Feature trailer just released

mainstreetprod said:
Well, of the two trailers, I'd say the first one was more effective. We released it, got 1500 hits overnight, a major DVD / streaming distributor contacted us, we sent a screener and next day he made an offer. Following day we contacted a theatrical distributor, they immediately responded after seeing only the trailer and we are in talks as we speak. So at least with distributors, the trailer is doing it's job, fast cuts and all.
Click to expand...


This is advice I see over and over again in writing blogs, and I think it applies here as well. Your audience is almost always right when they say something is wrong, but almost always wrong about why it's not working. I had no idea it was a romance. I thought it was about a child preacher or something.
 
I'm resurrecting this thread because we now have a new trailer for theatrical purposes (Providence, a silent feature shot on the FS7, releases Feb. 12 in AMC theaters). Whether or not you were part of the original conversation, I'd like to get your feedback on the new trailer (keeping in mind this is a "chick flick").

Check out the original trailer here:

And the new trailer here:



As you can see from the previous conversation, many posters thought the original trailer moved too fast and gave little idea what the movie was about. Is the new one an improvement?
 
Last edited:
Just discovered this thread. I watched both trailers.

I agree with most of the comments. The first trailer was really bad IMO.

The second was really good IMO.

Great job.
 
I didn't like the first trailer one bit but being a silent film puts you in a really, really tough position. I liked the second trailer, though now it gives far too much away, I feel like I'm seeing most the movie. Also the voiceover is excellent but then when I walk into the theatre and realise I'm seeing a silent movie I might walk back out. I have no idea about marketing for a silent movie but maybe one of the quotes that mentioned something about it being silent (only watched once so sorry if there was)?
 
tmnt said:
I didn't like the first trailer one bit but being a silent film puts you in a really, really tough position. I liked the second trailer, though now it gives far too much away, I feel like I'm seeing most the movie. Also the voiceover is excellent but then when I walk into the theatre and realise I'm seeing a silent movie I might walk back out. I have no idea about marketing for a silent movie but maybe one of the quotes that mentioned something about it being silent (only watched once so sorry if there was)?
Click to expand...


Understand the concerns about it being silent, it's a tough nut to crack because the term brings up the idea that it's 15fps, jerky with subtitles and overacting. It's more of an extended length music video. The final screen does give you a clue it's silent due to the tagline "Love Needs No Words". Not concerned about anyone leaving the theater if they will give the film 15 minutes, in test screenings the story grabbed the audience and held them. Review here: http://onefilmfan.com/indie-film-review-providence

As far as giving away the whole movie, we wrestled with that one when putting together the trailer. The last two shots are the only ones that do that, showing the couple finally getting together. We ended up deciding that everyone knows the couple is going to eventually get together so we aren't really giving anything away.
 
Last edited:
The new trailer is much better. I'm just have a difficult time wrapping my head around a silent film in 2015. I feel like it's odd to watch a film where there's dialogue going on but we don't hear it. Maybe after watching some I will feel differently though. So why did you decide to make it a silent film?
 
maranfilms said:
The new trailer is much better. I'm just have a difficult time wrapping my head around a silent film in 2015. I feel like it's odd to watch a film where there's dialogue going on but we don't hear it. Maybe after watching some I will feel differently though. So why did you decide to make it a silent film?
Click to expand...



You've heard the old saying "show, don't tell". We decided to test that theory (to the extreme) , starting with eliminating dialogue from the script itself. This film is our second silent feature, the first one was a selection in 40 festivals (smaller ones of course) and winner of 10 accolades, so being silent served the purpose of making us stand out. 95% of the time there is no talking going on, so seeing dialog without hearing it is generally not an issue. When there is talking, the viewer fills in the blanks with what he thinks the character is saying, based on the situation. It does require a certain level of acting ability because it's all in the expressions of the characters.

Most of the reviewers of both films liked the concept once they saw it. A few just don't get it, but that could be caused by distraction. A silent film demands full attention or you miss important plot points.
 
That's awesome you've had such good success with the silent film genre. It would be really cool to do such a film with deaf actors who use sign language with subtitles, I think it would appeal to a lot of people who have lost or never had that sense. Either way, congrats on the distribution and theatrical release. It's cool to see a forum member be rewarded for their hard work and perseverance:-)
 
maranfilms said:
That's awesome you've had such good success with the silent film genre. It would be really cool to do such a film with deaf actors who use sign language with subtitles, I think it would appeal to a lot of people who have lost or never had that sense. Either way, congrats on the distribution and theatrical release. It's cool to see a forum member be rewarded for their hard work and perseverance:-)
Click to expand...


Thanks for the kind words. We've actually contacted deaf organizations about the films, thinking this would be a perfect audience, but so far no response.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top