Trailer: Revolutionary Road
By Craig Kennedy - September 21st, 2008; 7:55 pm
Here’s the trailer for Sam Mendes’ Revolutionary Road minus the obnoxious play-by-play from terminally chirpy Mary Hart.
Catch the whole movie in theaters December 26.
Filed under: Trailers
Tags: Kate Winslet, Leonardo DiCaprio, Revolutionary Road, Sam Mendes
Related Posts: - Preview: Revolutionary Road
- Trailer: Che
- Lest we forget the cinematographers…
- Poster: Revolutionary Road
- Harvey Has His Way: ‘The Reader’ to Open December 12
God, I can’t wait to see this.
Michael Shannon wants to know why they cut him out of the trailer, Chico. That guy’s so scary good and I didn’t even see a single shot of him here.
Otherwise, a pretty good trailer. Clearly they want to sell it as a Leo & Kate reunion movie, but if that gets butts in the seats, so be it.
I’m not likely to pre-judge a film by its trailer–that’s just wrong–but I couldn’t help but feel a certain familiar-to-Mendes-films lack of subtlety, with seemingly every line of dialogue conveying the same message over and over.
I hope it’s just an annoying trailer, and not an annoying film, but, my record with Mendes isn’t very hot, so I’m inclined to accept my gut instinct. Though I’m sure I’ll be seeing this when the inevitable wintry Oscar buzz storm hits in December.
I like the use of Nina Simone in the trailer, but I agree with Alex about the definite lack of subtlety in this trailer. It’s the same old hat about repressive suburban culture in the 1950s. Nevermind that suburban culture in the aughts is just as, if not more, repressive in both similar and entirely different ways.
Based on the trailer alone, I’d say the exchanges between Don and Betty Draper in Mad Men have much more nuance and realism while exploring the same themes.
This trailer definitely evokes a comparison to the hit TV show and, in this case, it’s not flattering. Then again, I never had high expectations for this film. The subject matter is so cliched and something about most of Leo’s “adult” performances always ring false — like a kid dressing up in daddy’s clothes — no matter how raspy he makes his voice or how forcefully he intones each line of dialogue.
Beautiful, understated cinematography, though. Maybe this is Deakins’ year.
I have a similar concern about suburban 50’s heavy-handedness, but it’s a ripe milieu and the cast is irresistable.
Good call on Michael Shannon, Paul. I don’t think I even knew he existed until I saw him in Bug followed by his memorable performance in Before the Devil Knows You’re Dead, and of course Shotgun Stories.
Michael Shannon is definitely someone to watch. Powerful in “Bug” (how many of us enjoyed that film and the performances? Like, 20 people tops? :P) and solid in a significantly small role in “BTDKYD.”
As to RR, well, it’s obvious that I will be there with bells on.
I was a little torn on Bug. I think I gave it 3 stars, but I also saw it under the worst possible circumstances. For one thing, people were walking out en masse and every time someone would leave, the door to the lobby would squeak shut, then stick part way open so the crowd noise of all the little dopes lining up to see Transformers or whatever dog crap was playing the auditorium next door leaked in.
Then the audience that stuck around ended up laughing through the end, which wasn’t quite the filmmaker’s intention.
I tell ya, sometimes you’re better off staying home with a DVD.
Having said that, Shannon and Judd were great and I really liked a lot of the movie.
I think Mendes deserves credit for some subtlety. He directed Tom Hanks to his most restrained and, for me, moving performance in Road to Perdition (his best work)
I don’t think I’ve seen Perdition since it was in theaters.
For the record, I have no official complaint with Mendes, though that’s pending an eventual revisit of American Beauty.
I have to say, after seeing Towelhead, if it turns out I don’t like AB anymore, I’m ready to blame Alan Ball for teh whole thing.
Hmm.
The beauty of the book is in Richard Yates’ writing and in the layers of tiny, subtle truths about American life and ego and cowardice and self-deception he weaves throughout the narrative’s more melodramatic plot elements. I’m a huge fan of the novel. So much of its greatness exists in the subtext. How well those tiny subtleties will translate to the screen, I’m just not sure. I’m hopeful it will be a great complement to the book, mainly because I want Kate to get her first Oscar, but I can’t say I like this trailer much at all. In the case of this film, I’d say less is more. It didn’t need the dialogue.
Michael Shannon’s part is one of those key, pivotal roles with hardly any screentime. It should certainly stand out in the film and get him some much-deserved attention, but I imagine he’s only in it a few minutes.
OK, the trailer isn’t doing much for me but I’ll show up to see the performances. Otherwise though, I feel like I’ve seen this movie many times before. Unlike some, I’m not done with Mendes but I agree that he’s no fan of subtle. And I agree with Ari that Road to Perdition is a pretty solid film with an amazing performance from Tom Hanks.
JB, sounds like a difficult book to translate to screen, but a potentially powerful one if it’s done well.
And Joel (and the others) I see what you’re saying, though I can’t help but assume the trailer is simplifying things. The whole movie could be that way, but it could also be far more complex.
We shall see.