MOVIE TRAILERS: Free samples, but of what?


A FREE SAMPLE FOR A DIFFERENT MOVIE THAN THE ONE ADVERTISED

The universe of audio-visual heralds for audio-visual entertainments keeps expanding, as I hope to have demonstrated in these posts. Consequently, I find myself revising my definition, conception and understanding of what “trailers” (in the broadest sense) are in order to include new functionality, new media for their dissemination, and all necessary and sufficient conditions of their being.

The difficulty of saying what they are, or perhaps an acknowledgement of their variety, is, I think, fundamentally a consequence of their hybridity, their deployment of motion-picture art for the objectives of marketing.

Thinking of their near relative, audio-visual advertisements for non-entertainment products– say, soap powder, cars, cereal, financial services, what have you– I was struck by the difference not in the means used, which are, after all, cameras, actors, dialogue, action and copy, but in the product sold.

Trailers are commercial films for a product that’s typically a story or narrative. And in this case, the medium of the product is also the medium of the advertisement. When you’re selling Tide detergent, the advertisement may very well offer a short narrative featuring the virtues of clean clothes and a reliable product, but the product itself must be bought and consumed apart from, outside of or beyond the medium of audio-visual presentation.

The film, tv show, video game trailer, featurette, spot or promo presents a sample of the product being advertised, a sample which is to be consumed in the very moment of its presentation. By consumed, I mean read or followed or understood, since the product is, after all, a story or narrative. But of course, that sample is not a portion of the larger entity being advertised, its story is not THE story, so much as a simulation of the story (the film, tv show, video game) from which it is distinct, having been visually reconfigured, adulterated with copy and graphic design, at the very least.

The trailer–an amalgam of those salable qualities of the film is not intended to represent the film as it is, but the film as its distributor conceives of it in order to appeal to audiences and compete with other offerings. It’s a story that’s for sale and a story that’s being shared with likely audiences/consumers, but they are not the same story, although they may, and probably should be, similar.

(Trying to imagine an analogous marketing situation to trailers and their films, I found myself eating a small “sample” portion of lasagna at my local Trader Joes this morning, provided by the employee who prepares food items that the story wants to promote and sell. That portion, it occurred to me, was a true sample of the frozen lasagna that was there available for my purchase. My medium for enjoying the sample–my gustatory sense– is the exact medium by which I would consume/enjoy the product. The food preparer needn’t have been present, nor would I have needed a sign to direct me to the free samples: smell and appearance did the work of alerting me to their presence and savory appeal. Smell and taste are, it seems, media, in the literal sense of mediating between object and subject, thing and self, world and experience of it.)

David Ogilvy says that advertising, at its essence, is “news,” and I think this claim is true of movie trailers just as it is of commodities and packaged goods. Advertising the film (providing information about it intended to induce a likely consumer to purchase it) requires that the product be classified (by genre) and described. That description—whether ingredients, (actors, directors, producers), functionality (comedy, tragedy, blockbuster, family movie), quality (commerce/art), testimonial (critical reviews, festival laurels) or demonstration (scenes, dialogue, “look”)—is what the audience/consumer relies on to make its decision.

At the grocers, you might obtain a sample of a product for sale, as you might at a cinema before the feature presentation. (Frozen lasagna, say; or cheese and crackers; nachos and salsa;) But at the grocers, it’s a face to face exchange, an encounter that can-but needn’t–be scaled up to the level of the regional and national marketplace.

The movie distributor, for its part, can, via a quick upload to youtube, or a digital distribution of the video file, offer a free simulation of the goods for sale to millions of potential consumers in locations around the world, at negligible marginal cost.

All of which is to say that a trailer is not a actually a free sample of the product for sale. A trailer is a free sample of the film it is itself, which, by dint of qualities/features/ingredients that are also present in the film (tv series, video game, etc.) being marketed, it hopes to make you desire to consume in their filmic fullness.

Lastly, I wanted to share the url for a forum devoted to the most deceptive trailers ever. In these examples, the stories the marketers felt compelled to tell via the trailers they cut, were less a simulation of the feature, than a distortion or misrepresentation. Audiences, as you can glean from the comments, did not approve of the artistic license taken by the marketers. The Village was a standout, on the forum, for advertising a psychological drama as a horror film. That would be like trying a sample of the lasagna at the grocers, buying the product, and getting home to find that there was a pizza, or perhaps a chicken pot pie–in the package.

Posted in Introductory and Reference Post, Observations and Provocations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Movie Trailer Editing: Tips, Best Practices and Links

Editing

One of my close friends is currently enrolled in Video Symphony‘s 14 month editing program, so I’ve been absorbing editing theory and technique every time we’re together, and reminding myself of the subtlety, complexity and sheer artistry involved. Thus inspired and challenged, this post is dedicated to the key creatives of the trailer making industry, but intended for those who aren’t [yet?] editors, who want to know the conventions and formulae of trailer editing, better understand how it differs from feature editing, and appreciate the niche it occupies in the ecology of the film business.

A trailer editor is expected to provide information about the movie, emphasizing those aspects most likely to appeal to audiences as determined by the marketing department of the distributor. As does a feature editor, a trailer editor tells a story (or stories) eliciting and channeling emotion using images, sound, dialogue, music, voice over and graphic design. But this story telling is not always, necessarily or especially linear or narrative in presentation.

Moreover, while audiences are to be relied on as partners in the communicational exchange– since they are themselves “experts” on the subject by dint of having watched countless trailers and tv spots during their viewing lives– they must typically be corralled and guided through the dense, layered content typical of trailers. How exactly that happens is, of course, the $64,000 question. Practice, certainly. Trial and error, no doubt. But here are some articles and posts that offer an introduction to the trade as well as some tips to follow or appreciate, depending on your desire to become a trailer editor or merely to understand better what they do.

Emphasizing functionality, editor Mike Flanagan asks in his article “How to Edit a Trailer that will get your film noticed, “can you put forth something that represents not only the production value, the quality of the actors, the structure of your story, but also the TONE of your film as well, all in less time than you’ll find in a network commercial break block?”

He prefaces his review of representational fidelity, acting, structure, tone and vision, by reminding readers that the director/editor of the film is often the least well-qualified person to produce/cut the trailer, for the simple reason that they are too close to the material and too invested in its film artistry rather than its commercial potential.

The other takeaway from this article is the examination of the conventional three-act structure of a trailer, understood not as a criticism of formula but rather as an appreciation.

On Chris Jones blog, Chris interviews trailer editor Ross Evison who shares the following tips and advice:

• Choose the story through line and stick to it.
• Don’t introduce too many motifs or characters choose whose journey it is – if you’re fortunate to have a known performer, albeit in a minor role, utilise that fact.
• Don’t name check people who nobody knows.
• Know the end, the theme and feeling you want to leave the viewer with.
• The trailer doesn’t have to be as linear as the film – often better if it isn’t.
• Don’t have random moments that come out of nowhere – sounds contradictory to the above point but you can put scenes in any order as long a the through story is being followed, don’t be afraid of mixing it up.
• Writing copy (the voice over or captions) is tough, unless you have a way with words, don’t try and be too smart, serve the film rather than attempting to be clever with you words. The copy should encapsulate your through line story and can be helpful to skip through this. However, if you don’t need copy, don’t use it. If the film is strong enough let it do the talking.
• Stick with simple graphic captions – often the best way if you’re not graphically skilled.
• Voice over is not a must, and bad VO can alienate the viewer (don’t cheapen it with a fake American accent, if you’re a Brit and can read the lines, be a Brit, just be confident. Failing that, stick with captions)
• Don’t let shots and moments out stay their welcome. The perfectly constructed moment you created in your film CAN be trimmed right down in the trailer, don’t worry it doesn’t ruin your film. It will always be perfect in the film.
• Say something once, for example you may have two characters saying pretty much the same point in two different ways, cut one out you don’t need the other. Move on.

My last shout out goes to David Malki, a retired trailer editor now working as a cartoonist, who describes the trailer making ecology, breaking into the business, the daily grind of an editor and practical (and quite sensible, too) career advice for would be editors of trailers and features alike. See his “Breaking into Trailers” post on the website davidmalki.com

Creative Commons License
movietrailers101 by Fred Greene is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Posted in Introductory and Reference Post, Lists & Compilations, Observations and Provocations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Movie Apps: interactivity, investment, engagement and ?

I was recently asked to expand my remarks about apps produced to promote and market movies, after my post mentioning the Stifler App from American Reunion that I first learned about in Professor John Weller‘s graduate seminar on digital marketing at UCLA TFT.

I began by looking for other movie apps and also by trying to understand, in a more rigorous way, what an app was. Short for application, an app is a program accessed via the internet that’s downloaded to a portable device–say a smart phone or an iPad– where it then mediates between the developer/server and the client/user. In this way, an app obviates the need for every update to the program to necessitate a download to the client’s device. Instead, the update to an application (the program) happens invisibly and nearly instantly. I’ll let Wikipedia continue the thought:
“Web applications are popular due to the ubiquity of web browsers, and the convenience of using a web browser as a client, sometimes called a thin client. The ability to update and maintain web applications without distributing and installing software on potentially thousands of client computers is a key reason for their popularity, as is the inherent support for cross-platform compatibility. Common web applications include webmail, online retail sales, online auctions, wikis and many other functions.”

I start from the functional assumption that an app developed in conjunction with a feature film is intended to extend, enhance and exploit the movie and movie marketing experience to build engagement, interest and consumption, whether tickets to the theatrical exhibition, purchase/rental of the DVD or the desire to see the sequel or the next installation in the series. Like any good advertising and promotion, such an app should provide information about the “product;” it should convey something of the nature of the film experience; and lastly, it should engage the curiosity and interest of the audience (or viewer or player) such that a consumption decision is brought closer to consummation.

Let’s take a look at some movie apps and assess this hypothesis.
I searched “movie apps” and “apps for movies,” as well as “apps” in conjunction with the name of some prominent Summer releases to see what emerged in the results. I found examples that will, I think, inspire some conclusions as well as beget a few more questions.

First, I encountered the apps that are about movies generally rather than a specific flic.

Flixster, bills itself as the #1 app for showtimes, trailers and reviews. Fandango provides the same information but also offers ticket purchase. The TCM (Turner Classic Movies) app delivers schedules, photos, trivia, movie history “and more” for classic movie lovers and viewers of its proprietary cable channel. IMDb, “mobilizes” the internet movie database, an essential tool for industry professionals and fans alike. Lovefilm is a streaming movie rental concern in the UK that ranks high in the “movie apps” search results.

I next searched by titles: MEN in Black III has an app: the “mib iii” app is, in the words of the developers: “The official game of Men in Black 3, putting players in charge of the agency.”

Dark Shadows has two apps, both of which seem lackluster, by comparison with the Stifler App. The first is a photo filter, that gives all your pictures the Tim Burton (and his cinematographer) treatment; The second app is a mobile scroll, which appears to be backgrounds and fonts for your texting pleasure.

Prometheus has an app: “The recently revealed Facebook app page shows an interactive “starmap” where delving deeper into it you can find new Prometheus stills and other goodies.”

Battleship’s app is “AUTHENTIC! EXPLOSIVE! AND FREE!” and “Inspired by the BATTLESHIP movie.” It’s a game where you “play as the Human navy or mysterious Alien forces. Sink every enemy ship – the fate of the world is at your fingertips!”

Avengers, too, has an app, one built by a Vancouver start-up, “Loud Crow Interactive…tapped by Marvel Comics to create an interactive comic app to mark the launch” of the film. “This is the first fully interactive comic book,” says Tom Mara, Loud Crow’s director of sales and marketing.

Films like Best Exotic Marigold Hotel and Moonrise Kingdom did not have apps, not, presumably because of the expense–which can be modest, or not, depending on the development process– but perhaps because the marketing department did not see the clear and obvious benefit.

Which begs the question of what exactly that benefit it? For summer [would-be?] blockbusters, like MIB or Avengers or Battleship, an app seems to be part of the standard list of promotional features. Games are common and perhaps obvious choices for films that are themselves inspired by games and or comic books and are likely to inspire additional games or comic books.

For a film like American Reunion, an app can engage with and extend the world of the film through the memorable verbal stylings of a defining character like Stifler. (Stylings that were too provocative to be approved by Apple. Happily, Android had no such compunctions.) The Stifler App transcends its film, in the best way, endowing this unlikely anti-hero with cultural currency and longevity. Upload this app to express your inner fratboy!

For Dark Shadows, whose gothic soap-opera conceit has been made-over into a Tim Burton experience, aesthetic qualities of the film –its cinematography and production design– constitute the basis of the app’s appeal.

And of course, for the movie apps first described, essential marketing information– showtimes, reviews, tickets, trailers, posters, etc. etc.,–is the point and the payoff.

What I will hazard to say given this by no means comprehensive survey of movie apps, is that the situation remains fluid and developing. Different movies inspire radically different kinds of apps, with radically different modalities, sophistication and interactive possibilities. There is as yet no “standard” or formula for a movie app, as there IS a standard or formulaic trailer. What does appear to be certain, however, is that the movie app–however it is designed for a given film–is quickly becoming a standard feature of the movie marketing arsenal, and represents a new arena for audio-visual creativity and audience engagement.

Creative Commons License
movietrailers101 by Fred Greene is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Posted in Introductory and Reference Post, Lists & Compilations, Observations and Provocations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment