The trailers of “Black Hawk Down” (BHD) and “Lions for Lambs” (L4L) appear to portray the war from both an “on the ground” and an “in the office” perspective, respectively.
For the “Black Hawk Down” trailer, the creators tend to focus on the more “real” images in order to appeal to the pathos of the viewer. When dealing with a tragedy as recent as this was, it is very important to keep the emotions of the viewer in mind. Showing the riots and the destruction in Somalia in the beginning helps show the viewer the emotion is real. This is the main difference in the two previews, seeing as “Lions for Lambs” focuses more on logical appeal to the viewer. Starting out with a professor meeting with a student shows the viewer that this movie will be more on the political side of the action spectrum; and the addition of the senator/journalist meetings hit this idea home even farther. Despite this main difference, most trailers build appeal to the ethos through use of naming Robert Redford as the director on “Lions for Lambs” and Jerry Bruckheimer as the producer of “Black Hawk Down.”
Aside from the differences in appeal, the two trailers use of images is relatively similar. They both use images of the environment to build up a relationship with the viewer. This helps in the case of BHD when the viewer can relate to the destruction taking place in the beginning. This attribute also helps out in L4L when the shots of DC and the warzone help show where that part of the trailer is taking place. The shots of DC help show who is making the calls on the war, which brings this movie further into the political debate.
Both previews also have a certain “climax” point where they get systematically more intense with the crescendo of the music. In the case of BHD, this shift is verbal and begins with the screaming of “RPG” while in L4L, it begins when the transport fires its missile.
Though they are arranged quite differently and are trying to attract different audiences, the two trailers both achieve the obvious goal of grabbing the audience’s attention and keeping it. Though the images are different and the objectives of them are different, both are able to compel a viewer to watch their respective movies, thus both have used their different images effectively.
Chad Cavender
I love how you noticed that there is a huge climax point in the trailer. The trailers are inicially so attention grabbing that I failed to see the climax point. Another point you have made that I failed to notice about these two trailers is that the effect on the environment on everyone. Yes, it is obvious that it is a war setting, but you were able to depict it in a deeper sense. You saw how it affected the characters. Lastly, I loved how you were able to grasp the concept that these films had a deeper impact other than war; it was all about politics.
ReplyDeleteYour analysis of BHD and L4L is quite identical to mines. We both thought that BHD has more of a "real" image whereas, L4L came from more of a political view. Also we both mentioned the differences in pathos and logos used in each trailer. However, your examples were generally different from mines and it made me view both trailers in a different way, but still having the same meanings. Instead of looking at just the destruction of Somalia and the violence through the trailer, you could also use the portrayed "heroes" throughout the trailer that are shown as an attempt to appeal to the pathos of the audience. Besides that, everything you pointed out was similar to what I said and I couldn't agree more with what you said.
ReplyDelete