From: Matt Jensen (email@example.com)
Date: Wed Dec 27 2000 - 10:45:35 PST
I offer some whining, and a solution.
On Tue, 26 Dec 2000, Dan Kohn wrote:
> It's also hard not to miss the Teledesic  reference.
Yes, and it's darned annoying. Now I know what the secret is that the
protagonist and his buddies stumble onto, and I have less incentive to go
see this movie.
Studio executives claim research shows people want trailers that reveal
more info. But I think they are mistaken. When a studio tests trailers
on subjects plucked from the shopping mall, and the subjects say "I didn't
see enough stuff that interested me", that does not mean they want to see
how the movie turns out. It just means the studio chose the wrong shots
to promote the first act.
In most movies the first act contains most of the good stuff anyhow, so if
you can't make a trailer from that alone, the movie's probably a dog.
But don't give away the endings of decent movies just to fit into a
formula that claims audiences want to know more.
I would PayPal $5 into a research fund to scientifically investigate
audience preferences for trailer scope. I believe it would let me enjoy
more the movies I see, and would pay for itself within a year. And I
believe the research conclusions alone would be entertaining (in that
studio wisdom is toppled) and reassuring (in that it would show the
average moviegoer is not a spineless dolt).
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Dec 27 2000 - 11:01:11 PST