Have movie trailers always been awful or is this a new thing?

[DwaynieAD]

Originally Posted by MatticusMania

Im not a big fan of 3D, but I find the slasher pic to be the perfect vehicle for it.
Sure, 3D can be used well to put an audience member into a setting, but it just works so much better for putting a chainsaw or pickaxe (My Bloody Valentine) in someones face.



Last Monday.

I don't care either way when it comes to 3D movies, but when I saw Avatar and the world tree was burning. without even thinking I reached out and attempted to catch one of the falling ashes.

at that moment my face looked like that Keanu Reeves meme.

[Phalex]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceBXUyuv4Q0

I really hope the Evil Dead is 3D.......

BTW, this trailer got me excited.......

[BawanaRik]

Originally Posted by MatticusMania

Im not a big fan of 3D, but I find the slasher pic to be the perfect vehicle for it.
Sure, 3D can be used well to put an audience member into a setting, but it just works so much better for putting a chainsaw or pickaxe (My Bloody Valentine) in someones face.



Last Monday.

You mentioned seeing a non sequel etc last Monday. Not many folks can say that.

The people that caused Texas Chainsaw 3d were the people that bought tickets to the first tow and will probably but tickets to this one and the next one. If you want less TCM3D try to talk your friends into seeing some thing a little more challenging, like the Sessions.

Or for that matter IFFR is coming up in a matter of weeks. There are hundreds of similar events every year. Support one near you.

http://www.filmfestivalrotterdam.com/en/iffr-2013/

The fact is the world is a LCD, Lowest Common Demominater place. Adam Sandler is a wealthy man. Preston Strurges was broke.

[BawanaRik]

Lawrence of Arabia played at the local multiplex a month or two ago. Fantastic flick. I believe it's 3 hours long. McLean could make movies.

Originally Posted by Pilgrim

Uh, that's not just trailers. That describes most entire movies!

Seems like the studios have abandoned character development and actual plot continuity (and plots that make sense) in favor of continual explosions, car chases, grossness, nudity, shooting and other visual distractions. You don't learn much about the characters, and trendy (choppy) editing often destroys the continuity.

Movies like the John Ford classics and David Lean epics such as Lawrence of Arabia are pretty hard to find nowadays. Thank heavens for Peter Jackson and The Hobbit, and Spielberg's Lincoln.

[jugglingfreak]

Personally, I think the previews have always been crap. Watching the trailers of older movies included on DVD extra features.

I sit there thinking, how did that ever entice me to watch that movie (and they are movies I love very much)

example: Two (in my opinion) fantastic movies with horrible trailers. "Jaws" and "The Exorcist"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9d9lxPTUyI

and

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDGw1MTEe9k


Something to keep in mind when watching the old trailers is don't let your opinion be colored by the fact that you have probably already seen (and like/dislike) the movie in question.

[jmattbassplaya]

I actually remember a time when I used to look forward to seeing the movie trailers that played before a movie started at a theater. These days, not so much.

[skychief]

Originally Posted by hbarcat

I think bad movie trailers are just representative of bad movies.

More movies suck now than they used to because the movie makers have lost the desire to take chances and go with their basic human instincts about what makes a good movie.

Committees of marketing experts make movies now. They're formulaic and bland and predictable and they insult the intelligence of the average, would-be movie goer.

Also, too many movies are remakes or sequels of other movies or adaptations of classic pop culture. The stuff writes itself and the producers don't spend any money or effort on it because they know nostalgia alone will get just enough people into the theaters to turn a profit.

Never gave it much thought, really, just kinda accepted that the movie viewing audiences have morphed over time, and really dont care about story/plot rather they just want to see fast-moving things, SFX, and loud bangs.

But your synopsis is spot on, imo.

[MatticusMania]

Originally Posted by BawanaRik

You mentioned seeing a non sequel etc last Monday. Not many folks can say that.

Youre probably right. Even I cannot say that Ive never paid to see a sequel, but for the most part Im not interested in movie franchises (the recent Batman trilogy excluded). Id see a sequel/prequel if I felt the movie had substance and I enjoyed the previous release.

Originally Posted by jmattbassplaya

I actually remember a time when I used to look forward to seeing the movie trailers that played before a movie started at a theater. These days, not so much.

I do like to know what crap to avoid in the future, like Hansel & Gretel: Witch Slayers.

[Bloodhammer]

Originally Posted by MatticusMania

I do like to know what crap to avoid in the future, like Hansel & Gretel: Witch Slayers.

Ha! One time at work, I was talking about movies with a guy and I mentioned some movie in passing (can't remember what it was) and he lamented that it was terrible and that he had wasted his time watching it. I said that I could of told him that - without having even seen it. I knew it was going to suck.

He sort of half-hung his head and grumbled, "I wish I had that kind of discretion..."

[duff beer]

Originally Posted by skychief

Never gave it much thought, really, just kinda accepted that the movie viewing audiences have morphed over time, and really dont care about story/plot rather they just want to see fast-moving things, SFX, and loud bangs.

And due to their short attention span, the camera shot has to change every 2 or 3 seconds with no regard to continuity. It's the visual version of the audio loudness wars.

[MarkMgibson]

Originally Posted by duff beer

And due to their short attention span, the camera shot has to change every 2 or 3 seconds with no regard to continuity. It's the visual version of the audio loudness wars.

Very true. I saw a documentary about both movies and television shows, and they demonstrated how camera cuts have got shorter and shorter over the years. It's at the point now where anything longer than a 4 second shot, and they fear people will change channels.

In answer to the original question, if you're talking about Hollywood movies: nobody in that town has had an original thought since the 70's. And the good movies are usually remakes of either old movies or foreign language films. The trailers are crap because the movies are crap (and I include those awful "Hobbit" movies).

[MatticusMania]

Originally Posted by Bloodhammer

Ha! One time at work, I was talking about movies with a guy and I mentioned some movie in passing (can't remember what it was) and he lamented that it was terrible and that he had wasted his time watching it. I said that I could of told him that - without having even seen it. I knew it was going to suck.

He sort of half-hung his head and grumbled, "I wish I had that kind of discretion..."

Its very rare that I pay to see a movie that I end up not liking. I have the same great ability to determine a movies quality without having seen a trailer.

[Bloodhammer]

Originally Posted by MatticusMania

Its very rare that I pay to see a movie that I end up not liking. I have the same great ability to determine a movies quality without having seen a trailer.

People around me call it pessimism.

Whatever. They can optimistically watch terrible movies all day, for all I care.

[MatticusMania]

Originally Posted by Bloodhammer

People around me call it pessimism.

Whatever. They can optimistically watch terrible movies all day, for all I care.

There is a huge difference between having a crappy movie filter and being a pessimist. I happen to really enjoy movies, just not most of them.

[Bloodhammer]

The one man who made a difference five times before...... is about to make a difference again. Only this time, it's different.