I’m so relieved that the disaster footage was cut in, especially as it seemed to have global warming or some such environmental catastrophe as the cause.

And I’ll tell you why I think it’s a negative thing to mislead people like this; I don’t want to have to sit through a screening full of disgruntled inchworms huffing and puffing, taking the piss and ruining the experience for me.

Anyhoo, the discussion seems long over, but these are my thoughts.

I must also say that no other book has moved me as deeply as this one has. I don’t know if I will see the flim because I know that seeing it will forever change my experience of this story and I’m not sure I want that. Perhaps staying with the book alone is best.

How do you think an audience expecting constant action is going to react to that kind of cinematic pace?

Go back and pay attention to what exactly is in that news footage. Environmental disaster. Violence. Natural disaster. Those aren’t random cuts they’re doing. It’s specific footage.

IMO they’re trying to create a whole “End Times” feeling in that trailer, trying to shift focus onto WHAT happened to the world when McCarthy’s book goes to great lengths to disregard that very issue.

And, like the book, the film will likely ignore that issue for the most part. But the trailer is scenes of disaster spliced with footage of Charlize Theron saying “What’s happening?” But that scene isn’t even taking place by a TV!

By showing the disasters and having the whole “What’s happening?” thing going on, the filmmakers are setting up a mystery that is never going to be solved or largely addressed in the film. That could piss A LOT of people off.

The Road trailer does not misrepresent the movie. It presents no “preachy” messages, or misleading pyrotechnics. And audiences will not see something ENTIRELY different from what is shown in the trailer. Rather, the adrenalized tension of the greater portion of the trailer represents PARTS of McCarthy’s tale. Important parts of The Road are EXACTLY post-apocalyptic action thrills. For some viewers, these will be the most compelling parts in the film. For others, the calmer Man/Son moments will be more affecting (though the cannibal action will still be important.)

Many trailers contain footage that doesn’t appear in the movie. The “false” footage in this one is less than one-fifth of the trailer. The whole of the remaining “real” footage shows that this story takes AFTER that “one event” that changes the world.

No significant portion of people who see The Road are going to be crying “What?! The only reason I bought a ticket to this movie was to see a few minutes of disaster newsreel. I feel so deceived!”

The primary objective of ALL movie traliers is to attract an audience to generate a profit. It has NEVER been to tell the truth. Pointing this out is not “defending deception.” It’s just reminding you that there is a difference between what “should” be, and what “is.” If you truly oppose dishonesty coming out of Hollywood, you need to re-evaluate where your pressure is most needed/ most effective. Don’t continue down this particular road- it’s a mis-use of your valuable efforts.

I still want to see it.

It’s not unusual to have a movie trailer pitch something totally opposite of the film. Example: “Observe and Report”, Adventureland”.

I understand that stock footage were not used in those trailers. You get what I am saying.

That tactic did not help the movies at the box office.

You don’t think you’re underestimating the effect of a good/bad trailer?

B/C we can do a post about that very subject if need be. I will break down some point by points of where trailers have made a CLEAR difference in the perception and ultimately profits of a movie.

To be honest, that 5 seconds of stock footage does little other than set the setting. I don’t think it gives that feel of a ‘cheesy post apocalyptic thriller’ at all. Even if it did, the rest of the trailer didn’t dissuade you? That at least should show you what you’re in for. You’re blowing it way out of proportion. These 5 seconds won’t have the impact you’re saying it will.

‘The Road’s box office numbers won’t be dependent on this trailer. It’ll be dependent on the millions that read the book and the many weeks it was on the NYT bestseller list.

Remember a “tiny film” called Juno that won Oscars and made gangbusters money based on strong word of mouth?

How about a “tiny film” called Napolean Dynamite?

Could you imagine if Juno was marketed as a rom-com between two awkward teenagers and the whole pregnancy thing was ignored b/c it would “turn people away?”

Oh wait, that did happen… which is why it took many months and a lot of word of mouth for the film to be recognized for its quality.

And my whole point, in case your not a careful reader, was that THE FILM IS GOOD.

So again, why dumb down and/or misrepresent a GOOD FILM??? So people who don’t like quality cinema will come see it? Do you also invite crazy street vagrants to dine in nice restaurants with you?