-
Karina's Spoutblog post on the film -
The International trailer released on youtube a few weeks ago. -
The trailers on MTV.com that kind of give an indication of the hack job that was probably done to the film.
This is more of a review of the way this film is being advertised or its potential to be advertised well. I would probably have a lot more to say at this point, but I am holding back my ensuing rage at the exhibition of
Across the Universe until after I have actually seen it. All I can say is that when I watch the international trailer, I am so excited to see this movie. When I watch the cut up trailers from the MTV website, I am barely interested. Obviously, the editing is done to market the film to completely different audiences (teen-musical-lovers-of-HairSpray), which isn't inherently wrong (or maybe it is). What I find most troubling is the overt content of the film which would dictate that it be marketed in a way that is true to 1)the songs, 2)the era being depicted 3) and to the people who experienced that time period and were shaped by those songs. Thus, I would feel that the international trailer is more true to the film content and should be the trailer that is used nationally as well as internationally.
However, what might seem obvious to me might not be so clear or important in the current market. My observation/question is this: When films are advertised to be something other than what they are, people go to see it expecting one thing and get something else. At which point, the average viewer assumes that the movie is "bad" simply because the ads(Expectations) and the actual film(Experience) did not match. So, despite critical acclaim, the peer to peer reviewing/reccomendation system prevents the film from a realistic evaluation. A lot of good films have been toted as being terrible, when they are more than likely misunderstood because of the exhibition. Wouldn't most films have a better shot at success if they were marketed in a way that was true to the content? That way, the people that would go to see it would be people that were actually interested in the film (experience matches expectations = good reviews) and not a bunch of people that are basically being lied to so that the production companies have the best chance of covering their costs (experience does not match expectations = bad reviews). The last time I checked, we were creating and exhibiting art, not just trying to turn a profit. Or if you are going to turn a profit, how about it comes from the genuine acknowledgment of an appreciative audience and not from tricking people? but perhaps I am an idealist. I am just hoping this doesn't happen with Across the Universe. I, for one, plan on seeing it, and I am hoping it's good enough that I end up seeing it multiple times. Cheers.