Archived Discussion

This is discussion archived from a time before the current discussion method was installed.


Lale: I never saw Sky High, but I'm confused abut the entry. Was the main conflict of the movie his lack of superpowers, with the result given away in the trailer? Or do the trailers make it look like lack of superpowers is the main conflict when it's not?

Paul A: I never saw it either, but the original wording (still visible in the edit history) seems to suggest that the answer is "C) Both of the above".

Nevrmore: The first half of the movie, the conflict is the main characters lack of super powers. The second half of the movie, the conflict is a super villain taking over the school. The trailer both hides the second conflict and reveals the first, making you wonder why anyone wanted to see the movie in the first place.
Caswin: So this page says that all the trailers for Terminator 2 ruined the plot twist that the T-1000 was the bad guy and Arnold was a hero, while Never Trust a Trailer says that the trailers started by directly implying that Arnold's character was evil, then (out of a necessity to show more of the movie in general) showed them both as neutral, with a comment that it somehow spoils the movie even though the entry itself says nothing of the sort. Not having seen any of the trailers, I'm confused, but these can't all be right. Help?

crazyrabbits: The first teaser trailer depicted a T-800 being built (presumably in Skynet) and having the newly-formed robot (with Arnold skin) look at the camera with his red eye before it cut to the title. It gave audiences the impression that a similar model to the Terminator that pursued Sarah in the first film would be back. The second trailer gave away that there were two Terminators, but didn't say which one was bad.

As far as I know (and I might be wrong on this), it was only after the film had been in theatres for a couple months that the trailers outright gave away the "good" and "bad" Terminator twist. I have the T2: Ultimate Edition disc, but it's been a while since I've watched all the extras.

Caswin: Even if that's the case, that still doesn't tally with the claim that "every single trailer" spoiled the twist. Any idea where they might be getting that from, or is it just wrong?

Caswin: Cutting as per above.
  • The first twenty minutes of Terminator 2: Judgement Day are spent setting up a twist that every single trailer spoiled.

Cut the following two points, because they both repeat information mentioned earlier in the entry:

  • What Lies Beneath was absolutely spoiled. It gives away the reveal, which means you spend the first half of the movie watching the protagonist chase what we know is a Red Herring and the second half of the movie coming to the conclusion that we already know, leaving about fifteen minutes where we don't actually know what's happening.
  • At the end of the first Lord of the Rings movie, they included a trailer for the second one that revealed Gandalf's return from the dead. Of course, You Should Know This Already, if you read the trilogy, but many people never read the books. (And would blithely decide not to bother once they've seen the movies.)

Darmok: Cut
  • The DVD cover and a few posters of At World's End also spoil the end of Dead Man's Chest (Barbossa being Back from the Dead).

from the Pirates of the Caribbean example. This is an example of You Should Know This Already, as it seems quite reasonable that one should watch the 2nd movie before watching the 3rd.

fleb: The YouTube link to the Forest of the Dead trailer is dead. [1]

Not sure if this counts or not, but I find that cable descriptions of new episodes often tell you enough to figure out the entire plot of police procedurals (I find the local digital cable provider is horrible at this with Law & Order Criminal Intent). Even when they don't, what they do tell you has you figuring out the "real" plot by the time the cold opening finishes.


It's asserted that the trailer from Fox of Firefly spoilt the fact that it was a girl in the box. In actuality, on its first run, the pilot episode was not aired until after the series had been canceled. This meant that the scene which revealed the contents of Dr. Tam's cargo was never actually aired, thus making its inclusion in the credits and trailer a moot point.

R Taco: Removed this, because it's more an example of Never Trust a Trailer if anything:
  • The original Pitch Black Trailer subverted from this as it showed a nice crew of travelers getting stuck on a planet with a dangerous prisoner called Riddick without mentioning the hordes of aliens that were the real threat in the movie

Masami Phoenix: Removed this, because it's Complaining About Shows You Don't Like on an example that was trying to do it's best not to do that. The example was the one that explains that a mediocre comedy movie will put all of it's actual good jokes in the trailers to make the whole thing look funnier than it is. It did this without actually mentioning any specific ones to avoid Complaining About Shows You Don't Like

superslinger2007: and that is why certain members of my family never watch the next episode preview of a show they are watching.
Caswin: It's been a few years, but can anyone identify the following trailer for me?

YOUNG HEROINE: I love horseback riding. I am also very good at racing. I wanna be in the big race!
OVERBEARING FATHER: That is foolish. No daughter of mine is going to realize her dreams. You cannot be in the big race.
YOUNG HEROINE: Why not? :(
OVERBEARING FATHER: I am convinced. You can be in the big race.
[The race happens. The young heroine wins!]
[Title card.]

Blork: I really have to question that Cars example. The fact that the film features talking cars isn't a spoiler, it's the premise - in fact it would be my first guess if all I knew was that it's a cartoon called Cars. If you want to approach a film with that much of a clean slate then your complaint isn't with any particular trailer, it's with the whole concept of trailers in general.