Jump to content

The Film Thread


DeadlyDirk

Recommended Posts

34 minutes ago, osmark86 said:

I never watch trailers myself for the same reasons that have been mentioned itt. rarely have I seen trailers that don't include spoilers or misrepresent the movie in any way.

I think its down to accessibility, the www allows us easy access to it, blogs/vlogs all general info surrounding this making it difficult to avoid having an idea of who, what, where, when.

Films going back 40/50 years and up to about 10/12 years ago roughly were shot more straight forward, more obvious plot wise so seemed to be more revealing but you were shown a clip more so then an informative trailer to get bums on seats. Trailers on TV were only a 10 second clip maybe, much more familiarity too because of so many sequels these days.

Unless I'm imagining this, when I was younger you only got to see some trailers in the movie theatre itself before the first film, intermission and the main feature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trailers now intentionally misdirect in some blockbusters. There's numerous cases of scenes shown in trailers never appearing in the film, or being changed significantly in the final release, to change details in the overarching plot or so on.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Chindie said:

Trailers now intentionally misdirect in some blockbusters. There's numerous cases of scenes shown in trailers never appearing in the film, or being changed significantly in the final release, to change details in the overarching plot or so on.


I remember the trailer for Star Wars Rogue One and almost none of the trailer scenes are in the film itself. Tie Fighter scene at the top of the tower etc.  

As you say, happens a lot now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some of it is due to the trailers being put together whilst the film is still being made so they use old footage that gets changed as the film is finished up. I believe that was particularly the case with Rogue One - that film iirc had numerous reshoots and was kinda slapped together at the end (which is why its all the more miraculous that film works as well as it did). But it did mean that various details in the trailers got changed/deleted/etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Chindie said:

Trailers now intentionally misdirect in some blockbusters. There's numerous cases of scenes shown in trailers never appearing in the film, or being changed significantly in the final release, to change details in the overarching plot or so on.

That's a good point. Maybe through intentionally not watching many or even half watching them to avoid learning too much I've misinterpreted things. 

Like in the new strange trailer, I know through the way I've read it that he is going to be confronted by an evil alter-ego, so along the way I sort of know where we are heading.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Phil Silvers said:

I think its down to accessibility, the www allows us easy access to it, blogs/vlogs all general info surrounding this making it difficult to avoid having an idea of who, what, where, when.

Films going back 40/50 years and up to about 10/12 years ago roughly were shot more straight forward, more obvious plot wise so seemed to be more revealing but you were shown a clip more so then an informative trailer to get bums on seats. Trailers on TV were only a 10 second clip maybe, much more familiarity too because of so many sequels these days.

Unless I'm imagining this, when I was younger you only got to see some trailers in the movie theatre itself before the first film, intermission and the main feature.

Coupled with the intro, “if you only see one film this summer make sure it’s this one……”

I think the fella who did all those voice overs was a Villa fan as well

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Follyfoot said:

Coupled with the intro, “if you only see one film this summer make sure it’s this one……”

I think the fella who did all those voice overs was a Villa fan as well

The value for money compared to today is some difference. I remember that voice so vividly, ha, I'll have to research him now if he's a Villan.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Phil Silvers said:

The value for money compared to today is some difference. I remember that voice so vividly, ha, I'll have to research him now if he's a Villan.

 

Red someone I think 👍

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, osmark86 said:

I never watch trailers myself for the same reasons that have been mentioned itt. rarely have I seen trailers that don't include spoilers or misrepresent the movie in any way.

I watched the trailer for Annihilation and decided it wasn't for me, but you are definitely right about spoilers.

I usually take a look at Wiki and check-out the Rotten Tomatoes score, but increasingly find they don't match the audience response.

Even checking the box-office take, compared with the cost of making the film, is not very reliable.

Kermode recommendations are pretty reliable but definitely not infallible.

For old films, Halliwell's can't be beat.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, MakemineVanilla said:

I watched the trailer for Annihilation and decided it wasn't for me, but you are definitely right about spoilers.

I usually take a look at Wiki and check-out the Rotten Tomatoes score, but increasingly find they don't match the audience response.

Even checking the box-office take, compared with the cost of making the film, is not very reliable.

Kermode recommendations are pretty reliable but definitely not infallible.

For old films, Halliwell's can't be beat.

I tend to go with my gut feeling about whether or not I want to watch a movie. I find that certain online magazines reflect my own tastes better or worse too. Then there's always reddit and imdb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, MakemineVanilla said:

I watched the trailer for Annihilation and decided it wasn't for me, but you are definitely right about spoilers.

I usually take a look at Wiki and check-out the Rotten Tomatoes score, but increasingly find they don't match the audience response.

Even checking the box-office take, compared with the cost of making the film, is not very reliable.

Kermode recommendations are pretty reliable but definitely not infallible.

For old films, Halliwell's can't be beat.

box office numbers are a pretty terrible way of judging film quality

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

box office numbers are a pretty terrible way of judging film quality

Quite right!

When I've watched a clunker, I always want to know if they broke even.

I watched The Marksman recently and was surprised to find they did.

One day Heaven's Gate is the byword for outrageous losses, the next, the BBC include it in their list of America's greatest 100 films of all time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MakemineVanilla said:

Quite right!

When I've watched a clunker, I always want to know if they broke even.

I watched The Marksman recently and was surprised to find they did.

One day Heaven's Gate is the byword for outrageous losses, the next, the BBC include it in their list of America's greatest 100 films of all time.

I think we can all conclude that effective marketing and artistic value are not correlated whatsoever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Seat68 said:

Yes, The King's Man was pretty poor. 2h 10 I will never get back. 

The best part was googling to find out who that giant was after 

 

The world's tallest bodybuilder is a man named Olivier Richters. He is 22  cm (almost 9") taller than the Rock. - 9GAG

Edited by Follyfoot
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â