Lonesome Jim, The Trailer!!

I think that distributor is tried to sell the film as a Hollywood-style romantic comedy because Lonesome Jim isn't an easy film to pidgeonhole. Not to mention also trying to cash in on Liv Tyler's appeal. I'd agree about LJ being character driven and the film takes a risk because Jim isn't all that likeable of a character. If the film does see a U.S. theatrical release, I sure hope they cut a better trailer. If someone goes to see the film based on that trailer--they're not getting a light romantic comedy--that's for sure. Plus, I think that trailer would discourage the film's true potentlal audience from seeing a quirky little nuanced film with a complex central character.
 
I could have thought of a few better words than *Blair Witch* or *Open Water*......but hey......whatever works!! Open water did quite well at the box office. Domestic take was 30.5 million. Not sure what the international was. Blair Witch's Domestic take was like 140 million. Not too bad for either film considering their budget's and the medium used to capture the story.

~reservoir~
 
nice look/lame story

nice look/lame story

Footage looked great. Did anyone see Tree's Lounge? Seems to be the same kind of pathetic/loveable loser character. Where's the mojo?
 
Barry_S said:
I think that distributor is tried to sell the film as a Hollywood-style romantic comedy because Lonesome Jim isn't an easy film to pidgeonhole. Not to mention also trying to cash in on Liv Tyler's appeal. I'd agree about LJ being character driven and the film takes a risk because Jim isn't all that likeable of a character. If the film does see a U.S. theatrical release, I sure hope they cut a better trailer. If someone go to see the film based on that trailer--they're not getting a light romantic comedy--that's for sure. Plus, I think that trailer would discourage the film's true potentlal audience from seeing a quirky little nuanced film with a complex central character.
Click to expand...

I see what you mean Barry. They absolutely HAVE to sell the film as a romantic comedy because that's what we like and that's what we are used to. It sickens me though to think that Hollywood has screwed with many peoples emotions and feelings on what we like, because that's all Hollywood produces! Hollywood is definitely NOT about performance, it's about making money, and in order for them to make money on this film, they have to sell it as a romantic comedy. When I watched the trailer, I saw the potential for major performance, not some "Walk to Remember" plot. It looks very interesting, and I'm sure it does have a story to tell. I really want to see it. It's just a shame that in today's age, they have to false advertise a product when it is totally something else. I think false advertising misleads most of the audience into thinking the movie is going to be one way, when it is actually something else. HOLLYWOOD CAN SUCK IT! So all in all, yes, they have to recut the trailer. I don't think it was well done.
 
How could you possibly tell from a tiny internet window with loads of compression if the images are great, or like 35mm? Of course the DVX holds up to a trailer like that, On the big screen things are different. Yes it holds up, but it looks a lot worse than film. As for taking film characteristics, I'm starting to like transfering of the DVX image to Reala 500 negative. It really kills the DVX noise, hidding it under the film grain and looks awesome!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top