ViewerAnon Posted August 25, 2021 Share Posted August 25, 2021 (edited) 24 minutes ago, ThomasNicole said: Now i'm curious for Malignant. This one also have terrible test screenings but James Wan also told is a very different movie than the typical horror he is known for. Let's see if it will be another case of a decent movie that people on test screenings dislike because it's different. I know multiple people who saw MALIGNANT and I ended up seeing it myself. It's not impossible that we're all wrong but it's a wider sample size for me than CANDYMAN. Edited August 25, 2021 by ViewerAnon 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnokesLegs Posted August 25, 2021 Share Posted August 25, 2021 24 minutes ago, ThomasNicole said: Yeah i remember the rumours that test screening for Candyman was bad lol. Now i'm curious for Malignant. This one also have terrible test screenings but James Wan also told is a very different movie than the typical horror he is known for. Let's see if it will be another case of a decent movie that people on test screenings dislike because it's different. I heard similar from an LA based source who allegedly had knowledge of the production. Sounds like they were talking out of their arse (thankfully). 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cruel Summer Posted August 25, 2021 Share Posted August 25, 2021 (edited) 4 hours ago, SnokesLegs said: There’s literally hundreds of great horror films that are 90 minutes including credits (the original Halloween is also 91 minutes), if the story only needs 80-90 minutes and is told well, it shouldn’t matter. Also, Escape Room 2 was crap, an extra 10-15 minutes wouldn’t have saved it. the original halloween is great?? to you. it was boring out of the mill slasher. ER2 needed more time in the plane scene. candyman actually seems more complex so i wanted a longer lenght Edited August 25, 2021 by Cruel Summer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amorphous Posted August 25, 2021 Share Posted August 25, 2021 Same thing happened with the original test screening for HALLOWEEN (2018). A guy notorious for loving the original sequel from 1981, went around to blogs, etc. and told them that the reaction to the film was extremely poor, and that the film was in extreme trouble. Whereas in fact, I know first hand, it actually got very strong reactions. The only negative was a certain sub plot, and that the original ending was anti climatic. Test screenings can go either way but it's frustrating when one person tries to speak for everyone with their extreme bias. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnokesLegs Posted August 25, 2021 Share Posted August 25, 2021 4 minutes ago, Cruel Summer said: the original halloween is great?? to you. it was boring out of the mill slasher. It’s a classic…and not just to me…fair enough if you don’t like it but don’t try to rewrite history. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThomasNicole Posted August 25, 2021 Share Posted August 25, 2021 5 minutes ago, ViewerAnon said: I know multiple people who saw MALIGNANT and I ended up seeing it myself. It's not impossible that we're all wrong but it's a wider sample size for me than CANDYMAN. Oh i see it, thanks for the info, let's see then how it goes. I was not expecting Wan to deliver a masterpiece because he is a decent director, not much more than that. But i remember reading somewhere that people straight up laughed on test screenings and i was shocked and wondering if he is capable to make something bad in this level, since his filmography is in general very decent. Then when he said is a different movie etc i started to think that maybe is more a case of disconect with general audiences than a truly awful movie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViewerAnon Posted August 25, 2021 Share Posted August 25, 2021 (edited) 4 minutes ago, ThomasNicole said: Oh i see it, thanks for the info, let's see then how it goes. I was not expecting Wan to deliver a masterpiece because he is a decent director, not much more than that. But i remember reading somewhere that people straight up laughed on test screenings and i was shocked and wondering if he is capable to make something bad in this level, since his filmography is in general very decent. Then when he said is a different movie etc i started to think that maybe is more a case of disconect with general audiences than a truly awful movie. I'm curious to see the changes for that reason - when I say people laughed, I'm not exaggerating. The final confrontation of the movie played like ANCHORMAN to the crowd, and I heard the same thing happened at another screening. But that was also over a year ago and movies change. We'll see. I'm looking forward to the discussion about it because there are some shall we say bold story decisions. Edited August 25, 2021 by ViewerAnon 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Atreides Posted August 25, 2021 Share Posted August 25, 2021 The thing people fail to recognize with test screenings, and production in general, is what it says on the can: they're tests. Even the smallest edits can drastically change a movie's quality, and movies go through many different forms and shapes before the final cut l. Hell, George Lucas can tell you that even the final cut will go through changes over the years. So nobody's "wrong" over early word on Candyman not being good or test screenings being poor. And for all we know, the guy saw the final cut and just didn't like it. And yeah, this stuff can be subjective. And while it's fun to hear this kind of stuff, and I love hearing ViewerAnon's input on these movies, it's important to recognize that movies, up until the day they come out, are always changing and that you shouldn't take early word seriously or chastise folks for this. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnokesLegs Posted August 25, 2021 Share Posted August 25, 2021 3 minutes ago, Eric Robitaille said: The thing people fail to recognize with test screenings, and production in general, is what it says on the can: they're tests. Even the smallest edits can drastically change a movie's quality, and movies go through many different forms and shapes before the final cut l. Hell, George Lucas can tell you that even the final cut will go through changes over the years. So nobody's "wrong" over early word on Candyman not being good or test screenings being poor. And for all we know, the guy saw the final cut and just didn't like it. And yeah, this stuff can be subjective. And while it's fun to hear this kind of stuff, and I love hearing ViewerAnon's input on these movies, it's important to recognize that movies, up until the day they come out, are always changing and that you shouldn't take early word seriously or chastise folks for this. True, and to be fair, the person I heard from said that they’d been stuck in the edit for longer than normal trying to get it right. Seems they cracked it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lorddemaxus Posted August 25, 2021 Share Posted August 25, 2021 (edited) Of course, I'm hearing mostly bad stuff about this after I bought my tickets. Still watching it, but wish I picked sometime later in the weekend now. Edited August 25, 2021 by lorddemaxus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krissykins Posted August 25, 2021 Share Posted August 25, 2021 5 minutes ago, lorddemaxus said: Of course, I'm hearing mostly bad stuff about this after I bought my tickets. Still watching it, but wish I picked sometime later in the weekend now. ….mostly bad stuff? That certainly doesn’t fit in with the rest of the thread lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lorddemaxus Posted August 25, 2021 Share Posted August 25, 2021 Just now, Krissykins said: ….mostly bad stuff? That certainly doesn’t fit in with the rest of the thread lol Well, I don't trust or follow most of the critics in this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krissykins Posted August 25, 2021 Share Posted August 25, 2021 Just now, lorddemaxus said: Well, I don't trust or follow most of the critics in this thread. So who are you hearing the mostly bad stuff from? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valonqar Posted August 25, 2021 Share Posted August 25, 2021 (edited) 15 hours ago, Borobudur said: US was very polarised and a bit unconventional to some but Candyman look like a more standard horror-thriller flick. US was not polarizing, it was underwhelming. Polarizing is something that has a very love/hate reaction which US didn't. It was more meh. People expected great things but got a movie that was low on scares (worst thing you can say about any horror), big on intentional comedy and twist that was so stupid it retroactively ruined the movie. Hence massive OW and massive drop after. Polarizing is TLJ. Those who love it, love, those who hate it, hate it, neither can stop talking about it almost 3 years later. Nobody talks about US. Controversial is Joker, for example, because there were some hysterical people, including some critics, who tried to convince everyone that the movie posed a real danger to the public and would incite mass shootings. Hence why it was banned in Aurora where TDKR shooting happened. I'm just pointing out differences. Not every hyped movie that disappoints is controversial or polarizing. Mostly, they are just underwhelming because people expected something better/different. Edited August 25, 2021 by Valonqar 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firepower Posted August 25, 2021 Share Posted August 25, 2021 Reports about bad test-screenings are usually more correct than reports about good test-screenings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krissykins Posted August 25, 2021 Share Posted August 25, 2021 Not to derail the thread but US had big drops because it acted like a sequel hype wise, not just because of WOM. General audiences gave it a B Cinemascore. But it’s online ratings are actually really high for horror (3.7 on Letterboxd). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krissykins Posted August 25, 2021 Share Posted August 25, 2021 2 minutes ago, Firepower said: Reports about bad test-screenings are usually more correct than reports about good test-screenings. Not in this case thankfully! reports of bad test screenings were way off. As indicated, seems to have been one loudmouth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lorddemaxus Posted August 25, 2021 Share Posted August 25, 2021 1 minute ago, Krissykins said: So who are you hearing the mostly bad stuff from? Angelica Jade, Walter Chaw, Robert Daniels, Kambole Campbell, Richard Lawson, David Sims (seems more just ok reaction than bad though). Even Matt Neglia was mixed about it (not that I care about what he thinks, but dude almost always gives movies positive reviews). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firepower Posted August 25, 2021 Share Posted August 25, 2021 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Krissykins said: Not in this case thankfully! reports of bad test screenings were way off. As indicated, seems to have been one loudmouth. Hopefully! Edited August 25, 2021 by Firepower Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valonqar Posted August 25, 2021 Share Posted August 25, 2021 3 minutes ago, Krissykins said: Not in this case thankfully! reports of bad test screenings were way off. As indicated, seems to have been one loudmouth. Oh but everyone always zero's on them. Just look at every Marvel movie twitter embargo. 1000+ raves and 1-2 nope's and people here start to panic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
