Movie Trailers are False Advertising

Movie trailers are a necessity of film-making for producers and audiences alike. Their sole responsibility is to identify and communicate with a particular demographic, enticing them to invest their money and time into making that film a success.

In order to make these trailers, rushes of the film are sent out to dedicated companies to cut together a satisfying and alluring snapshot of the finished product, and in this process filmmakers must relinquish control and artistic direction to advertising executives. Unfortunately, trailer editors can sometimes have ideas of their own, giving birth to the admittedly rare but brutally unjust occasion where the tonality and mood of a film are completely lost in translation. As a result, the film fares disappointingly both commercially and critically.

In recent years two films in particular have fallen ill to this eventuality. The first is the downright brilliant In Bruges, Martin McDonagh’s dark and subversive comedy released in 2008. Now of course if you’ve seen In Bruges then you’re aware of its brilliance, its wry, morbid humor and penchant for slick yet meaningful dialogue; the problem is, that’s not how it was advertised.

If you’ve seen the film, then you’ll be aware of how farcical the trailer is. If you haven’t, presumably you’ll think it’s a knockabout-gangster-shooter-European affair, but it is most definitely not. Cinema goers of the time clearly thought so too after seeing the trailer, hence why it responded negatively with audiences who were expecting just that. The entire point of a demographic is that you’re not wasting everyone’s time: if you go to an independent cinema to see the new Wes Anderson film you won’t see a trailer for Jack and Jill 2: Cranial Reparation Surgery (I’m imagining that title, assuming the plot of the first was based on the nursery rhyme). That’s not to say that there wouldn’t be a crossover within those demographics, but I highly doubt every fan of Anderson is also inexplicably drawn to the mind-numbing idiocy of Adam Sandler in not just one but two fucking movie roles.

This is where the production house in charge of editing the trailer is to blame; out of all 107 stupendous minutes of footage, they had to crowbar in the joke about the fat American. Admittedly, it might be hard to communicate the charmingly understated and thoughtful relationship Farrell and Gleeson have, but that isn’t an excuse to advertise it as the unlikely odd couple. Similarly, the frenetic pace of the trailer completely belies the quiet sentimentality of the entire film. Thus, with some sorrow, In Bruges was left to slowly gather its cult status, missing the immediate impact and accolades it actually deserved.

The other film, perhaps even more a victim to this tragic turn of events, is The Grey. Oh you know The Grey, the one that had Liam Neeson’s steely visage plastered over every bus stop like the demonic overseer of an Orwellian society. If you don’t have this vague recollection of The Grey and are actually one of the few people who saw it in the cinema, you might remember experiencing the phenomenon of misplaced expectations.

If you haven’t seen it, The Grey is fantastic- a harrowing, deliciously dark film exploring very real human themes and fears. It is not the high-octane, action-packed film the trailer depicts, which would be more akin to a trailer for Taken 3: More Wolves (again, I’m presuming the first two weren’t rammed with wolves already). Audiences were quite rightly confused by this advertising cock-up, as the shot of Neeson charging into battle with broken bottles gaffa’d to his knuckles wasn’t even in the final film. Needless to say those who came expecting to see Oskar Schindler throwing some shapes at a wolf were severely disappointed. Misrepresentation was also responsible for audiences despair with the visual effects, notably the unrealistic CGI wolves.

This is perhaps the biggest fault of a poor trailer, in that an entire plot device can be completely missed, as the wolves in The Grey are actually a visual metaphor for death itself and intended to look slightly whimsical. More than that, the whole film revolves around death as its focal theme, and that isn’t communicated at all in the trailer, stripping it of its philosophical poignancy.

It’s important to highlight that perhaps some films just aren’t meant to be massive populace blockbusters, but an acquired taste that won’t appeal to the majority. Imagine if you did go to see Jack and Jill 2 and it was actually an adaptation of Tolstoy’s War and Peace. I doubt Sandler’s acting chops are quite up to the task of Russian literature.

If only to champion these two cruelly overlooked films, watch them if you haven’t because they’re great. Hopefully not too many more films will be resigned to the annals of overlooked classics in an attempt to broaden viewing figures. Then again, any executive making a choice that compromises monetary gain for integrity doesn’t sound likely at all.