a book, even if it shows the main plot beats. There's way more to a movie than knowing what happens and most movies don't rely on a big twist. Ah, yes, in that respect I agree.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 22:17
|
|
|
jet sanchEz posted:My local comic book shop had a petition at the front desk to get Keaton's role re-cast. Nerds never change.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 23:06
|
|
|
Happy Noodle Boy posted:Speaking of that, what's the worst example of a trailer giving everything away?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 23:45
|
|
|
Spoilers are an interesting concept. Some articles claim foreknowledge of the plot enhances enjoyment - or at least doesn't inhibit it, as evidenced by successful Shakespeare adaptations for 400 years. Others go for the "whoa" moment - I am your father, he was dead all along, the post-credits scene has Howard the Duck. Usually they don't also mean "there's nothing left of value in the film for me once I know those things" but it matters to them. Did people who knew Snape kills Dumbledore really not enjoy the book as much as their in-line wailing suggested? I wonder when that kind of thing really took hold - were people upset if they learned Rhett doesn't end up with Scarlett before seeing GwtW? Or was that part of the draw? Spoilers seem like a wholly modern thing to me. Gonna go search for some 1800s newspaper articles about spoiling the end of novels.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 23:45
|
|
|
It probably has something to do with twists becoming more popular. By that I mean like a thing that happens where it contextualizes the whole movie, which is a pretty big thing I can see actually impacting how you feel about something, maybe? But with the way words are people just consider every spoiler a twist and stuff like that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 23:49
|
|
|
The internet has done a lot for increasing rage about spoilers. I love them personally. I don't have a lot of time to see movies in the theater and I need to pick and choose for ones I'll enjoy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 23:51
|
|
|
Happy Noodle Boy posted:Speaking of that, what's the worst example of a trailer giving everything away? The Terminator Salvation trailers gave away the twist that Sam Worthington was a Terminator. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xAjWCyJ0krI
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 00:26
|
|
|
Mierenneuker posted:
I keep my earbud in and listen to music while playing my phone til the movies start. This trailer gives a lot away https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zkCnHUnoYY
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 00:32
|
|
|
You can always tell if a movie isn't tracking well, that's when they start including more story to hook people, eventually they give away the twists. What's the use of a twist if nobody sees it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 00:42
|
|
|
effectual posted:I keep my earbud in and listen to music while playing my phone til the movies start. TEENAGE MUDDAH! ... Means nine months of trubble!
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 01:04
|
|
|
"You gotta put out if you're gonna get back." "She was a real tease." Uh sounds to me like she wasn't.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 01:07
|
|
|
kiimo posted:You can always tell if a movie isn't tracking well, that's when they start including more story to hook people, eventually they give away the twists. What's the use of a twist if nobody sees it? Last Terminator movie 
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 02:20
|
|
|
Electromax posted:Spoilers are an interesting concept. Some articles claim foreknowledge of the plot enhances enjoyment - or at least doesn't inhibit it, as evidenced by successful Shakespeare adaptations for 400 years. Others go for the "whoa" moment - I am your father, he was dead all along, the post-credits scene has Howard the Duck. Usually they don't also mean "there's nothing left of value in the film for me once I know those things" but it matters to them. Did people who knew Snape kills Dumbledore really not enjoy the book as much as their in-line wailing suggested? To me, there are basically only two ways you can watch a movie: 1 – you have knowledge of what happens, 2 – you don't. The latter can only be experienced once, and it's completely different from the former in my opinion. When you know the plot, you can appreciate all the hints and nudges that went completely over your head before. I love watching movies where I know the plot, but I really have a hard time finding any love for them if I learned the plot before I saw the movie. Same with books or any other kind of media really.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 03:01
|
|
|
Happy Noodle Boy posted:Last Terminator movie
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 03:02
|
|
|
Snapchat A Titty posted:To me, there are basically only two ways you can watch a movie: 1 – you have knowledge of what happens, 2 – you don't. There's also a third way - You have false knowledge of what happens. Imagine, for example, if you heard a rumor that in the next Star Wars movie they revealed Supreme Leader Snoke to be Palpatine's long lost mentor (this is an actual theory, btw). You then head into the theater with this knowledge, and come to find that Snoke is definitively shown to be someone else entirely. That is itself a viewing that cannot be experienced more than once. The question then becomes "why do we value certain unique (and independent*) experiences over others?" The only justification in that sense is authorial intent. *Independent meaning "you can't experience more than one because each experience relies on a first viewing". computer parts fucked around with this message at 03:49 on Feb 20, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 03:44
|
|
|
computer parts posted:There's also a third way - You have false knowledge of what happens. Imagine, for example, if you heard a rumor that in the next Star Wars movie they revealed Supreme Leader Snoke to be Palpatine's long lost mentor (this is actual theory, btw). You then head into the theater with this knowledge, and come to find that Snoke is definitively shown to be someone else entirely. That is itself a viewing that cannot be experienced more than once. Re: False spoilers – That's true, but to me that is a side-experience? Like I mean it's unforeseen by the makers and the viewers. I've tried it a couple times, and I def. prefer it over knowing who Snoke is. If I know the true identity of Snoke, I'll be waiting for him to reveal himself. If I know the false identity of Snoke, I'll be waiting and I'll be pretty much the same amount of "surprised" as I would be if I had no idea. But to get back to the main point, the one-time-uniqueness of the experience. That's not to me a question of authorial intent, it's a question of viewer's experience. How you experience a work, written/filmed/etc, it's all about who you are at that point in time. If you're a person who knows what you're reading is going to be, you'll read it in a different way than if you had no idea. There's no doubt in my mind.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 03:52
|
|
|
Snapchat A Titty posted:Re: False spoilers – That's true, but to me that is a side-experience? Like I mean it's unforeseen by the makers and the viewers. I've tried it a couple times, and I def. prefer it over knowing who Snoke is. If I know the true identity of Snoke, I'll be waiting for him to reveal himself. If I know the false identity of Snoke, I'll be waiting and I'll be pretty much the same amount of "surprised" as I would be if I had no idea. The uniqueness is not authorial intent, valuing one unique experience over the other is. You just said having rumors/fake spoilers is a "side-experience", which implicitly means you value it less than the pure untouched experience. The only reason you think that is you think the author's work is itself more valuable than anything that surrounds it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 03:57
|
|
|
computer parts posted:The uniqueness is not authorial intent, valuing one unique experience over the other is. C'mon don't cherrypick. I'm going to boil it way down. There are two ways to watch a movie: The first time, and every other time. Any viewing of a movie is influenced by who you are, what you know, what you're told, etc. It's not hard to understand that some people, ie myself, prefer to watch a movie without any external interference. You might not agree but that's ok.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 04:04
|
|
|
Snapchat A Titty posted:C'mon don't cherrypick. I'm going to boil it way down. There are two ways to watch a movie: The first time, and every other time. Any viewing of a movie is influenced by who you are, what you know, what you're told, etc. If you see a movie at release, it's not without any external interference. At bare minimum you have the trailers in the back of your mind when you go to see it, never mind critical response, word of mouth from friends, etc. That's why From Dusk Till Dawn has morphed from "that movie that's explicitly about vampires" to "this movie with a super secret twist you can't spoil!"
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 04:22
|
|
|
computer parts posted:If you see a movie at release, it's not without any external interference. At bare minimum you have the trailers in the back of your mind when you go to see it, never mind critical response, word of mouth from friends, etc. I'm weird as hell. I never watch more than half a trailer, I tell everyone to not reveal key plot points whether they've seen the movie or not, and also I have no friends. It's pretty easy to avoid "spoilers" tbh.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 04:33
|
|
|
I avoided the trailers to Shutter Island like a plague. I ended up loving the movie. No one else did, and from what I heard it was the trailers fault or something. I dunno, I thought it was fun.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 06:37
|
|
|
I thought it was everyone predicting the twist? I had fun too, like I didn't even saw the twist as a twist, that just seem like natural progression of the plot. I don't get people sometimes. Cool, good movie.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 08:22
|
|
|
Knowing fake spoilers can be a problem too, since it sets you up to think something is going to happen and so you'll be looking for specific clues for that thing, and won't get a natural discovery. You keep waiting for a thing to happen that's never going to come, and sometimes they can push away what you would have otherwise thought about the story. The first time I saw Fight Club I didn't even know there was a twist, and I came to the realization about what was happening just slightly ahead of the characters, and it was such an incredible "holy poo poo!" moment that I still remember that moment of clarity over a decade later. But there was another movie recently where I had heard a certain character died, and so I was waiting for it and watching them closely to try to figure out how it was going to happen, and when the movie ended and they were still alive I was confused and I feel I missed whatever ideas I would have had about the movie's plot if I hadn't been preoccupied with this information.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 08:44
|
|
|
Asiina posted:Knowing fake spoilers can be a problem too, since it sets you up to think something is going to happen and so you'll be looking for specific clues for that thing, and won't get a natural discovery. You keep waiting for a thing to happen that's never going to come, and sometimes they can push away what you would have otherwise thought about the story. Yes, but that's just as unique of a reaction as going in blind. That's the point.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 08:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 15:23 |
|
|
Or just dont spoil
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2016 09:23
|
|
