Wholeviews
By Aaron 6/20/2007

After reading an interesting article on a similar topic, I had the sudden realization that previews ruin good movies. Instead of ranting about how the amazing Spiderman 3 trailer hurt what could have been a great movie, I want to talk about previews for movies that haven’t come out yet, for movies that were ruined for me recently when I went to see Knocked Up. That way, I can potentially finish ruining the movie in case the preview didn’t do the job.

[SPOILERS FOLLOW]

The first movie I want to talk about is Evan Almighty, the sequel to Bruce Almighty. Frankly, the trailer shows you the entire movie. God reveals himself and informs Evan he has an important role to play in saving humanity. Evan quickly shows signs of bear growing (a la Noah) and begins to build an ark (a la Noah) because animals, two by two begin approaching him (a la Noah). For some reason he can talk to these animals (a la Dr. Doolittle). Pretty much, this movie looks like it sucks – taking the sharp, sarcastic, slap-stick humor of classic Jim Carrey movies and churning out weak family fare trying too hard to be funny and trying too hard to recycle a story we all know. The only possible point for this movie to do something new is shattered when the trailer shows the flood actually happening, erasing any doubt that Evan WAS going slightly crazy and it was all for naught.

The second movie I want to talk about is The Heartbreak Kid, Ben Stiller’s new Along Came Polly movie. As usual, it’s very original and uses lots of revolutionary romantic comedy devices. The trailer gives it all away though, showing Ben marry a dream girl who turns into a nightmare and ditching her for the “normal girl” who just happens to have a thing for him. But she probably finds out he’s married and their relationship and the genuineness of their feelings is questioned! YAWNS.

I guess what I’m trying to say is that Hollywood makes things worse when they recycle movie plotlines and then give them all away (including possible deviations from the path) in the preview. It’s almost as if, after paying the inflated $10 to see a movie, you get to see three movie summaries chock full of ALL the funny parts (think Talladega Nights) all the possible twists (think Rumor Has It) and everything else you would have to pay if the rest of the movie was worth $10. But they usually aren’t, and the preview usually shows you all you want to see.

Could “Avatar” Win Best Picture?

By Brett Hogan

 

Last week, the trailer for James Cameron’s sci-fi experiment “Avatar” debuted. While initially unimpressed with the teaser, I began to wonder: Could this film win best picture? 

 

Buzz has been generating for this movie for years. Years. The technology to make this movie didn’t exist when Cameron conceived it, so he invented it. When is the last time you heard of a director spearheading the invention of anything? The casting started in 2005. Most movies these days, even epics, are done in half that time. I could go on. 

 

The most important thing to take away from all of this is that people are saying this will be the future of movies. Now, I don’t agree with the idea that CGI will become more prevalent than it already is. But I do believe that this will set the bar miles higher for sci-fi. I mean, that is what Titanic did. And that won some awards if memory serves.

 

I’ll bet you’re asking yourself, how can you even suggest that a film like this will win Best Picture when the initial trailer was nothing better than visual stimulation? Well, there are a couple of reasons. First, the Academy has expanded Best Picture to ten films. This doesn’t guarantee anything other than improved chances for most films on the cusp.

 

Second, after last year’s Oscars debacle, which saw the best film of the year, “The Dark Knight,” not only get shafted in awards but nominations as well, the Academy is pulling out all the stops to appease those with the loudest voices in the film industry, the fanboys. Now, the Academy probably didn’t lose anything because of that other than some viewers of the award show. Perhaps if people are again outraged with the winners or nominees, the heads of the Academy would lose their jobs. So this is all about the Academy protecting itself, which is not so outrageous.  

 

 

Third, there is an economic motive here. I’ve heard this film will cost $190 million, not counting the R&D costs associated with Cameron’s inventions or the cost of getting 3-D cameras into every theater in the country. The Academy will do everything in its power to get people into the seats and make this the next “Titanic” or “The Dark Knight.” But the Academy doesn’t have much power, besides nominating and awarding, so they will slap the “Nominated for Best Picture” moniker onto every commercial and print ad to get the people who didn’t believe the critics to relent and see this movie.

 

Of course, all of this is pure conjecture, and no revolutionary film (Terminator 2, Jurassic Park, etc.) has ever won the Best Picture category because it changed the game. Except maybe Titanic. But still, could this movie actually win? My answer is no but a nomination is certain and who knows what could happen from there. We’ll know more come February 2010.