So, I was suggested two book trailers by my friend Abby. In her opinion, the first one is worse than the second. I actually feel it's the other way around. Though, not by a lot. We're talking about the difference between a C- and a D here.
First up is "Infected".
I like that it's active. Things are happening, and the whole thing keeps moving. That's good. However, content-wise, it's something of a mess. It spends a good portion of it's 1:38 telling you what it's not about. I don't get that. A large percentage of time-- not to mention the CGI work (presuming that wasn't stock) showing meteors coming to Earth and telling the audience how it isn't what the story is about. There are a lot of things it's probably not about. Why tell me that? It's not an effective reversal. There's some other footage, which isn't terrible, but it's not well lit. This shows we're looking at, apparently, a viral-zombie story. If there's more to it (the virus's extraterrestrial origins aren't much of a game-changer for me), I can't tell from this.
Does it make me want to read it? Not really.
Next up: Max Quick.
This is exactly what I was talking about last week when I was talking about trailers that have no point was a video. There's a single image-- I presume the cover-- which is either shaken or zoomed in and out in a vain attempt to not have it be completely static. Sound is forgettable. Some blurbs and back-cover copy. In other words, there's nothing here that I wouldn't get from just picking up the book in the store and looking at the front and back. Actually, it's more like if someone else picked up the book, held it in front of me and shook it.
Does it make me want to read it? Not at all.
Do you have a trailer you want reviewed, or know what you want to see reviewed? Let me know.