Waiting Is the Hardest Part
For several weeks now I've been avoiding watching the trailer for "Crash," the new Paul Haggis movie, in order to walk into the theater knowing as little about it as possible. I read the first paragraph of a glowing review in the New Yorker, I've seen the poster, and I got a thumbs-up on the trailer from Mike, and that's all I plan to know before Friday.
Trailers are funny. I'm easily irritated at the superfast cuts and unintelligible editing of most modern trailers, but in reality they often are the best at not revealing critical plot details or entire swaths of narrative before you see the movie. The trailer for "The Interpreter" was one that bugged me for how much it showed of the movie's action and story, especially of the bus bomb sequence (I read a number of reviews complaining about how much the second Interpreter trailer gave away of this supposedly excellent sequence - any word, Mike?). A few days ago, Mike and I watched "Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia," then watched the trailer for the film after it was over. I was surprised by how much of the ending one could guess from the trailer, and how much better off we were for not having seen it prior to the film.
Despite all this, trailers are still one of my favorite experiences when I go to the movies. I love em, and always will. It's just sad that the ones that are the best in the long term are the ones that make it seem like you're watching an MTV rap video while sitting on the remote control's fast forward button.
posted by Seb @ 11:50 AM
8 comments
8 Comments:
Continuing on trailers, I find that when moviegoers and critics (even Ebert is guilty of this) complain about trailers they tend to say "these days" trailers give away everything. Trailers have always given away everything! I am always shocked by this when I get a dvd of a classic. The Paths of Glory trailer actually shows the "I'll see you in hell" speech, I watched the trailer for The Hustler recently and it even shows Fast Eddie threatening to kill Burt if he sends his guys after him again during the final bit of dialogue in the film.
As to the Crash trailer, I can't believe Mike liked it. It looks like melodramatic garbage, I am still looking forward to it though, because really if you want your smart drama to make money it is probably best to sell it as melodramatic garbage.
Wow. I went into the crash trailer as oblivious and innocent as Jean Reno getting into bed with 12 year old Natalie Portman after she asks him to have sex with her. I saw the trailer, and, having no idea what it was, thought, wow, is some sort of good movie coming out that I don't know about? The trailer struck me as indy, gritty, PT Andersonian in a Hard Eight sort of way. Drama without the melo. It's a fine line, we will wait and we will see.
Any word? Yes. I did not know that critics had a reaction to the bus bomb sequence. I thought it was the worst scene in the movie. Not a bad scene, just the worst. As I write this I take it back. I don't delete the sentence, I just tack on a new sentence taking back the old one. Forward momentum. I'll explain. The bus sequence was excellent, I loved it. One little thing at the end of the scene killed it for me. As you can see it warped my impression of the scene as a whole.
I love going into a good movie having seen nothing at all about it. But, trailers don't give anything away no matter how much they give away. A good movie is about the process not about the plot points. I could know everything about everything about Paths of Glory and still weep my eyes dry for 2 hours straight. Now, again, to argue with myself, the Psycho trailer was brilliant for its plot deceptions. It gave nothing away and probably would have ruined the movie if it had.
Listen to me, I have all the answers, both the right ones and the wrong ones.
Sure, it's possible to cry fro the second or third time at the end of Donnie Darko or get depressed in The Big Lebowski when Donnie dies (apparently it is not a good idea to be a character named Donnie in modern American cinema - you tend to have a short life span), or even if you have seen those movies a dozen times each. But at least for me, I'm able to do that because I'm tapping into the first emotional reaction I had to those scenes. If it was already known to me what would happen or how it would go down, I don't know if I could ever reach that peak of emotional connection. A lot of the time, it's the punch that you don't see coming that has the biggest effect. (Million Dollar Baby, coming to your Home Theater this summer.)
If I had seen a trailer for Godfather Part II with the "I know it was you, Fredo" scene before watching the movie, would that scene still have had the impact it had when I saw it? I don't know, but I'm guessing probably not.
I don't know about the whole emotional aspect of it, I am sure it varies from person to person but it’s a sad fact that trailers can often tarnish the film they are promoting. The best example of this is in the trailer for "Castaway" where they actually show Tom Hanks back from the island. I mean what the hell? That takes away all the tension and build up that Zemeckis was trying to create on the island.
What’s the solution to this horrible problem that seems to get worse with each new trailer? Create some sort of board of film historians who will review each trailer before it is released to the general public. They will check it and make sure it doesn't give away any plot points or show off too much of the movies content. That way we can get a taste for what the movie is going to be and not have it ruined.
And I don't know what Isaac is talking about. The "Crash" trailer really got me excited and when I saw that Paul Haggis was directing it immediately went on my must see list. Oh and how was "Bring me the Head of Alfredo Garcia"?
It's interesting you bring up Zemeckis; I was just reading a few days ago how many people thought the "What Lies Beneath" trailer, which I never saw, gave away too much, and when confronted with this complaint, Zemeckis said that American movie audiences don't like to be surprised. Is this just a case of CYA or is there actually some truth to it? If I may be insanely generalizing for a moment, I would say that many of those surprises are resented initially by middle-of-the-road audiences, but over time come to be regarded as some people's favorite moments in films.
Zemeckis could be making a good point, people often don't like going into a movie not knowing everything about it and what to expect. So perhaps Zemeckis is appealing to the masses, but for movie fans I think those over revealing trailers are doing us all a disservice.
Ummm. Seb- you know there are people here that haven't seen the Godfather II-
I like trailers.
you know what else I like?
Knowing everything about the movie and especially the end of a movie before I see it- (ignore previous contradictory sentence.)
What, did I Crazy-Glue your eyeballs to the screen and make you read the blog entries? You read the blog at your own risk, skipper.
And there is nothing sillier than wanting to know the whole movie before watching it. It negates the very essence of the movie going experience.
Post a Comment
<< Home