We circulated this survey in order to better understand why audiences view trailers. Unlike other commercials, the trailer is one that audiences regularly and repeatedly seek out, engage with and claim to “love.”  Given our assumptions about where and through what media trailers are commonly viewed, we anticipated that results would confirm simple and familiar motivations while revealing other complex and eccentric ones. 

We knew, or rather believed, that a great deal of trailer viewing occurs in an unmotivated and unfocused fashion—the audience is accidental, the screening is random.  While the data broadly affirmed our suppositions, it also underscores the importance--for trailer makers and distributors—of designing trailers for the range of viewing situations, attitudes and demands. The diversity of motivation and the breadth of investment, the variety of contextual and subjective positions inscribed in the responses, deserves to be addressed within these critical and expensive marketing tools. 

After asking the name of the last trailer viewed in Question 3, Q4 of our survey asked “Did you seek out this trailer?”

On a purely quantitative basis, more people chose to view the specific trailer mentioned (53%) than did not (47%). Yet that number must be considered alongside a later question (Q10) which asked whether respondents had EVER sought out / searched for any trailer.  81% said yes; only 12% said no. In this post, we combine the findings from Questions 4 & 10 to itemize and describe the reasons given for choosing to view a trailer.

As is well understood within the industry, an effective trailer should keep the wrong audience out while drawing the right one in. This is not done cynically, but in a sincere attempt to minimize negative reactions from an identifiable demographic or group who might otherwise return to the cinema to view a film which they are unable to appreciate.  In practice, however, most trailer makers edit for an audience imagined as eager, engaged and able to enjoy the proposed entertainment. For the purpose of this post, we will focus on the 53% and the 81% who actively seek out trailers and examine the reasons they give for why they do so.

 (Negative responses, and the views of what we colloquially call “trailer haters,” will be covered in later post.)

Within the group responding positively to Q4 and Q10, a range of locations and media platforms was described.  Here, the category of “specific search” includes everything from entering the title into a search engine and deliberately being in the theatre to view the trailers, through clicking on a link in a news article, choosing to watch some (if not all) trailers on a site or DVD, to the minimal and liminal position of deciding “not to skip” the previews at the cinema, on a website or on a DVD.  For our respondents (some more discriminating than others), all these activities were considered as demonstrations of positive decision making. 

Q4 also invited ‘Yes’ respondents to explain (in 140 characters) why they sought a particular trailer, an option that drew an array of comments about what trailer audiences find most appealing.  Information (“learning”) about a film was among the most common reasons adduced, although many other needs, wants and desires characterize the knowledge sought. Q10 followed up this subject of audience demand or expectation, seeking to tease out particulars. The answers provide a more granular account of how audiences use trailers to ‘know more’.

 
Together, answers to Q4 and Q10 disclose the following, commonly expressed demands, uses and expectations:

1.      Responses that play variations on the phrase “so I know what to see,” position trailer viewing as entertainment curiosity and research; knowing more was also valued in order to “confirm” a viewing choice already proposed, whether by the respondent or her viewing partners.  Although the demand for reliable evidence is often disappointed (as a result of watching the feature, for example), that possibility appears to be more irritating than surprising to audiences.  (We explore this fascinating topic in other posts and research).

2.      Audiences want basic factual information, including the nature and sophistication of the content, release date, cast, rating, genre and production information. Often this demand relates to entertainment research pertaining to quality (production value), suitability (whether for a child, a friend, a parent or a date) and fandom.

3.      Audiences are motivated by pre-existing interests: a star, a favorite actor, a director, a book that’s been adapted, a genre, sequel or franchise. Here, the trailers are expected to deliver a pleasurable reminder and/or savory taste of a “known” pleasure.

4.      Audiences want the trailer to prepare them for the emotional and intellectual experience of the film, imagining and anticipating the film through the surrogacy of the trailer footage.   The intensity of the psychological investment in the phenomenology of reception makes it one of the more volatile, not to mention powerful, appeals.  

5.      Audiences look forward to and anticipate the art and craft of a good trailer. For the high percentage of respondents who self-identified as fans and a significant number who indicated a vocational/educational interest (media-related students and professionals), trailers are conceived as independent film experiences, offering aesthetic pleasures and entertainment rewards distinct from their commercial obligations and derivation.

6.      Viewers watch/listen for the sounds and star-power of the cues and the feature soundtrack.

7.      Many respondents describe exploring recommendations from peers and the media. Familiarity with the latest trailers is the dues of membership within a social media community or milieu.  The film industry has long known the power of “word of mouth. ” Social media has developed and exacerbated the effect.   Whatever the “reality” of this communal experience, it points to the trailer’s social exchange value as cultural capital. (The explanation: “I’m a geek” was one clear expression of this tendency, suggesting that trailer viewing may be mandatory within certain subcultures).

8.      An interest in independent / foreign film trailers was notable, indicating a persistent curiosity for features that aren’t likely to have “in-theatre” trailers. An urge to support smaller films (by consuming, at least, their marketing) was commonly overdetermined by the emotional / intellectual demands of trailer viewers, described in #4 above. 

 
Information, curiosity, cultural knowledge, a range of pleasures and social pressures: these, then, are the recurring answers to why audiences choose to watch specific trailers. While trailer makers and researchers know these expectations and demands exists, certain of them (aesthetic and cultural ones, for example) are harder to fulfill, perhaps, than evidentiary and informational ones.

 
Coming Soon:  In comparison to the diversity of curiosity and expectation among trailers aficionados, we’ll consider how indifferent and even hostile audiences relate to the trailer they consume.  

Here at Watching the Trailer, we’ve been encouraged by the press coverage our research has garnered since we launched in early November. This week we’d like to reflect upon our initial success. So far we’ve given radio interviews in the UK and Canada*, our work has been distributed via international news services and discussed, blogged, tweeted, reposted and otherwise digitally disseminated in the UK, the U.S, Canada, New Zealand and Hungary. To date we’ve logged over 200 references from the global press, including several in languages other than English.

 
*one of which was alongside our colleagues at the trailaurality project.
 
The fact that our research project resonates globally as serious news, only goes to show that this research is not only interesting but needed. Although critics focused on the presumed and well-anticipated results of our research, we’re confident that our complete results will answer the demand for new and unexpected insights.

Below, we’ve compiled some of our press, partly as an archive of our own, and partly as further engagement for interested parties. Indeed, the articles, blogs, posts and such comments as we’ve inspired expand the field of inquiry, providing source materials that can be used for further study. We’re genuinely pleased and gratified to provide a selection from the discussion we’ve engendered. We invite you to contact us should you find something of interest in reported results or if you have an article or insight that’s relevant to our inquiry. We sincerely hope that we may count on those who commented on our press to participate in our upcoming survey, coming soon.

The independent: 'The Desolation of Cinema-Goers'

The Daily Mail: 'Cinemagoers say they're fed up with trailers'  

The Guardian: 'Spoiler Alert!'

Collectively and perhaps not surprisingly, the press picked up on our results that discuss the previous Hobbit trailer (The Desolation of Smaug) and this somewhat luckily for us, tapped into the release of the third movie trailer

In 2014, the distinction between TV viewing and online viewing is impossible to maintain without additional follow-on inquiries.   When respondents tell us they watched movie trailers on their TV’s, they are increasingly doing so outside of the commercial broadcast realm. Instead, they are using their TVs as screens for computer-enabled devices (Xbox, PS3, DVR) that allow on-demand and repeat viewing.  
   
Interestingly, “Television” is not offered as a possible location for Movie Trailer Viewing within the 2009-2011 Nielsen/NRG research, even though computer-enabled devices like On-Demand, X-Box and Play Stations, which employ televisions as screens, are listed.  But despite TV’s absence from “venues for viewing trailers,” TV features as the top vote getter in Nielsen/NRG’s question about sources of movie information. Of course, others sources of movie information on TV include commercials, film clips on shows like Access Hollywood or Entertainment Tonight, talk show interviews with movie stars (in anticipation of releases) and news/infotainment items about forthcoming releases. 


Issues with the Data?

In our own data--and impacting our ability to draw unambiguous conclusions-- some percentage of respondents has almost certainly conflated a TV spot with a theatrical trailer in their comments. As fans and students of trailers understand and appreciate, TV Spots and Trailers, while related types of A/V movie marketing, are nonetheless distinct in terms of function, form and content. (You can read more about their differences here.)


In all fairness, rarely is a theatrical 2:00 movie trailer shown on broadcast or commercial TV; instead, what is shown on broadcast and/or commercial TV are :30 or :15 TV spots-- short, hyper-kinetic offspring of the trailer produced not so much to  preview the film but to remind viewers of its current or imminent availability in theaters. Given the length, the story information is typically abridged and the emphasis rests on stars, spectacle, genre and branding, information that can be presented visually and quickly.   

In our data, TV is mentioned by 15% of respondents as the medium through which they viewed a trailer. Regrettably, we did not ask them to specify whether their TV is in fact a computer-enabled device, allowing them to watch (on demand) a theatrical trailer. As convergence of TVs and computers is achieved, this distinction will cease to matter. For the time being, we cannot be entirely certain that a significant number of respondents are not referring to trailers and TV spots interchangeably!

 

Still, we take comfort in the fact that the qualitative responses provided elsewhere in the survey describe content suggestive of trailers and experiences with story details that a:30 spot would be unlikely or incapable of delivering.   

 

In any good research project, part of what you learn is which questions to ask better or next time. We look forward to inquiring in detail about the viewing experience of TV spots as a separate question from the viewing experience of what we used to refer to, for good reason, as theatrical trailers. 

“What was the last trailer you watched?”  With this question we launched our survey, believing it wisest to anchor our inquiry in a concrete experience.   

We then asked,  “What medium did you use to watch that trailer”?  We listed theater, TV screen, computer, mobile device and public screen as possible answers. Here, in graphic format, is what we learned:  

Though separated by three years (an eon in internet time), our data confirms the trend away from in-theater viewing visible in the Nielsen/NRG findings. We can say with some confidence that online trailer-watching now surpasses the in-theater experience.   Whether viewing occurs with mobile device, tablet, desktop or TV-enabled computers like On-Demand, X-Box or Play Station, the public, site-specific & communal experience of watching trailers that defined the first 100 years of their history has been replaced by a more personal, private and self-directed experience.  We pause a moment to acknowledge this transition. 

But enough nostalgia. No longer are viewers restricting to a controlled and limited viewing of these dense, short, commercial films. People seek out trailers, talk about trailers and watch trailers – repeatedly—for entertainment and information, often with little reference to the features that motivated their production.  For many industry watchers, this will be old news, widely predicted years ago.
 
Issues with the Data:

While the change in “mobile” consumption of trailers from 2011 (10% in the Nielsen/NRG Data) and 2014 (11% in ours) seems far too modest, when you include the Tablet/iPad option (5%), it looks as if Mobile viewing has actually declined over the past 3 years. Those numbers defy conventional wisdom and lived experience. We’re going to have to ask the question again with a larger and more randomized pool of respondents. Most likely this is a statistical anomaly or an outcome attributable to US vs. UK adaptation rates.