BvS All Things Superman and Batman: An Open Discussion - - - - - - - Part 16

[BatLobster]

I have mixed feelings on MOS, but there's no doubt that trailer 3 was pretty astonishing. When that trailer hit, my expectations skyrocketed.

I think the overall problem I had with the marketing in retrospect is that so much of it focused on the pre-Superman stuff, and there wasn't a ton of that in the movie. I thought the movie was going to be more of a "Clark on a quest" type of film that had more of a buildup to the first reveal of him in the suit. Essentially a modern remake of STM, at least in terms of the structure and broader beats. So, more of a Superman Begins in terms of pacing .

I understand why they didn't do that, but it was hard to not get excited at the prospect of that. What they ended up delivering was more of a Superman/Superman II hybrid.

 

[The Sage]

Actually, I think most of the trailers promised a film the filmmakers didn't deliver.

I thought the second and fourth trailers represented the film well, particularly the tone. The third was great but had a lighter tone that the film didn't.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

I have mixed feelings on MOS, but there's no doubt that trailer 3 was pretty astonishing. When that trailer hit, my expectations skyrocketed.

I think the overall problem I had with the marketing in retrospect is that so much of it focused on the pre-Superman stuff, and there wasn't a ton of that in the movie. I thought the movie was going to be more of a "Clark on a quest" type of film that had more of a buildup to the first reveal of him in the suit. Essentially a modern remake of STM, at least in terms of the structure and broader beats. So, more of a Superman Begins in terms of pacing .

I understand why they didn't do that, but it was hard to not get excited at the prospect of that. What they ended up delivering was more of a Superman/Superman II hybrid.

Exactly. The "origin again" people should hide in a hole. Because the origin story is really where the character develops the most (generally speaking) and is really the best way for audiences to get emotionally attached to the character.

Now MOS2 has to focus back on Clark while fitting in Batman/WW/LL and his henchman.

If Goyer/Nolan treated Clark with the same level of thoroughness as Bruce in Begins we would have had the definitive solo superhero film in some time.

 

[Boy Scout]

I thought the second and fourth trailers represented the film well, particularly the tone. The third was great but had a lighter tone that the film didn't.

I thought the tone of the film was represented fine. However, I think the trailers promised a film of better quality than the one we got.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

^ Isn't that what trailers are for, though?

 

[Boy Scout]

Yes. It's not a big deal; it just contributed to my overall disappointment.

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

Oh, Lencho. How I love you. In a dudely way. t:

 

[Lencho01]

I thought the tone of the film was represented fine. However, I think the trailers promised a film of better quality than the one we got.

Same thing happened to me.

Oh, Lencho. How I love you. In a dudely way. t:

Someone's gotta make a Snu-Snu joke in one of these films.

 

[Marvin]

Actually, I think most of the trailers promised a film the filmmakers didn't deliver.

That's debatable.

It happens most of the time. When the audience see's a trailer, and they don't expect crap from a production team, said audience tends to fill in the blanks in a way that the filmmakers simply can't account for.

There's a similar effect in the translation from book to film. We fill the blanks in with our own directorial imagination.
That's not to say films don't often deliver or surprise people, best case scenario is to go in cold imo.

This next starwars marketing campain vs film is going to be a masterclass on the issue.

 

[roach]

It happens most of the time. When the audience see's a trailer, and they don't expect crap from a production team, said audience tends to fill in the blanks in a way that the filmmakers simply can't account for.

There's a similar effect in the translation from book to film. We fill the blanks in with our own directorial imagination.
That's not to say films don't often deliver or surprise people, best case scenario is to go in cold imo.

This next starwars marketing campain vs film is going to be a masterclass on the issue.

I believe that this is 50% of people's issues with the Prequels. Nothing that Lucas could come up with would trump over 20 years of imagination.

 

[charl_huntress]

I really wasn't impressed with the MOS trailers. I didn't see a whole bunch, but the ones I did see were very somber.

 

[Marvin]

Few people figured stuff like this below, would be a 30second epilogue flashback after the fact.

I fear they may have been one or two people that went in thinking the film was going to be a conventional narrative told with these shots literally. Everything from stm(though it didn't spend much time in these moments either) but with this 'style'
Hard not to see some people being let down on principle alone.

 

[Marvin]

I believe that this is 50% of people's issues with the Prequels. Nothing that Lucas could come up with would trump over 20 years of imagination.

would you argue the same about hobbit(part one)?

 

[InJustice]

would you argue the same about hobbit(part one)?

I think what it comes down to is that people hold onto their lore, so much so that any additions in the future has the burden of living up to an exquisite trilogy (I'd say that about LOTR, not sure about SW). Even if the future additions are good, they never measure up to the "magic" of the old films.

 

[The Sage]

Exactly. The "origin again" people should hide in a hole. Because the origin story is really where the character develops the most (generally speaking) and is really the best way for audiences to get emotionally attached to the character.

Now MOS2 has to focus back on Clark while fitting in Batman/WW/LL and his henchman.

If Goyer/Nolan treated Clark with the same level of thoroughness as Bruce in Begins we would have had the definitive solo superhero film in some time.

Why should I hide in a hole?

The origin isn't the only way to show the character's development and journey. And it's arguable whether it's the best way for audiences to get attached to the character. You can do that in a story with an established character. As you tell the story, you reveal things about the person, and set him/her on a journey in which he/she has to overcome a physical, emotional, or mental obstacle the audience can relate to.

I wasn't one for seeing the Superman origin again because I figured it was going to be a flat out repeat of things that had been done in the past. But I really liked Man of Steel, and one of the things is because while it felt familiar, it also felt fresh. It didn't play out in a total conventional way, and for me that's one of the best things about it. I can see Clark's story continuing, with Batman, Lex, and Wonder Woman being part of it.

 

[InJustice]

Exactly. The "origin again" people should hide in a hole. Because the origin story is really where the character develops the most (generally speaking) and is really the best way for audiences to get emotionally attached to the character.

Now MOS2 has to focus back on Clark while fitting in Batman/WW/LL and his henchman.

If Goyer/Nolan treated Clark with the same level of thoroughness as Bruce in Begins we would have had the definitive solo superhero film in some time.

I'd say that's debatable at best, depending on which films you cite. In TDKT's case, I thought Batman/Bruce Wayne's development was spread evenly: BB showed how tragedy shapes Bruce Wayne's life so much so that he invents a persona to fight against the forces of evil. TDK furthered the character by juxtaposing Bruce Wayne's ideals to the rest of Gotham and the Joker. Batman is now suddenly forced to do things that he wouldn't have done just to beat the enemy. Tragedy is also furthered as we see that by the conclusion of TDK and beginning of TDKR, significant deaths have taken a toll on Wayne (so much so that he retires, and is emotionally reclusive). Lastly, TDKR moves Bruce Wayne to explore the question of can he achieve catharsis and purge his depression and anger?

 

[Boy Scout]

It happens most of the time. When the audience see's a trailer, and they don't expect crap from a production team, said audience tends to fill in the blanks in a way that the filmmakers simply can't account for.

Or...and maybe I'm reaching here...they just expect a quality product. I didn't go into the film with obnoxiously high expectations.

 

[MrsKent26]

The MOS trailers gave a "best movie ever" impression. That's not quite what we got. I liked MOS, but it wasn't quite the movie the trailers made it look like. It looked like a billion-dollar IM3 crushing epic-fest. It turned out to be a pretty good sci-fi origin story.

 

[Bathead]

The MOS trailers gave a "best movie ever" impression. That's not quite what we got. I liked MOS, but it wasn't quite the movie the trailers made it look like. It looked like a billion-dollar IM3 crushing epic-fest. It turned out to be a pretty good sci-fi origin story.

That's what a trailer is supposed to do.

 

[Marvin]

Or...and maybe I'm reaching here...they just expect a quality product. I didn't go into the film with obnoxiously high expectations.

A quality product in a subjective market....
Apply this discussion to the likes of an episode of SNL for example. This isn't a matter of a quality car, but a piece of narrative art and experience.

Never really said anything about obnoxious expectations, only that people expect their own ideals.

To expect a basic "quality product" would mean to expect a product just how much better than Green Lantern, Howard the Duck....Transformers2, xmen origins... If all people expected here was a quality product I fear far more people would have had their basic expectation met on that angle alone imo. They wanted what they wanted..

 

[lc23]

I'm glad I went into this movie blind, having seen no trailers or ads, and had low expectations which ended up being far exceeded. So no crushingly bitter disappointment for me.

 

[MrsKent26]

That's what a trailer is supposed to do.

I agree. But not all trailers do that. MOS had fantastic trailers.

 

[Vid Electricz]

I believe that this is 50% of people's issues with the Prequels. Nothing that Lucas could come up with would trump over 20 years of imagination.

Let's be fair though, a lot of it wasn't "what he came up with", it was the execution of said ideas that seems to be what most take issue with when it comes to the prequels.

 

[Vid Electricz]

It happens most of the time. When the audience see's a trailer, and they don't expect crap from a production team, said audience tends to fill in the blanks in a way that the filmmakers simply can't account for.

There's a similar effect in the translation from book to film. We fill the blanks in with our own directorial imagination.
That's not to say films don't often deliver or surprise people, best case scenario is to go in cold imo.

This next starwars marketing campain vs film is going to be a masterclass on the issue.

Absolutely, and the fans (fanboys in this case) are the ones who get upset when their own, esoteric, ephemeral understanding of said character/franchise/property isn't translated to screen verbatim. They simply don't understand/can't accept that certain changes must be made translation from page to screen.

 

[charl_huntress]

I'm glad I went into this movie blind, having seen no trailers or ads, and had low expectations which ended up being far exceeded. So no crushingly bitter disappointment for me.

Same here. I didn't spoil myself and I think I may have watched the full trailer and a couple of TV spots, but that was it. I plan on doing the same for this movie. Once the spoilers and all that start rolling then I'll go dark and keep my expectations low. I'd rather be happily surprised then crushed under the weight of exceedingly high expectations and hopes.