|
Great thread. OP, do you ever lament the fact that your job can act as one big spoiler for movies? I realize you're probably not bummed out over missing the genuine Bucky Larson experience, but something like Gangster Squad--does it bother you at all that you'll never just be able to sit down and enjoy the finished product without having seen it in various stages of production? Also: I blame "Warrior" bombing mostly on the Godawful trailer, which actually edited in the announcer uttering, "Unbelievably, the two fighters in the final---ARE BROTHERS!" How does that happen without someone saying, "You know, that line is so groan-inducing people will actively avoid this otherwise fine film?"
|
#
¿
May 10, 2012 21:07
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 18:38 |
|
|
^^^^ Yeah, the Hollywood press had a field day with the Jurassic vs. Arnold angle. LAH, though, had a ridiculously tortured production, with no one--including the many, many high-profile writers brought on board at mammoth expense--sure of what tone to take with it. In the end, no one really wanted to see a tongue-in-cheek take on the action genre. They just wanted a good action movie. This thread reminds me of the time I got actively annoyed with a filmmaker: when "Castaway" was circulating its trailer and getting criticism for spoiling the movie's central mystery, Robert Zemeckis was quoted as saying he had no problem with it and that audiences want those beats laid out for them. It just sounded so cynical and so...wrong.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2012 22:57
|
|
|
I absolutely cannot work my way into Finke's logic for lambasting the GS trailer. The scene "should have never appeared in the first place?" I understand pulling it following last night's events, but why on earth would it be considered distasteful prior?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2012 20:51
|
|
|
GD_American posted:What would you guys say were the most effective/best made trailers of all time? I know I'm going to get heckled for this, but the trailer for the '97 reissue of Star Wars was perfect to my eyes: I was too young to have seen any of them in the theater, and the teaser perfectly captured the canyon of difference there is between watching it on the big screen and loving around with VHS. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39J2zBB-AyU And, of course, the musically-silent teaser for Burton's Batman blew minds and shut asses about Keaton's casting in ten seconds flat: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyozzozRsCk RoughDraft2.0 fucked around with this message at 04:06 on Nov 21, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2012 04:01
|
|
|
Jedit posted:But when we've seen remakes of Halloween, The Fog, Nightmare on Elm Street, Black Christmas, and many other classics of the period and each and every one of them has been an apocalyptic turd, and when the trailer for Evil Dead looks no better, I don't think it's unfair to presume. Bypassing the argument some of those movies were worthwhile, the ED remake differs in one very significant way: the original director/producers are very hands-on and involved. They more or less own the concept and characters and don't appear to be willing to prostitute them: Raimi never allowed New Line to do Freddy vs. Jason vs. Ash, for example, because he didn't want anyone loving with his stuff. As much as I dislike remakes, I'd give these guys the benefit of the doubt.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2013 04:20
|
|