Dawn
of Justice: Can't Hollywood think of anything more novel?
The Batman-Superman
Trailer and the Death of Cinematic Taste (Diario de Noticias, Portugal)
"Of the
reactions to the Batman vs. Superman trailer
release in the U.S. film press, I read a curious column by Graeme McMillan of the
Hollywood Reporter. … At a certain
point, McMillan acknowledges that trailers are no more than 'tricks' to convince
viewers that the film comports with their preconceived notions. McMillan
defines the ultimate test of a trailer with puerile phrase: To convince the audience that, 'hey, this
movie is exactly what you want to see!' … If movies are thought of only in
terms of what 'you want to see,' it ultimately suggests that the cinephile taste is in its death throes."
Readers may have seen the news about the premature release
of the trailer for Batman
vs. Superman: Dawn of Justice with Ben Affleck and Henry Cavill. This is one more episode of audiovisual piracy on Web
that obviously shook up plans for the release of the film by Warner Bros. Studio.
Beyond the many months leading up to the premiere (March, 2016), the material
released was a poor mobile phone recording and was of extremely low technical
quality. In an effort to minimize the negative effects, Warner Bros. decided to unveil
the official trailer.
Of the reactions the episode unleashed in the U.S. film
press, I read a curious column by Graeme
McMillan of the Hollywood Reporter
reflecting on the consequences for the audience of superhero fans. The writer
highlights, in particular, the fact that the choice of Ben Affleck for the
character of Batman remains a controversial issue among this "support base,"
which can be more-or less-identified by the social network din …
I have no doubt that McMillan is touching on matters that bedevil
the accounting departments of every studio. In any case, the analysis is a
symptomatic accomplice worthy of reflection: the dynamics of the industry have
come to depend on a typical imaginary fan club. At a certain point, the article
acknowledges that trailers are no more than "tricks" to convince viewers
that the film comports with their preconceived notions. McMillan defines the ultimate
test of a trailer with puerile phrase: To
convince the audience that, "hey, this movie is exactly what you want to
see!"
How does one react to this? This is not to suggest that the
industrial and commercial life of film can ignore having a genuine economic and
financial strategy. In fact, the question that really matters has to do with
the importance of said strategy: can you keep a film and television market
alive (in the U.S., Portugal, or any other country) solely with repetitious productions
involving astronomical investments and that therefore are likely to generate systemic
disruptions on every front of the market?
Posted By Worldmeets.US
What Superman Tells us About America ... and About Ourselves (El Mundo, Spain)
If movies are thought of only in terms of what "you
want to see," it ultimately suggests that the cinephile
taste is in its death throes. We know the current stupidity that says a defense
of the cinephile taste is simply to ennoble those of
the "critic." Shouldn't one recall that critics are not a herd, and
that, to the contrary, they operate in a space with many nitpicky disagreements
and irresolvable divisions?
It turns out that cinephilia is
built, not on the promotion of films, but on a constant openness to cinema's plurality
(historical, thematic, aesthetic, etc). The cinephile doesn't look to a trailer
for what they "want to see," and feels gratified to find a trail that
convinces them: "Hey, this movie offers you what you have never seen!"
