Quote:
Originally Posted by Qtx
Considering the news article said they made this decision after doing a screen test and judging the feedback, its reasonable to make a judgment that they didn't like the content and the content was as I said before.
|
Films get bad screen tests all the time. That's why they have them. This one wasn't even that bad:
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/mo...ed-1235191932/
Quote:
|
Either way, when a very early version of the film test screened, with temp VFX and score, it landed a score in the low 60s and is believed to have only tested once. Film producers and executives have long noted that test screenings are best used to determine whether audiences are engaged or disengaged during certain parts of the film, not as a final judgment call on a movie. For example, horror films that end up doing well have been known to test in the 60s. Batgirl’s test score, which was for a director’s cut, is comparable to scores for the first It (2017), which wound up grossing $700.3 million globally, as well as an early score for the upcoming Shazam! Fury of the Gods. Both of those films tested in the 60s.
|
As mentioned before there is some issue at WB. This morning there is speculation HBO Max is in trouble:
https://www.thewrap.com/hbo-max-layo...nings-preview/