I admit, I did watch the bootleg version of this over the weekend, but I didn't want to comment too much until I had seen the official version. Well, I've seen the official version. It still looks like a half-assed fan-edit preview. The two telltale signs of a fake preview have always been cheesy onscreen text and the use of copious footage from previous films of a given series. This has both, insultingly reminding us that 'every hero has a journey' (thanks Campbell) and every journey has an end (also knew that, but thanks). The first 45 seconds is nothing but footage from Batman Begins, with a dash of The Dark Knight thrown with Liam Neeson's narration tossed in. The only new footage we get is Gary Oldman lying in a hospital bed whining about how Batman left us, evil rose, and now Batman must Return. We do get a brief shot of someone climbing up a well (the Bat Cave hole?), a worn-down Batman facing down a mostly offscreen Bane, and a single close-up of Tomas Hardy as the villain of the day, Bane. Are we thrilled yet?
Yes, it's a teaser, but it's a laughably lazy one that substitutes suspense and tension for cliches and platitudes. Does that mean the movie is going to be terrible? Of course not, it just means that Warner Bros. should have waited until they had something worth teasing. Last time around, they had The Joker, so all they had to do was give us a couple seconds of Heath Ledger talking in character to get us excited ("Starting tonight... people will die! I'm a man of my word."). This time, they have a villain no one cares about (oooh... Bane!) and a quasi-villain (Catwoman) who's brand has been damaged by the 2004 Halle Berry movie. Again, the movie may be a solid Batman story that suitably closes the book on the Nolan franchise, but this is a terrible and counterproductive piece of marketing. Does this tease make you more or less excited to see the film? And furthermore, if this was the teaser Warner was prepping, why the hell didn't they attach this thing to Green Lantern? I'm pretty sure Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows part II didn't need the help, but Green Lantern sure could have used an exclusive Dark Knight Rises teaser playing in front of it over opening weekend. Here's hoping the first real trailer (likely premiering in front of Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows on December 16th) brings the goods to the table. Anyway, the film itself opens on July 20th, 2012. I'm absolutely sure it will be better than this teaser, but that's not the point of a teaser, is it?
Scott Mendelson
17 comments:
Come on, man. If the other option was a 30-second clip with just an animated logo, some voiceover, and text, I'll take a minute, 47 of "sloppy" and "lazy" that includes some actual clips from the new movie any day. They've only been shooting for a month or so, so it's not like they have an abundance of new footage to include here. It does the job well enough.
I completely agree. The teasers for Batman Begins and TDK were two absolutely amazing pieces of art so I was hoping this would match it. It definitely fell very short... and like you, the first thing I thought was "fan-made" when they were showing clips from the previous movies.
I think your being a bit harsh to this trailer. Yes it looks lazy with footage of the previous 2 movies and it wasn't as thrilling as the TDK teaser but it was adequate. For a general audience this works completely fine because they don't analyze the way movie fans do. WB by playing this in front of the TDK made the general audience aware the final Batman film is out next summer. Also if this was exclusively attached to Green Lantern I seriously doubt it would boost attendance (making it a must see on the big screen) unless they showed something great, which this trailer doesn't have.
An even lazier trailer I can think of is the one released for HP6 when it was basically 15 seconds with just title and Dumbledore saying one line. Sure WB released something a month later with the "omen"-like trailer but what was the point of releasing the 15 second one? It was over before people even realized what was on the screen.
I agree that it wasn't the best trailer in the world, but calling Bane "a villain no one cares about" reveals that you know approximately nothing about Batman mythology. Bane is a big part of Batman lore, and the real Bane (not the pathetic knockoff from "Batman and Robin") is a perfect fit for Nolan's Batman series.
The teaser looks as cobbled together as Bats' costume in the last shot. Not sure how throwing a brief shot of Bane (unless Hardy is recognisable) into the mix is doing anything, and you can barely hear what Gordon's rasping about. Terrible.
Bane was created as a Mary Sue, automatically introduced as 'the bestest villain EVER' because DC wanted their Death of Superman event too (wow... he's so smart he can deduce Batman's identity just by staring at Bruce Wayne!). That was 18 years ago. With the exception of a few interesting stories involving him trying to find his father (The Snake King if I recall) and a brief time where he was being treated (therapeutically) by Leslie Thompkins, Bane has generally been a bore. Whether or not Nolan uses him in an interesting way is another question entirely. Point being, Bane has never been a very compelling character and general audiences either don't know who Bane is or remember him from Batman & Robin. Fine for the movie perhaps, but a problem for the marketing campaign, of which this teaser is a part of.
I don't think WB really cared too much about drawing audience appeal with this one. Because I'm sure their biggest sell for TDKR, was TDK.
Considering that Ra's al Ghul was similarly unknown to the average moviegoer (and then considering how far the franchise has come in terms of popularity since the first movie), I don't think it's going to matter that Bane isn't well known. And all Nolan really needs is that first storyline - every comic book villain has his/her fair share of mediocre storylines. I'd also like to point out that if you weren't already familiar with the comics, the initial teaser for Batman Begins wouldn't even appear to feature a real villain. So your complaints about Bane and this trailer mean just about nothing in terms of what audiences will or won't go for.
But Batman Begins didn't set the box office world on fire, partially because it didn't have a marquee villain at its core. It only got a sequel because it was leggy and it sold like gangbusters on DVD. We can argue that box office for The Dark Knight Rises is irrelevant A) as long as its a good movie who cares? and B) it's the final film in this Batman cycle so there is nothing to lose. From a marketing standpoint, the film is so far sounding and feeling more like Batman Begins and less like The Dark Knight. For those who think that the film is going to open as high or better than The Dark Knight... well, maybe. But a HUGE part of The Dark Knight's opening weekend (if not longterm box office) was a marketing campaign centered around a popular and somewhat mysterious actor (Ledger) playing the defining literary villain of the last 100 years. Batman vs. The Joker > Batman vs. Bane, no matter how much free press the film gets thanks to Hathaway's catsuit.
I agree that the trailer is weak and un-enticing. The only reason I saw "I Am Legend" was to see the opening scene from "The Dark Knight", and I would do that again if it was for another movie I wasn't interested in seeing. I personally don't have high hopes for this movie. Bane is one of the least iconic Batman villains and I can't imagine Hathway bringing much allure or intelligence to Catwoman.
You're also underestimating the boost the film got from Ledger's death, tacky as it sounds. But whatever. The movie will most likely be good, and I don't disagree in principle that the trailer isn't the best. But it could be worse, and it actually does a pretty good job of appealing to the fond memories people have of the first in Nolan's series and a sense of closing up shop. Plus it's still a year away, so I forgive them their lack of newer footage to draw from. Thanks for the replies!
Trailer is as trailer does. The thing that frightens me is this absolutely embarrassing scene of Commissioner Gordon in the hospital bed that is apparently a part of the film. Feels like a "fanboy" with no knowledge of how to make a script wrote it. Worries me that the Nolan Batman franchise may be out of gas and running on fumes...but we'll see. I'm not gonna judge this thing til the movie comes out.
Look at Stardust...wonderful movie...horrid trailers.
I didn't get a trailer for the Dark Knight Rises in front of Harry Potter!
Nor did I, but then I was at a press screening. Worse, I didn't get the end-credits cookie for Captain America when I saw it last week (if you don't know what's at the end, I'm not spoiling... just stick around).
Oh no, Ledger's death had a lot to do with it in the end. Even if it was just that extra 10% who otherwise wouldn't have seen a Batman film without the mystique involving his demise, with that 10% spreading positive word of mouth to their friends and so forth. BUT, Batman vs the Joker is a huge selling point. Plus, two of the three trailers were released before Ledger died, so it wouldn't be completely fair to use that when discussing the earliest marketing for The Dark Knight.
You don't know the context of that hospital scene. Yea its not a typical thing you would put in a trailer but it was fine.
I definitely wasn't at a press screening! I'm in Canada tho so that may be why. I saw Harry Potter again an d Thursday and no Dark Knight Rises trailer either.
And yes I knew about the stinger for Captain America.
Post a Comment