By Keri O’Shea
Now here’s a new one…
Here at the site, we’re in the habit, if we’ve reviewed a film, of embedding the film’s trailer at the end of the piece. We do this so that if we’ve piqued reader interest, then they can straight away take a look at what the film may have to offer. Makes sense, right? However, we also pride ourselves on our diligence in not simply trotting out plot synopses in our reviews here; therefore it’s odd that, more and more, after taking pains to discuss the film in question in a thorough way without spoilering it, a potential source of spoilers would come from the film’s trailer itself. On a couple of occasions, I’ve watched the trailer for the first time after I’ve written a review, and decided that I just can’t embed it after all because it neatly unpicks all of my efforts in a minute or so – or, if I do add a trailer, I often feel I have to give a warning about what it contains. Only in recent years have I ever had to add the addendum to a review, ‘Watch the trailer at your own risk‘. To use a recent example, a couple of weeks ago I reviewed dystopian horror The Colony; it’s no world-beater but it’s a decent enough sort of yarn which, yeah, if you had your wits about you, you could probably see going in one of a handful of directions; that’s no reason whatsoever for the trailer to do what it does, though, and that’s to render down all of the significant plot developments which happen across ninety minutes into a minute or so. In effect, watch the trailer, and you will have absolutely no reason at all to watch the film. Call me old-fashioned, but surely it’s not meant to work like this. And yet, more and more films are going this way…
It’s legitimate to complain about film reviews which give the whole game away, sure, but likewise, it’s all very well getting bent out of shape at reviewers when the official trailer for the film goes and commits the same crime, with no warning whatsoever. I must confess ignorance here, and I’d welcome the responses of any filmmakers who may be keeping an eye on Brutal as Hell on Facebook or Twitter, but I’m guessing that it’s studios which have the final say on a lot of what goes into trailers, and if this is the case then it must be desperately frustrating to see what they think ought to go in, go in. I mean, you work hard to generate buzz about your film and it’s the very thing intended to promote your project which shoots you down; must be a pisser. Certainly, what you can expect to see has changed radically somewhere along the line…but why – are trailers no longer intended to tantalise?
Perhaps in these days of instant gratification, film viewership is just a drastically different deal; when a brand new film can hit the torrent sites within hours of its release, or it can even get leaked before it’s meant to be out at all, then the policy of dropping hints can maybe seem a bit like playing coy too late. Ditto that, when we have the phenomenon of social networking ramming spoilers into our heads at every turn, even if we ask it nicely not to; perhaps, for many studios and distribution companies, it now just seems pointless to try and hold back the tides. Could this be why a growing selection of movie trailers seem to be less about the tease, and more about flaunting as many of a movie’s wares as possible? It certainly appears that this is the way to go for some films, and getting a film noticed and remembered in these saturated and cynical times is more important than other concerns, even if it means that the mystery is sacrificed along the way. Hey, if reviewers are going to discuss the plot anyway, it could be a case of if you can’t beat ’em, join ’em…
As I say – you can call me old-fashioned, but I quite liked it when trailers were so much harder to come by and as such, retained their power to keep us at a bit more of a distance. It’s a genuine charm now, if you watch an old VHS cassette, to see the trailer reel at the start: these little snapshots from batshit movies which may or may not have found their way to DVD, Blu-ray or the internet, but which still look like a hell of a lot of fun. Back when these things were more clandestine somehow – with a very limited cult cinema press, fewer releases and of course no internet – perhaps their renegade status did most of the work, and they plain didn’t need to tell the whole story. Even the daftest old 70s sleazefests (which you can get hold of now) managed to show you everything, but still not show you everything. It’s a daft distinction, but it’s there as far as I’m concerned, nonetheless.
Or, for all of that, it could just be that a lot of people in the business of promoting film haven’t got a fucking clue about film fans. It’s not beyond possibility, is it? Someone green-lit the Carrie remake. Unimaginative and crudely-rendered films get distribution deals whilst gutsy, original storytelling languishes unseen; people love Paranormal Activity these days, right, so we clearly need more like that? And so on and so forth. I suppose, ultimately, however the movie-watching and making landscape may have changed, it doesn’t for one minute mean that it’s okay to find another avenue through which to ruin the surprise and enjoyment of a new film, least of all when so many of us are so used to that avenue being a taster and nothing more.
Long story short: I really don’t want to be a fan writer in a world where I have to actively warn people against watching the damn trailer. I would expect most people to agree with me; things may have changed these days, but they haven’t changed that much, so please let us be able to trust in the trailer even if all else is a risky business. And, if you have any involvement with this business, please remember a mantra which never goes out of style: less is more. Trust me. Films deserve the opportunity to stand on their own merits and we deserve the chance to let them.