• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Spider-Man Homecoming - Official Trailer #2

Status
Not open for further replies.
F

Flynn77

Member
Bobby Roberts said:
I'll probably avoid em, but if I trip over one or two, it won't be that big a deal.

I missed almost everything about Rogue One, actually.
Click to expand...
I'll indulge you on your crusade ;) You don't seem to have a particularly well functioning memory. Are you seriously suggesting people have to heavily research a trailer in order to remember scenes when they are watching the movie? It's one of the reasons I've backed out of a lot of trailers. It's simply more enjoyable if the set pieces in these type of films are a surprise. Otherwise, if you haven't seen a bloody great ferry show up by the third reel, you know what the ending of the film is going to be. It's as easy as buying the overpriced popcorn :)
 
B

BLACKLAC

Member
Bobby Roberts said:
Oh hey, just occurred to me:

I thought the trailer was okay. I'm not much for Tony being Spidey's main inspiration in this version of Spidey, but overheated superhot superhate of Tony aside, it makes sense for this version of Spidey (even though he really should be able to make a suit better than Starks but HEY WHATEVER) and I'm cool with seeing how it plays out.

I think whatever we're seeing in this trailer that's focused largely on the angst & disappointments of young Peter Parker is okay, but I feel like the stuff that isn't in the trailer, the stuff that deals with the high-school coming of age shit: THAT'S what's gonna make or break this film. If they really did try to squeeze a John Hughes comedy from 1985 into this 2017 superhero flick and managed to nail that, I'll be happy.

We're not really seeing any hints of that, just the basic Superhero beats. But those beats seem to be done decently, at least.
Click to expand...

Right there with you. The effects, action, and colors look like a winner so I have no concern with that, creative connections to the MCU... also great. I was there for Spidey and friends in school and I'm glad they are keeping that under wraps, not even worried about the villain(s); looks like that will be solid too.

Video media black-out for Homecoming now engaged. *Patiently awaits Ragnarok goodness.*
 
B

Bobby Roberts

Banned
Flynn77 said:
Are you seriously suggesting people have to heavily research a trailer in order to remember scenes when they are watching the movie?
Click to expand...

No, but I do find that the type of recall being discussed in this thread is the kind of recall I think is made possible by watching/rewatching a lot of the marketing as opposed to watching a trailer once or twice months before the movie drops.

I'm not saying they have to do that. But I'm saying a lot of them do. Voluntarily.
 
B

Bobby Roberts

Banned
Flynn77 said:
Are you seriously suggesting people have to heavily research a trailer in order to remember scenes when they are watching the movie?
Click to expand...

No, but I do find that the type of recall being discussed in this thread is the kind of recall I think is made possible by watching/rewatching a lot of the marketing as opposed to watching a trailer once or twice months before the movie drops.

I'm not saying they have to do that. But I'm saying a lot of them do. Voluntarily. Whereas you:

It's one of the reasons I've backed out of a lot of trailers.
Click to expand...

Which is cool! You already know you're going to watch the movie, and for you, you value the element of surprise enough that you don't actually make yourself watch commercials for things you're already sold on, much less watch them multiple times, much less look at gifs of moments, much less complain about how much you were spoiled by a basic recap of basic plot points tucked into two minutes of out-of-context imagery and sound without having any real frame of reference as to what the story really is outside of the very basic and easy to guess typical superhero storytelling arc as gleaned from a couple decades worth of consuming that fare.

I have a pretty decent memory. Not the greatest. I'm old now.

For example: I think I saw the Logan trailer something like - 3 times? Something like that. When I sat down to watch the movie, about the only thing I really remembered as the movie was playing was

"She's gonna cut someone's head off here"
and
"At some point they're in a car, he's bloody, and she's wearing sunglasses."

That was it. And in both cases, even if I hadn't seen the trailer, those moments would have seemed ridiculously obvious to me in the context of the film as it was playing. The experience I'd have been trying to preserve wouldn't have been preserved! The film itself was going to telegraph it to me whether I'd seen a commercial or not!

And I think in a lot of cases (the Wonder Woman on the jet example from earlier in the thread) the large majority of "AWW THEY SPOILED IT" moments people love to gnash over are moments that in the course of the film's run itself, were moments very heavily telegraphed. Not surprises. Things you will know are coming if you're paying attention to the movie as it plays even slightly.

The hypothetical "pure" experience never actually gets experienced. So you have people complaining about a thing they never owned being robbed from them by the marketing for a film that was never going to give them the experience they were pre-emptively protecting.

edit: Your avatar makes me grin. Goofy '80s Jeff Bridges is the best.
 
F

Flynn77

Member
Bobby Roberts said:
No, but I do find that the type of recall being discussed in this thread is the kind of recall I think is made possible by watching/rewatching a lot of the marketing as opposed to watching a trailer once or twice months before the movie drops.

I'm not saying they have to do that. But I'm saying a lot of them do. Voluntarily. Whereas you:



Which is cool! You already know you're going to watch the movie, and for you, you value the element of surprise enough that you don't actually make yourself watch commercials for things you're already sold on, much less watch them multiple times, much less look at gifs of moments, much less complain about how much you were spoiled by a basic recap of basic plot points tucked into two minutes of out-of-context imagery and sound without having any real frame of reference as to what the story really is.

I have a pretty decent memory. Not the greatest. I'm old now.

For example: I think I saw the Logan trailer something like - 3 times? Something like that. When I sat down to watch the movie, about the only thing I really remembered as the movie was playing was

"She's gonna cut someone's head off here"
and
"At some point they're in a car, he's bloody, and she's wearing sunglasses."

That was it. And in both cases, even if I hadn't seen the trailer, those moments would have seemed ridiculously obvious to me in the context of the film as it was playing. The experience I'd have been trying to preserve wouldn't have been preserved! The film itself was going to telegraph it to me whether I'd seen a commercial or not!

And I think in a lot of cases (the Wonder Woman on the jet example from earlier in the thread) the large majority of "AWW THEY SPOILED IT" moments people love to gnash over are moments that in the course of the film's run itself, were moments very heavily telegraphed. Not surprises. Things you will know are coming if you're paying attention to the movie as it plays even slightly.

The hypothetical "pure" experience never actually gets experienced. So you have people complaining about a thing they never owned being robbed from them by the marketing for a film that was never going to give them the experience they were pre-emptively protecting.

edit: Your avatar makes me grin. Goofy '80s Jeff Bridges is the best.
Click to expand...

Well i don't get the whole, 'this line or non specific thing would spoil the movie', but, i really think recent trailer style has ruined a lot of the cinema experience. As to your example of Logan. It's cool you didn't remember stuff because that was better for you. But those trailers specifficly weren't released until a few weeks before the movie.(the only one i watched was the Jonny Cash one, but again, that was by my design) The style now is to really ram home a lot of the movie in the vein hope to draw people in. There is no longer any mystery, and i really hope in marketing terms it comes back. The other more interesting point we are not discussing is when trailers intentionally construct a false narrative. I'm speaking to your comments on what might not be the Spiderman plot. But really, what good does this kind of advertising do apart from to confuse and muddy the opening night experience? Also, apologies for replying before your edit ;)
 
B

Bobby Roberts

Banned
Flynn77 said:
The style now is to really ram home a lot of the movie in the vein hope to draw people in. There is no longer any mystery, and i really hope in marketing terms it comes back.
Click to expand...

This was the style when our parents and grandparents were alive, too.

You remember your parents ever giving a shit about spoilers the way we do?

It's a weird generational thing, definitely.

That said, there's still plenty of "mystery" about Spider-Man: Homecoming. Almost anything/everything involving an interpersonal relationship is completely buried in both trailers. There's a girl Peter likes? And maybe another girl? He's got a friend, we know that. And he looks up to Tony. We know Vulture is disgruntled. We don't know how he really interacts with his crew. What really pisses him off. Any of that shit.

Almost anything else that has to do with how these characters work as characters is hidden. Now, if you're looking at a movie as not much more than a collection of setpieces strung together, then yeah, knowing what 15 seconds of a setpiece is going to look like in a 2 minute commercial might feel a little annoying, I get that. But if you're looking at the movie from the level of character development, character interaction - you still don't really know shit but the broadest of strokes.

The how of what gets done is completely unknown to you. And the how is probably the most important part. Not the what.
 
F

Fandangox

Member
Bobby Roberts said:
This was the style when our parents and grandparents were alive, too.

You remember your parents ever giving a shit about spoilers the way we do?

It's a weird generational thing, definitely.
Click to expand...

I wonder if Websites like TV tropes made this a thing? Some people seem to pay more attention to tropes or plot outlines themselves existing without thinking much about the execution.
 
Glass Rebel

Glass Rebel

Member
Fandangox said:
I wonder if Websites like TV tropes made this a thing? Some people seem to pay more attention to tropes or plot outlines themselves existing without thinking much about the execution.
Click to expand...

wiki's have either contributed to this or are a response to it

kind of a chicken egg situation
 
F

Figboy79

Aftershock LA
Bobby Roberts said:
What? No, I understand him perfectly. See the bolded? That's what I mean when I say people are watching commercials SPECIFICALLY for the purpose of trying to Solve for X. You're trying to beat the movie before you see it. That's not the trailer's fault, because obsessively rewatching the same movie commercial upwards of 5-6 times solely for the sake of trying to figure out the plot isn't the commercial's intended use.

That you think this is what you're supposed to do is what I'm trying to point out as a problem.

Like I said, the option where you start to think of movies less as games you need to speedrun and more like stories you experience for the sake of them never seems to be even partially considered by people who love to watch trailers for movies they already know they're going to see if only so they can complain that it "spoiled" everything for them.

The entire act is counterproductive. If you're that concerned with preserving the experience, why are you watching trailers? If you're watching the trailers, why are you using them as incomplete wiki entries?

95% of all the "faults" with a commercial along those lines aren't the commercial's fault. They're yours.
Click to expand...

For me, it's just that I watched the trailer one time, and didn't expect it to beat for beat run down the entire plot of the movie, the character beats and conflict, the villain's arc, and a pivotal set piece. It's not about trying to "beat the movie." It's about having at least some kind of freshness when going into a movie potentially blind. I don't watch many trailers. I also don't over-analyze trailers I've seen. Seeing out of context clips is one thing. Seeing clips that clearly are in context is another.

For example seeing:

Shot of Tony looking irritated: "Give me the suit back, you don't deserve to wear it!" paraphrasing, of course.

and seeing:

Shot of Spider-Man failing to save the boat and Tony swooping in: "Give me the suit back, you don't deserve to wear it!" followed by a montage of clips of Spider-Man in his home made suit "proving himself.

is quite another. This Homecoming trailer was a case of the latter. The former at least forms in your head questions like, "Whoa, why is Tony so pissed at Peter, and why is he taking the suit back," as opposed to, "Oh, Peter tried to take on something bigger than he was prepared for, so Tony is "grounding" him and taking his toys away, and Peter has to learn to be a kickass Spider-Man without the suit, and will have no doubt learned this lesson by the end of the movie." I know the journey and just sitting back and letting a story unfold is part of the fun, but I have to say it's a lot more fun when you can go into it with minimal information about the twists, turns, and flow. I can't even imagine what a trailer to something like The Usual Suspects would be like today.

This isn't our first rodeo, so most of us know how these superhero stories go, but it would still have been nice to sit in the theater July and only have a fraction of information to go off of. No, it's not the trailer's fault for existing, and it's on me for watching said trailer, but when I booted it up, I didn't think it'd show us the major beats of the film.

I look at something like Rogue One, and the only reason why its trailers didn't reveal everything was because they reshot so much of the movie that the previous trailers were incredibly inaccurate. I actually kind of liked it. I'm not saying trailers should be made up of cutting room floor footage, but I was impressed at how much I thought I knew about Rogue One based off of those trailers, to what I actually saw in theaters.

Movie trailers are notorious for over-selling their product. I just wish they'd dial it down a notch. As a Spider-Man fan, of course I'm going to be seeing this thing, that's not the point. People can still express displeasure at what they feel was the movie over-selling itself by jam-packing the trailer with information, context, and even resolution, implied, if not explicitly shown.
 
D

DustyVonEric

Member
Ha! I started watching this trailer and noped out real quick.

Instead of just setting a mood, it looked like too many good scenes were going to be shown and I want to save some for the actual movie.

This is gonna be great.
 
F

faceless007

Member
Bobby Roberts said:
That they're derivative is part of the point though. I'm not denying that they're derivative. I'm suggesting that being derivative is pretty much a given at this point, so maybe choosing (and it's always a choice) to consume marketing as some sort of mystery to unravel before watching the movie is even more a counterproductive and presumptive waste than it already is, because the nature of these things means any pursuit of surprise (again, as if surprise is the single sole benefit of storytelling) is probably going to be a disappointing, if not fruitless one. And if you're looking to preserve surprise as the key aspect of your hypothetical future experience, why are you seeking out trailers for the movie you already know you're gonna watch in the first place?
Click to expand...
I don't know what you hope to accomplish here by simply rewording your earlier overwrought argument about unnamed people employing underdeveloped thought processes regarding the overconsumption of over-designed commercial products, but you seemingly failed to notice that precisely none of it applies to me. I 1) do not consume marketing that way (please, don't insult me by assuming I give any intellectual credibility to marketing of any kind), 2) am not a fan of this or any other comic book property, 3) do not feel disappointment at the trailer since it looked and and progressed in exactly the way I expect a trailer for this kind of movie to, 4) did not seek out the trailer at all (as I said it came on during a commercial break on live TV of the show I happened to be watching, seriously did you even read the post you quoted) and 5) almost certainly do not have any hypothetical future experience with this film at all so there's nothing for it to ruin.

Now you can either try to reconcile the fact that all of your assumptions about whatever weird nerd habits you're railing against don't actually apply to the person you're reading at this moment and yet I still figured out as much about the trailer as I did...or continue to do this obnoxious thing where you presume to know the inner thought processes and motivations guiding certain behaviors that you're criticizing even while the very people you're addressing outright tell you that you have it wrong and don't actually know what's going through their heads and so you're railing at phantoms at worst or at best just have some misdirected criticism and assume everyone on the Internet is one big hive-mind. It's your choice, but even if you really did have such impressive powers of divination that you could tell the inner processes motivating the reactions of people writing hot takes on a message board thread (spoiler: I don't think you do), do you really think any sort of constructive discussion can come from repeatedly telling people what they actually think and why they think it? Moreover, do you think I as a poster on this forum have any reason to continue to engage with you if you continue to? Do you think anybody does?

Again, most people can and do understand this already. Before they ever click play on the second trailer for the 6th Spider-Man movie that is also the 16th movie in the continuous Marvel Cinematic Universe.
Click to expand...
Well, I didn't really expect any different, but if that's the case, why is anybody else reacting to the trailer in the way that you disagree so strongly with? The very fact that people are expressing the reaction they are proves that, to them at least, it was surprising to them, which evidently means they didn't understand or expect the trailer to be that easy to write a complete plot outline from. Now I'm not making an argument as to whether that emotional reaction is justified either way (I think arguing as strongly as you are about other people's emotions is a little weird, to be honest), but on a purely empirical basis, your argument seems to simultaneously be that everyone knows trailers are going to be spoiler-ific so everybody expects to be spoiled by them, and also that only super-obsessive nerds who repeatedly watch the trailer and scan it for clues would be able to glean any spoilers for it. Which is it?

But you're also, if I'm reading you correctly, seeing the commercial as first and foremost a puzzle to be solved?
Click to expand...
No you quite plainly aren't reading me correctly given that I explicitly said "Marketing products aren't inscrutable puzzle boxes. They're in fact designed to be accessible and digestible." Come on dude. Should I take this reply as anything other than a sign that you were so eager to prove that you knew exactly what I was thinking that you latched onto a few keywords that you think are peripheral to the conclusion you've already come to and are looking for ways to backfill evidence for just so you can repeat the exact same thing in the next post?

I didn't say it was hard (although people acting like sussing out very basic plot arcs for blockbuster films is a remarkable achievement does frequently happen),
Click to expand...
You said -- or at least chose to specifically focus on -- that it took certain unspecified viewers multiple viewings and a particularly devoted mindset geared toward that purpose in order to suss out what I did. I employed neither of those things and I came to the conclusions that I did in real-time as I watched it. If you're now saying that those elements aren't needed at all -- and that's completely correct, I would expect anyone with a basic sense of object permanence and linear editing to be able to suss out what I did, it's not like we're dealing with Eisenstein montage here -- then great, we're on the same page, except then I don't know why you've repeatedly in this thread referenced those hypothetical over-obsessed fans in the first place since all that did was open the door for someone like me to come in and present a trivial counter-example.
 
D

Dram

Member
It looks like Donald Glover is part of Vulture's crew, so I wonder if he's playing the Prowler?
txwBqg9.gif
 
N

neoanarch

Member
First viewing​ I wasn't feeling it. After seeing it again and again it's actually a decent trailer. The Ned stuff looks aces.
 
A

AquaWateria

Member
If this movie is half as good as Tobey Spiderman 2 I'll be satisfied because man was Spiderman 2 a GOAT comic book movie.

I've been disappointed by the recent spiderman movies so please let this be good.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Nic Cage In Talks For “Spider-Man Noir”
17
1K
Valedix replied
Spider-Man 4: Thomas Haden Church Believes Sam Raimi and Tobey Maguire Will Return
Rumor
38
2K
bitbydeath replied
Spider-Man 2 - 2h Trial - now on PS+ Premium
News
11
578
nial replied
Spider-Man 2 PC Dev Build Leaked, First Screenshots
36
5K
MikeM replied
Marvel’s Spider-Man 2 officially requires a minimum of 98 GB
Rumor Hardware Platform 2
60
4K
Beechos replied
Top Bottom