Then it failed there, too. 90% of it was flashy computer graphics. If it wasn't for the Marvel logo, the average viewer's reaction would be "eh?"Eh, it's very pretty but it fails in the single most important objective of a trailer (or even a promo): tell the viewer what it's about.
On the contrary -- it's a teaser, meaning that its goal is not to tell people what it's about, but to get them wondering what it's about.
Then it failed there, too. 90% of it was flashy computer graphics. If it wasn't for the Marvel logo, the average viewer's reaction would be "eh?"
Just because it's a longstanding practice doesn't make them interesting.Then it failed there, too. 90% of it was flashy computer graphics. If it wasn't for the Marvel logo, the average viewer's reaction would be "eh?"
Come on, countless initial teasers are just as vague, or more so. It's a longstanding practice.
Eh, it's very pretty but it fails in the single most important objective of a trailer (or even a promo): tell the viewer what it's about.
Then it failed there, too. 90% of it was flashy computer graphics. If it wasn't for the Marvel logo, the average viewer's reaction would be "eh?"
Then it failed there, too. 90% of it was flashy computer graphics. If it wasn't for the Marvel logo, the average viewer's reaction would be "eh?"Eh, it's very pretty but it fails in the single most important objective of a trailer (or even a promo): tell the viewer what it's about.
On the contrary -- it's a teaser, meaning that its goal is not to tell people what it's about, but to get them wondering what it's about.
Could be.You're not ignorant of the product enough to respond to the tease.
Charlie Cox doesn't look like Matt Murdock, but he did a great job portraying the character.
As for being super angsty, wasn't there a lot of angst in the Alias comics?
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.