Open Forum Friday: Should Movie Trailers Be Shortened to Avoid Spoilers?

Posted by on May 31st, 2013   Filed under: Open Forum Friday

openforumshortertrailers

In an age where movies are forced to compete with so many others (not to mention so many other forms of entertainment), movie trailers are a necessary evil. How do you advertise a movie without giving people a taste of what they are getting themselves into? Still, there is a fine line between giving away a taste and giving away the whole meal, and unfortunately it seems that marketing execs don’t always know the difference. Nowadays it’s pretty common to hear the average moviegoer complain on the way out of a movie that they saw all the best scenes in the trailer, and yet the studio already has their money so why should they be concerned? Interestingly, it is the theatre owners who are now starting to realize that this phenomenon might be hurting their business in the long run.

This week the National Association of Theatre Owners is pushing for new rules on how movies are marketed to their customers. Specifically, they are proposing that the length of trailers be limited to two minutes (as opposed to the usual two and a half) in order to cut down on potential spoilers. They are also saying that a shorter promo time before movies might help win back some frustrated moviegoers. For their part, studios are afraid that exhibitors just want to squeeze in more of their own advertising. What do you think? Do trailers always give away too much of the movie? How important are they in determining what you end up seeing? Would shorter trailers fix the problem or are there better solutions out there? Give us your thoughts here on Open Forum Friday.



  • piggystardust

    10,000 times yes. The less I know going into the movie the more I love it. Evil Dead remake would have blown me away. Would have.

  • Scott-El

    Spoilers are bullshit. There’s no such thing.

  • Tommy

    It’s all in how it’s edited. If you have to resort to showing all your moments to fill a compelling two minutes, you have a problem.

  • Bryan

    I’m perfectly good with spoilers for “blockbusters”, and can’t stand spoilers for smaller, “indie” films…

    Example – we chose to watch THE WORDS on VOD the other night, and I had to shut off the trailer they provide less than 10 seconds in. I knew my zero knowledge of the plot would be fucked by the trailer. After watching the flick and liking it, I watched the trailer – yep, the movie was spoiled. But for a blockbuster/comic/sequel movie? Who cares? Half the fun of the film’s experience is following along its production and rollout on the webs and in the multiple trailers. IMHO…

  • ProCynic

    Back when ‘Casino Royale’ was being shown as a trailer, I decided then to close my eyes and put my fingers in my ears throughout the Trailers section whenever I attend the cinema. Trailers ALWAYS show the most dramatic parts and therefore kill the initial wow factor reaction when you see it for the first time. Greatest trailers of all time have always been teasers, not mini versions of the film. Exorcist was a voice over and an image of Max Von Sydow standing outside the house, and that is still applauded today. Trailers nowadays are aimed at the Twitter Generation, who just can’t seem to get past everything being spelt out in 140 characters, so trailers have to say everything in 140 seconds or less.

  • My thoughts line up more with Tommy above. I think the only time you get into potential spoiler problems in trailers is when the editors have nothing better to put in the trailer. Basically, only time you come across that problem is when the movie is shitty anyways.

    Granted some good movies might have some moments “spoiled” by trailers, but they still offer plenty more to appease you beyond what was in the trailer. I mean, it probably is a bit of a chore to build hype for a movie without giving away ANY of the good parts.

    But yeah, those “all the good parts were in the trailer” complaints are more a testament against the poor quality of the movie itself, not the editing of the trailer, I feel.

    That being said, I rarely watch trailers anymore. Even when I go to theaters, 9 times out of 10 I go to the drive-in. In that case, I don’t tune in the radio till after the trailers (though they only show one or two anyways). Granted, sometimes I’ll watch some to decide if I want to watch a movie. If I know I’m already determined to watch a movie, I’ll avoid trailers like the plague…usually (damn you Man of Steel temptations!)

  • Rob

    watching trailers now for blockbusters and you are likely to have something in there from the last act, its kinda rediculous.
    They dont neccessarily need to be shorter, the Cloud Atlas trailer was over 5 minutes (i suppose its a 3 hour movie, with an unconventional storyline) but that did not reveal too much or give too much info whilst remaining enticing.
    Obviously the majority of blockbusters have predictable narratives, but some of these trailers make it pointless seeing the movie! I’ve seen everything that happens up until the final few scenes (which anyone can deduce what will happen in) and they have shown me most of the big set pieces and one liners in between!

    On the flipside teaser trailers dont even tease a lot of the time! just showing a logo and a date is the same as an announcement or a poster

  • Peter

    As far as winning back moviegoers, I don’t think long trailers was what made them frustrated. A few months ago, the Cineplex preshow was about 20 minutes of commercials and segments before the time on your ticket, 10 minutes of pure trailers, then feature. Now it’s 20 minutes of commercials, lights down for about 10 – 15 minutes of commercials interspersed with trailers. And that is bullshit. Well it’s all bullshit, but that is especially bullshit.

  • Anthony

    Nothing’s worse than the 4 minute Girl with the Dragon Tattoo trailer.

  • El Ohroy

    I’ve given up watching movie trailers. And my movie watching experience has been greatly enhanced. Thinking back, all my favorite movies are ones that I watched without having seen the trailer.

  • Ovenball

    Studios pay theatres for trailer placement now, so I imagine theatre owners want shorter trailers so they can place more trailers before the film in an specified time frame (say 10-20min). I don’t think theatre owners care about spoilers in the trailers.

  • Napalm

    YES YES YES!

  • Bob

    I decide what to watch based on who is involved or if it’s an Indie flick which Festivals backed it/What like-minded critics thought. I would expect that trailers are really for people who care less about Film and just go every now and then to see whatever. I’m looking at you anyone who ever paid to see anything were the Rock was wearing more than just his underwear and some skate-pads.

  • kyri

    what they should do is remove the age rating and replace it with a spoiler rating. Green as spoiler free and red as filled with spoilers..

  • For the record, the actual NATO guideline request say nothing about the reasoning for shortening trailers to two minutes. The whole “reducing spoilers” mumbo jumbo came out during the rpess release if I am remembering correctly.

    There actually are some other very interesting things that NATO is asking for that aren’t really being publically stated, things regarding collecting consumer data are quite interesting.

  • Owozifa

    What a terrible acronym. I can’t read that without continually wondering why the North Atlantic Treaty Organization cares about movie trailers.

    I don’t think the length of the trailer is as important as what’s shown in it. I’ve seen too many short trailers that decide to put shots from the ending in them for no reason.

  • Alex Krajci

    I Like It When Movie Trailers Play Before The Movie Even Starts.

  • Heradixle

    I don’t like the new comment section. It’s not half as clear as the old one. Maybe everyone else loves it, in which case ignore me :)

  • MisterQuigley

    Love the Disqus. Formerly “Bryan” = now “MisterQuigley”…

    Take a bite of peach…

  • Steve Ferraioli

    1 billion x yes. I am sick of movie trailers showing glimpses of the third act in a movie – any scene at all, I don’t care if it’s a 1 second snap, I don’t want to see it. Even a lot of second act stuff is still way too much… recently the Oblivion trailer did this. They made it way too obvious where they were going with the movie – even seeing Morgan Freeman talk to him was too much. If it was the first 20 secs or so of the trailer of him flying around, surveying, etc., and then showing him crash land or drop into the hole, and then some fast cuts of action and maybe a drone or two, that would have been plenty.

    Also, the worst case of all time for me, was the trailer for the remake of The Italian Job. If anyone else remembers, they spoiled an important twist right in the trailer.. egregious.

  • Jr

    I love trailers. It’s more annoying to me when people complain about spoilers.

  • I intentionally arrive at all movies, ten minutes later than the showtime – in order to skip any trailers. Sometimes I miss the opening of a film, but it’s worth it to me.

    Seeing any trailer is off-putting… I anticipate movies based on my own interests and hearing friends’ or pod casters excitement for certain actors or directors.

  • At a Niagara Falls, NY theater, a friend of mine saw one movie trailer and twelve commercials before the film started. They said the ads were for Nivea face cream and cell phone plans, etc.

  • devolutionary

    It would be good if theatres posted the ‘actual’ time a movie was being shown on top of when they advertise the showing time (of said trailers…). Ha, yeah right! That would only mean that nearly everyone logpiles into their seats when the actual movie starts, causing even more ruckus and commotion for those who actually did arrive early.

  • Matthew Colton

    if i had my way only teasers would be allowed. Trailers at the moment give far to much away. I’m really hoping the Gravity trailer has held something back.