9/29-10/1 Weekend Thread

[Zakiyyah6]

B+ is a good score for a dour Sci Fi movie. The problem is that the audience for the film is small so it doesn't matter.

 

B is a good score for a horror movie. 

[TomThomas]

1 hour ago, grim22 said:

Cinemascore is reliable for ongoing franchises, just likely not the first of a franchise which built on word of mouth. Cinemascore pretty much measures how much a movie matches it's marketing, and the first Saw was unlike anything till that point, a big departure from existing form is always a hard sell. The audience reactions were split down the middle at the time (even though most of the gore in the first Saw is implied rather than shown). Luckily the people who loved it really loved it and started some great word of mouth among horror fans.

This one is clearly much better received than Saw 4 and Jigsaw which also got B, so it doesn't look reliable for ongoing franchises as well.

[Krissykins]

1 hour ago, TomThomas said:

Isn't it ironic the best movie in the franchise got nearly the lowest CS? Just shows how unreliable it is.

 

1 hour ago, Liiviig 1998 said:

. Various factors can lead to that.

 

TDK is a very beloved film that has stood test of time and has A . About four MCU movies have A+ but do you hear them getting the same level of praise.

 

Audiences go with different expectations in films . CS gauges reception of the audience at that time . 

 

Hereditary got a D and did pretty well . How disturbing it was definitely a factor that contributed.

 

CS really works different for all types genres.

 

Getting an A is so rare in horror. Anywhere B to D can work for a horror.  What may scare you may be tame for another and not register. 

 

CS is definitely one of the most reliable  metrics when it comes audience reception. It has done it again and again.

 

Once again it's not perfect , it's just  the most reliable we've got . They will always be outliers to any system.

 

What you doing here is looking at that one outlier and using it as something to say how unreliable it is and ignoring all the other instances that have proved CS as a reliable metric for guaging audience reception.

 

 

 

 

It’s more straightforward than that. 
 

“oh no that was too scary, I didn’t like it!”

”oh no it was too gory for me” 

 

leads to lower ratings. Even though the film delivered what was promised. 

[TomThomas]

1 hour ago, Liiviig 1998 said:

CS is definitely one of the most reliable  metrics when it comes audience reception. It has done it again and again.

 

Once again it's not perfect , it's just  the most reliable we've got . They will always be outliers to any system.

 

What you doing here is looking at that one outlier and using it as something to say how unreliable it is and ignoring all the other instances that have proved CS as a reliable metric for guaging audience reception.

That's not true at all. Jurassic World: Dominon got A-, to me this case alone discredits the entire system, I remember charlie questioned it as well, I don't know a single person who liked it anywhere in the world besides Brainbug who likes any movie where some big monster shows up. And there are tons of examples like that, it's not one or two outliers, it happens all the time, there are bot ridden platforms which are much more consistent than CS.

[Zakiyyah6]

Cinemascore is not perfect but it is way more reliable than internet polls. Rotten Tomatoes and IMDB audience scores mean nothing because of trolls. In particular bigots have ruined IMDB by giving low rating to most black and female led films that they haven't even watched.

[TomThomas]

Rotten Tomatoes has verified audience score. It's far from perfect too, but at least I know they paid for a ticket, I can't verify Cinemascore data, it could be based on thin air.

[JustLurking]

58 minutes ago, TomThomas said:

That's not true at all. Jurassic World: Dominon got A-, to me this case alone discredits the entire system, I remember charlie questioned it as well, I don't know a single person who liked it anywhere in the world besides Brainbug who likes any movie where some big monster shows up. And there are tons of examples like that, it's not one or two outliers, it happens all the time, there are bot ridden platforms which are much more consistent than CS.

Why are you pretending JWD had Morbius legs or something? Its legs were mediocre but by no means abysmal. The people showing up to these movies are just looking to see some dinos, if there's a good story on top of it they'll be happier but it's by no means a requirement. Hence why they are so generous with their score, and why the film had mediocre but not terrible legs regardless of the fact that "you don't know anyone who liked it" (just as a reminder plenty of people both here and on other platforms "knew no one who cared about avatar" and we all know how that went).

Edited September 30, 2023 by JustLurking

[WorkingonaName]

1 hour ago, TomThomas said:

 besides Brainbug who likes any movie where some big monster shows up. 

As all men should. 

[The Dark Alfred]

SAW X was terrific, one of the best in the franchise. Would love to see it winning the weekend and carve out a decent tally.

[TomThomas]

24 minutes ago, JustLurking said:

Why are you pretending JWD had Morbius legs or something? Its legs were mediocre but by no means abysmal. The people showing up to these movies are just looking to see some dinos, if there's a good story on top of it they'll be happier but it's by no means a requirement. Hence why they are so generous with their score, and why the film had mediocre but not terrible legs regardless of the fact that "you don't know anyone who liked it" (just as a reminder plenty of people both here and on other platforms "knew no one who cared about avatar" and we all know how that went).

I said nothing about legs. It didn't have terrible legs simply because those movies never have them even if they are beyond terrible. I remember some terribly received Melissa McCarthy comedy had 4 multi. Some titles are just reception-proof and Jurassic World is one of them.

 

By "I don't know anyone who liked it" I mean both real world and internet, Avatar is simply not comparable because many people like it and you can easily prove it by any metric, "nobody cares about Avatar" bros based this on their personal feelings, not any real data.

Edited September 30, 2023 by TomThomas

[Bob Train]

1 hour ago, TomThomas said:

Rotten Tomatoes has verified audience score. It's far from perfect too, but at least I know they paid for a ticket, I can't verify Cinemascore data, it could be based on thin air.

Cinemascore is a lot more accurate than verified RT. Cinemascore randomly polls people. Verified RT is beholden to the 20-year-old males who are the main participators on the site.

 

We saw this with Barbie. Really bad 83% verified audience score which normally correlates with a B cinemascore (Quantumania had an 82%, for reference).

 

And yet, it became the leggiest $150m+ opener ever, because the target audience, women, who are not as likely to participate on RT, really liked it.

[Boxofficerules]

Go Saw X! Certified fresh now.

[TwoMisfits]

14 hours ago, Bob Train said:

Cinemascore is a lot more accurate than verified RT. Cinemascore randomly polls people. Verified RT is beholden to the 20-year-old males who are the main participators on the site.

 

We saw this with Barbie. Really bad 83% verified audience score which normally correlates with a B cinemascore (Quantumania had an 82%, for reference).

 

And yet, it became the leggiest $150m+ opener ever, because the target audience, women, who are not as likely to participate on RT, really liked it.

 

They each have their problems.

RT verified has selection bias - only those motivated turn in results.

Cinemascore has location bias - it only polls the same sites (which I think are all big cities and only a few of them, last I checked, but it's really hard to get the data) - and timing bias - it only gets a glimpse of opening night movie goers, missing a TON of folks who will never go opening night.

 

So, having multiple options to look at always helps to get a full clear picture of WOM.  Both have skewed data, but it is almost impossible to get unskewed data, so you work with what you got.

Edited October 1, 2023 by TwoMisfits

[cheesypoofs]

Saw 7, 8, and 9 lowered my interest in the series, but the word of mouth for Saw X may have reinvigorated it. I'm totally interested in it. I'm taking my oldest to watch the new Paw Patrol today but I'll definitely watch Saw X when it comes out to watch at home

Edited September 30, 2023 by cheesypoofs
Autocorrect error

[Zakiyyah6]

Rotten Tomatoes audience score means absolutely nothing to me. I go by Cinemascore and most of the time that is the best metric. Not perfect but the best one by far. 

[Eric Lasagna]

5 hours ago, grim22 said:

That's Skye/Mighty Skye. Very popular among girls, I know because my daughter has so much Skye stuff I wonder where it comes from. Skye was the only female dog on the paw patrol till they expanded the team with new characters, so she's obviously a magnet for little girls who watch the show. My daughter is slowly growing out of the Paw Patrol target demo but still loves Skye.

They're still doing the Smurfette thing in cartoons?

[Spidey Freak]

5 hours ago, Liiviig 1998 said:

TDK is a very beloved film that has stood test of time and has A . About four MCU movies have A+ but do you hear them getting the same level of praise.

 

Black Panther literally became such a gigantic cultural phenomenon that it created a massive change in Hollywood casting and the kind of actors and storytellers being given more opportunities, noticeable to this day. Including, you know, John David Washington in The Creator, the film that has triggered this discussion.  

[M37]

2 hours ago, TwoMisfits said:

 

They each have their problems.

RT verified has selection bias - only those motivated turn in results.

Cinemascore has location bias - it only polls the same sites (which I think are all big cities and only a few of them, last I checked, but it's really hard to get the data) - and timing bias - it only gets a glimpse of opening night movie goers, missing a TON of folks who will never go opening night.

 

So, having multiple options to look at always helps to get a full clear picture of WOM.  Both have skewed data, but it is almost impossible to get unskewed data, so you work with that you'd got.

I was going to respond to the prior comment, but you pretty much nailed it. It’s not much different than ticket tracking, where each sample has its own pattern and quirks, best compared to itself, and when there is a big discrepancy, need to delve into why - unskew the polls - rather than presume one is more “right” 

 

[eeetooki]

As someone who actually liked Tenet, JDW's acting deters me to see The Creator in the theatres. I might watch it on streaming because I like Gemma Chan.

[Giorno]

Cinemascore/post trak is still extremely reliable when it comes to let's, much better than imdb or letterboxd where anyone can rate it regardless whether they saw it or not