IT DEPENDS: A Defense of Trailers as Virtuoso Film Art

Posted on February 9, 2012 by Frederick Greene

[youtube-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkTpAYrLcOo]

BIG STAR, POPULAR GENRE, STRONG TRAILER BUT IRAQ WAR FILMS DON’T SELL!

A two-minute trailer serves many masters and navigates varied, sometimes competing claims. Moreover, its film craft, marketing effectiveness and entertainment value are independent of one another and may, in fact, be wildly divergent. And yet, film after film, season after season, genre by genre, trailers consistently delight, compel, engage and excite, feats their feature films much less reliably accomplish.

In this post, which I have sworn to keep to less than 500 words (do you doubt me?), I intend to offer a full-throated argument for and appreciation of the artistic complexity and imagination of trailers and an acknowledgement of the competing, often contradictory or at the very least paradoxical demands managed by their makers. Films—whether art-house or wide-release, experimental or sequel—have won a lasting, deserved place in the pantheon of the arts. This is my brief for the admittance of those marvelous, short-form, hybrid vehicles of promotion and representation– to which this blog is dedicated—-into that same hall of glory where they can bask in popular acclaim and wince at critical inspection.

Most cineastes understand how lengthy, involved, complex and ultimately accidental is the process by which an idea or a story becomes a theatrically distributed motion picture. Trailers, which exist only because that struggle has occurred, are conceived, produced and distributed on a much shorter time frame, and with less angst over whether they will be made. When you make a film, marketing is an obligatory component, and a trailer is the “lead arrow” in the quiver of marketing, promotion and publicity: the difficulties, delays and deliberations aren’t over whether to make the trailer, merely about the how.

But apart from the brevity of a trailer, compared to its feature, and the perfunctory character of its production (if not the debates over its budget and the scope of its subsidiary parts, i.e. teasers, tv spots, featurettes, etc.), I assert that a trailer is subject to even more demands from even less aligned masters than the film it heralds.

A trailer must advertise and it must entertain; it must call to action and it must seduce; It must combine cinematography with graphic and sound design, all edited in a formulaic and assimilable manner that is nevertheless inventive, surprising and interpretively open. A trailer is written and rhetorical, visual and auditory—just like the feature it promotes– but its narration is exploited promotionally, while its promotion must be conducted narratively. Trailers are immensely self-conscious and explicit about their mediated distance from the film which they frequently present with the breathless immediacy of a typhoon or train wreck. Whereas a film draws you in, immersing you in its world, a trailer simultaneously pushes you back, with its cards, voice over, graphic design and title elements and non-linear editing.

With respect to the many determinants of its reception and result, a trailer depends on the accident of its audience, the whims of its projectionist and the dissemination strategies of its distributors (who are at the mercy of fiber optic cable, Fed-Ex delivery, the weather, labor, etc., etc.,). Likewise, a trailers depends on its budget, its competition in the marketplace, its scheduling (calendar), its exhibitors as well as the local weather whose advent can so importunately and effectively impact its consumption. A trailer depends on the materials (the film) and the stars, whose waning or waxing are themselves dependent on such intangibles as celebrity and such unpredictable factors as personal character and public scandal.

A trailer depends on the quality of the research that contributed to the creative brief. It it’s flawed or compromised, so too will be the resulting coming attraction advertisement. And let’s not forget the economy or the zeitgeist, the news, historical events or natural and man-made catastrophes, as we also recall the idiosyncratic and unpredictable interventions of powerful producers (and their spouses, paramours, masseuses, trainers or astrologers.)

I’m told that the major studios possess massive and wondrous databases in which most of the variables noted above (and some unimagined by me) are charted, analyzed and processed in order to arrive at predictions of box office results and explanations of actual results after the fact. Perhaps the marketing materials enjoy their own special tabs on such spreadsheets, with formulae quantifying their interaction. Such tools, I suspect, are about as accurate as the complex mathematical models at research universities, banks and government agencies that purport to anticipate aggregate or macro economic performance. In other words, the level of complexity and overdetermination involved is, well, staggering.

My constant qualification of the observations I offer my students by the words “it depends,” (which they probably consider one of my pause words, like, um, “like” or “um,” at this point of the quarter), is meant to underscore the tangled knot (Gordian?) of causes involved in the production, the achievement and the artistry of trailers, some merely proximate, some merely sufficient, many only accidental. Hindsight only makes them discernible. Assigning significance, praise and/or blame, remains a highly speculative endeavor.

Constraint it has been observed, albeit paradoxically, is a great catalyst of imaginative freedom. In the case of trailers, we see persuasive evidence of the power of human creativity and collaboration to overcome contradiction in a glorious artistic synthesis.

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

Posted in Observations and Provocations | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

PROJECT X Trailer — Desperate, Mean and Resentful: Party on American Youth

Posted on February 7, 2012 by Frederick Greene

It’s not my job or duty to “approve” the moral or political messages of movie advertising, but I do like to understand how they frame their appeals and accomplish their promotional objectives—the better to explain it to students, or more importantly, to earn my living from the satisfactory deliver of copy to clients. With respect to the official theatrical trailer for “Project X,” I gasped at the cynicism of the marketing, while applauding the trailermaking skill. I anticipate a strong opening for this “epic, dirty, hilarious movie” (verbatim from an audience member) film whose campaign enlists social networking (twitter/facebook), peer-to-peer advocacy and implicitly end-runs critical reaction and review. Experience the event, indeed.

Project X is a misleading title,because there is nothing mysterious or secret about the subject matter. Three high school “losers” (as described by the copy) bid to improve their social standing by throwing a raging party during a parental absence. The party is wildly oversubscribed and veers out of control. Rioting, mayhem and massive property damage result. Best of all, the events are videotaped and become, according to the framing device, fodder for a Jimmy Kimmel segment. The protagonists, while incapable of concealing their actions from their parents, have become cultural legends or outlaws courtesy of youtube.

We’ve seen this film before– although the midgets, the zip-line into the pool, the fire-bombed neighborhood, etc., etc., suggest an escalation in scale and scandal. (Audiences, it would seem, require more and greater stimulus to be titillated, shocked and satisfied.)

The 2:15 theatrical trailer begins with white text on a black screen, noting that in 2011, Warner Brothers invited audiences to “exclusive screenings” of this film. We then are told what those audiences said by way of reaction: “The Best party movie ever;” “An Epic, dirty, hilarious movie…I wish I was there;” “Funny as Hell;” “A parent’s worst nightmare;” and “Like SUPERBAD on crack.” These peer reviews appear on cards interspersed with scenes of the party, our three protagonists presiding.

Flashback to a scene at the grocery store where they boys buy supplies and spread the word, followed by a cards for Todd Phillips, and his relevant prior releases OLD SCHOOL and THE HANGOVER, promising name brand entertainment from a producer with a reputation for raunchy, anarchic fun. An infectious, transporting rave tune kicks in as the trailer delivers scenes from a teen bacchanal. Cards interrupt, exhorting viewers to EXPERIENCE THE EVENT / THAT WILL TURN LOSERS / INTO LEGENDS.

Soon exuberant celebration becomes reckless endangerment and major property damage. A father’s prized car drives into the pool. Triple parked cars and Rioting teens clog affluent, suburban streets; a flame-throwing guest ignites the neighborhood as party-goers flee in terror. Cut to an earlier scene of a neighbor who threatens to call the cops, only to be tazed by an over-eager attendee, who is then punched out by the enraged adult. Happily for our protagonists, the neighbor’s threats to involve the police are neutered by video footage of him assaulting the adolescent. Teens triumph over officious adults. This story line must test well.

Another early scene shows two of our protagonists in an ugly moment where the fast-talking, instigator cruelly insults his hapless, overweight friend (again!) about his body and his perfectly normal sexual objectives. Mean Girls have no monopoly on disciplining friends about body issues and sabotaging each other in their interactions with the opposite sex. Oddly, this is the third scene of unprovoked verbal abuse perpetrated by the same character, who is never shown other than conniving, obnoxious and insincere. I suppose “mean” tests well too. (I would argue that the tone/flavor of humor is tied more closely to the historical/cultural moment than about any other aspect of the trailer; regrettably, and for obvious economic and cultural reasons, we appear to be well into a nasty period.)

The release date and an invite to “get on the list” at the film’s twitter feed (follow@ukpartyprojectx) heralds the final button, in which the three sobering teens face the mess they’ve made and the challenge of cleaning up before parents return. The instigator promises that the video footage they’ve captured will never be aired, a line punctuated with a cut to Jimmy Kimmel discussing the Pasadena party and showing a clip. “Have you seen the footage,” he asks the studio audience, which function as a third-party invitation to do so. What he shows, before the four cards of credits closes the trailer, is a fire-helicopter dousing a burning home with flame-retardant, as the rave anthem swells in the background.

As I suggested earlier, the Ppoject X trailers is well-edited and compelling, despite its cynical positioning. The target demographic is appealed to on the basis of hilarity, raunch, vicarious misbehavior and a rather less foregrounded but no less potent combination of resentments: toward authority, responsibility and self-respect, most saliently. But the tagline call to action “experience the event/ that turned losers / into legends” promises that social success can be had for the price of anti-social behavior, so long as its sufficiently appalling. (No, not from throwing parties; but by behaving contemptuously to friends, parents, neighbors and community and recklessly with respect to safety and property.)

A legend is not, of course, a hero. In this case, our legends our hinds, but then we inhabit a culture that celebrates bad-boys and socio-paths, so long as they think big and destroy with abandon.

Is this a joyous evening? It doesn’t seem like it (with the exception of the bouncing Westmoreland Terrier—the cutest scene in the film.) Friendship plays little role; desperation seems to pervade the revelers as well as the party givers, whose bid for recognition and respect explodes in their faces. (They get the former, but the latter eludes them.)

Finally, this trailer advises you to listen to your peers, whose opinions matter more than any pointy-headed media critic, movie reviewer or uptight adult. If you can’t attend such parties, experience them as an audience member; if you can’t sabotage your own relationships with your parents, peers, neighbors and the future, enjoy that thrill vicariously. I’m talking to a wall here, I know. I was a once a thoughtless, emotionally stunted and angry adolescent; weren’t we all. But once we start celebrating pathology, enshrining it in multi-million-dollar filmed spectaculars, haven’t we drained it of its whole subversive, but not therefore invaluable counter-cultural ethos and reward?

Posted in Readings | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

The Grey Teaser Trailer: Liam Neeson–a leading man for the (no-longer) forgotten demographic

Posted on February 2, 2012 by Frederick Greene

[youtube+http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hfb0-U0ydj8]

Even before the tragic death of wife Natasha Richardson in March of 2009, which made him both an eligible widower and a figure of enormous sympathy, gravel voiced, Academy Award Winner (Schindler’s List) Liam Neeson was being repositioned as a mature and thinking man’s (and perhaps, more importantly, a mature and thinking woman’s) action hero, appearing in such paranoid thrillers as Taken and Unknown in which he demonstrated the physical and cerebral qualities displayed earlier in the little seen western duel, Seraphim Falls, with Pierce Brosnan.

Hollywood likes it’s older action stars manly in appearance and macho in affect–before Mel Gibson and Harrison Ford, there was John Wayne and Clint Eastwood, etc., etc.–if not also wise, belatedly recognizing that there is a huge audience segment that can be coaxed to the theater when offered something more substantial and age-appropriate than the latest matinee idol promoted to adolescents and young adults.

In The Grey, Neeson portrays an member of an oil-drilling team whose plane crashes in the Alaskan wilds, where he and his comrades must battle the elements and a pack of hungry wolves to survive. It’s a classic conflict, man vs. nature, in which Neeson is motivated by more than the individual existential imperative to save his bacon: back home, a beloved, beautiful and faithful woman awaits his return.

The movie led the box office this past weekend, posting $30M in receipts, and yet, I have to confess, I’d never heard of it until a couple of weeks ago when I saw a billboard, which told me little beyond Neeson’s involvement and the genre: action, thriller, though how exactly I knew from the few visual cues provided is a story for another post. (Let’s just say, that I’m familiar with the iconography of movie poster, or “key” art.) I was surprised that it’s B.O. was so strong, when I hadn’t seen the trailer, the TV spots or even a review or print advertisements in my daily NYTimes.

All of which, by way of lengthy digression, is to say that I was inspired to check out the Teaser, and see how this film first registered its existence in the public consciousness and heralded its arrival in theaters. The teaser appeared on You-Tube 4 months ago, presumably in sync with its theatrical presentation. That’s significantly later than the teaser window of 1 year to 6 months out, but not unprecedented.

Having now watched the 1:24 minute trailer repeatedly, I’ve confirmed my suspicions about Neeson’s ongoing re-positioning and his increased value to the studios as they pivot to exploit the B.O. potential of a segment of the movie-consuming public that doesn’t exist as far as some/much market research is concerned. (I use a research report in my seminar, generated by NRG for the 2008 Mike Myer’s fiasco, the Love Guru, which doesn’t include interviews with or data about anyone over 39. I say to NRG, now part of Nielsen, I object! I’m here, older than 39, I love to go to the movies, and I am not alone!)

The teaser, which is not at all abstract or conceptual, benefits from access to what I presume to be the finished and rendered film. It offers plenty of story information, scenes of action and threat, and a clear presentation of the stakes, the motivation, the climax and the probably resolution. Considered generically, this is not a traditional teaser, a marketing film which is often little more than the idea, the title and the cast run, supported by special shoot materials of an impressionistic and emotional character.

The Grey Teaser opens with the logos of its producers: Open Road and LD. A wide shot of a snow covered mountain, surrounded by low hanging fog, establishes the setting. Bass notes strike an ominous tone, while a few tinkling piano notes, suggest hope, civilization, romance? (Just speculating here.) We see Neeson writing a letter in a grey, sparsely furnished, utilitarian bedroom. Frost on the window and snow outside connect to the opening image, of a cold climate. (From reading the synopsis, I guess this is his quarters in the remote drilling site where he works, far from his lady love.)

An exterior shot of a border crossing/gate at night follows, with the glare from security lights obscuring any detail, apart from snow and cold. This shot seems wasted. Next, Neeson reads the love letter he is presumably writing, his voice over conveying his all-consuming passion for the recipient. Intercut to a man (probably Neeson) walking through a snowy wood, no gloves on his hands. Back to a closeup of hands holding a love letter, followed by sunlight-suffused images of the object of Neeson’s address. (Again, my understanding of this juxtaposition of images is a result of my susceptibility to the Kuleshov Effect.)

Next, Neeson sits riverside in a snowy, wilderness landscape; he is underdressed for the weather. Cut to an exterior shot of chapped hands holding a cracked, framed photo of the beautiful woman, followed by a close up of Neeson’s wind-burnt face, and frost-bitten fingers as he holds the keepsake.

A flashback to a planes’ interior flickers across the screen, followed immediately by scenes of distress and panic as the plane and passengers experience an emergency descent. The images and the soundscape are jarring. The screen goes black for a couple of seconds and all noise is stilled. Out of silence, a flashback image of Neeson and his beloved beneath white sheets in a sun-lit room appears. He wakes, startled and shivering, from this happy recollection into the white desolation of a snow field, his actual “coverlet” a blanket of snow. Sound resumes.

Stumbling and climbing toward the plane’s wreckage, he finds fellow passengers. The pacing of the trailer dramatically increases as we see the survivors trekking through the wilderness, menaced by wolves. Blood curdling growls and up close shots of wicked teeth and snapping jaws, seen in daylight, alternate with shots of the pack at night, their presence indicated by glowing eyes staring at the desperate survivors. Neeson’s V.O. returns as he utters, “all my love for you, take it now, leave me only with what I need to fight.” (This is my best estimate of what he says: his voice is hard to make out in its lower register.)

As his “prayer” ends, quick cut scenes of a man being chased, sliding, falling, plunging into freezing water, drawing a knife, running, and jumping from a cliff, a makeshift rope tied around his waist. (It may not be Neeson who we see, but it’s impossible to tell given the speed of the cutting and the bulky, drab clothing.) This scene is accompanied by a crescendoing electronic track, climaxing with the plunge over the cliff. The screen goes black.

When the light returns, we see Neeson, alone, facing a black wolf, who watches from a distance. Neeson has fashioned claws from bottle glass, which he’s taped to his knuckles. As the wolf growls and lunges, so too does Neeson. Cut to the title card, THE GREY, suitably, grey letters on a grey background, followed by 2012, followed by a final card with the Facebook address of the film’s website.

There don’t appear to be any females among the oil-drilling party that survives the crash. So, in this film, the relevant point of identification for women audience members is Neeson’s beloved, who, at least in the teaser, is portrayed as beautiful, sensuous and saintly. (Madonna and whore?—who knew!) Whatever the size and significance of her role in the film, the trailer makers present (whether accurately or not, I can’t say) Neeson’s female love object as a central character and the prime motivation for his resolve. She figures prominently in the trailer in the protagonist’s dream and day-dream life.

Neeson–in or out of character– is the marrying kind of guy—manly, rugged, distinguished, but in no ways puerile, pretty or fickle. For Chrissake, he’s the voice of Aslan, a Christ figure, in the Narnia Chronicles; he’s the wizard of the seas, Fujimoto, in the animated film Ponyo; he’s Zeus in the Titan remake. Men want to be him; women (heterosexual women, at any rate) want to be loved by him.

If you were looking for a clever or counter-intuitive take on why this teaser is effective or how this movie made $30 its first weekend without blockbuster promotion and publicity, I’m afraid I’ve disappointed. Whatever the merits of the film, the marketers understand the advantages they’ve got, as well as the weaknesses they’ve got to manage (lack of significant female characters engaged in the action); they’ve exploited the first and finessed the second.

Sure, the visual palette is grey, the stunts are impressive, the situation is inherently suspenseful and the action is brutal and not entirely implausible, while the editing is hair-raising. But primarily, this trailer gives audiences a star (not a character, but a star!) to identify with, root for and adore. And this star is cold, endangered and desperate but also very determined to do whatever it takes to make it home from one of the most inhospitable places on earth and despite the preferences of a pack of the craftiest, most indefatigable and pitiless stalkers you’re liable to see on screen. Thriller’s should thrill. The Grey Looks like it does.

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

Posted in Readings | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment