PDA

View Full Version : Advertising For ROTS VERY Misleading



Bantha274
05-20-2005, 10:22 AM
Everywhere you go, toy stores, theaters, internet, etc., ROTS is being advertised with Darth Vader as the poster-boy and main selling point of this movie.
But, in reality, Darth Vader, in the costume many recognize him in, is only in the movie for literally a few minutes. This seems a bit deceiving to some of the less-informed fans out there. I myself have been following the spoilers for a long time, so it was no suprise to me. I saw the movie last night and thought it was awesome.

It just seems a shame that they are touting ROTS as the "birth of Darth Vader", and a lot of people I've been talking to, who have not seen the film yet, are expecting to see Vader in the black costume fighting and choking people throughout the movie.
They seem to be a bit disappointed to find out that the "man in black" is really only shown in a few brief scenes near the end of the film, and knowing this may keep them from seeing the film in theaters and just wait for the DVD.

**I'm curious as to what others opinions are of this.**

But we all know the die-hard fans will go no matter what. Remember, it's not always the destination, but the journey to get there that really matters.

And thank you George Lucas for telling such a wonderful story. The circle truly is complete.

JON9000
05-20-2005, 10:37 AM
are expecting to see Vader in the black costume fighting and choking people throughout the movie.
That sounds incredibly boring and one-notish to me. I thought it was much more powerful to see Anakin getting naughty in the temple and slaughtering children. Besides, the dramatic high point has to be the Obi-wan/Anakin fight.

My appraisal of the advertising- you see Anakin, Anakin, Anakin, and you see one shot of Vader on the table. In no preview do you see Vader doing anything of consequence.

Seeing a guy in a Black suit and mask killing doing terrible things is what they think they may want to see, but I don't think the trailers give that impression.

DarthBrandon
05-20-2005, 10:46 AM
That sounds incredibly boring and one-notish to me. I thought it was much more powerful to see Anakin getting naughty in the temple and slaughtering children. Besides, the dramatic high point has to be the Obi-wan/Anakin fight.

My appraisal of the advertising- you see Anakin, Anakin, Anakin, and you see one shot of Vader on the table. In no preview do you see Vader doing anything of consequence.

Seeing a guy in a Black suit and mask killing doing terrible things is what they think they may want to see, but I don't think the trailers give that impression.

Same here for me, the trailers show tons of Anakin, Palpy, Yoda, more Anakin, more Obi, planets etc. They show Vader for a brief shot or two out of all the trailers. If anyone got the impression that he was doing anything other than being built/born then they are gravely mistaken.
I also think Lucasfilm did a great job on the advertising of the film. The only thing that may be misleading is the amount Vader is plastered all over the merchandise, other than that it's all good.

stillakid
05-20-2005, 11:01 AM
As I'm sure you know, advertising is meant to just get your butt in the seat. After you fork over your cash, they don't really care whether or not you feel betrayed by misleading advertising.

On the same sort of topic, one of the reviewers last night made an interesting point...that III should have been entitled Attack of the Clones since this is really the movie in which it happens more accurately.

El Chuxter
05-20-2005, 12:13 PM
I'd say it was misleading. It looked like a good movie. :mad:

Sith Lord 0498
05-20-2005, 04:40 PM
I think it was more compelling the way it actually played out. What you need to keep in mind is that we did see the birth of Darth Vader and then saw him in action. The birth of Vader occurred the moment Anakin chose Palpatine over Mace. I think it's just difficult for audiences to separate pre and post mechanical Vader. They see Vader before the armor and still see Anakin. I have to admit that it was difficult for me in that respect once I saw the movie. It was easier to call him Darth Vader when reading the novel.


On the same sort of topic, one of the reviewers last night made an interesting point...that III should have been entitled Attack of the Clones since this is really the movie in which it happens more accurately.

I think Revenge of the Sith was the perfect title for Episode III. It's an appropriate counterbalance to Episode VI, and it captures the essence of the plot perfectly.

The approach should've been to give Episode II a different name to begin with and never use Attack of the Clones.