>5 years in development
>Creator is heavily involved with production
>It still sucks
What happened?
>5 years in development. >Creator is heavily involved with production. >It still sucks
>5 years in development
>Creator is heavily involved with production
>It still sucks
What happened?
not scary enough
it was never good
You loved it because you were 12
The whole game is based on jump scares--the lamest type of horror.
Audience score (the one that matters) seems good
Disney froze the audience score btw.
The Warcraft movie was fricking dogshit.
Cope
they actually did
It has been 86% since day one.
And?
They absolutely pumped up that audience score after the critical who are paid shills couldn’t pretend the movie wasn’t complete slop
The audience gets it wrong
They are npcs after all
>Posts one of the most in your face and blatant manipulations of the audience score ever. They didn't even try to hide it, nobody even bothered denying it, just looked you right in the eyes and said "Yeah we can just buy that score"
Showed him.
my bad
This was at 82 for a few days as well. Nice try Disneygay
>that pic
google "law of large numbers"
feel free to do the math on how many 7/10 reviews it would take to drop the "average" to 85% after 10/100/1000 10/10s.
>*deletes all the real reviews*
>see goy it's actually a good movie!
Might have worked if I had ever heard of anyone actually liking that movie.
>it's just disney paying for the audience score guys, the audience would never say franchise slop from any other company is good!
>Verified Ratings
>Verified
This, alone, disproves the the validity of the general reception because its skewed in the studios' favor.
unlike ep IX, uncharted was a decent popcorn flick
>disney/marvel
yawn
Every movie has a high verified audience score due Rotten Tomatoes changing the algorithm after Captain Marvel got a low audience score.
the audience for that movies are mentally ill furrytrooons, so i'll go with the critics here
>the audience liked it so its bad
hmmm
you can only leave an audience review after buying a ticket through fandango and it can't be under 7/10
You going to actually believe reviews from highly autisitic gamers? Did we not learn from that garbage ass mario movie?
as a casual viewer that knew nothing going in but had played the first game, i got absolutely nothing out of this movie
It doesn't matter if the film is bad (it is). It is still a massive financial success and that is all that matters.
Why? Did you have stock in the film or something?
If it makes money, it will get sequels, regardless of what Chistine Chandler's brother thinks.
That's true. For the people that liked it well enough and are interested in seeing more that really is all that matters.
Possible the most israeli thing iv ever heard
Anon gets it. Case point: prometheus.
Everyone hated it, I loved it though because I didn't know it was an alien movie. Good box office. Sequel created due to success of prometheus. Sequel is utter garbage. Flops no more alien movies. Money speaks.
Nothing.
~~*Criticss*~~ just hate Christians. Simple as.
or maybe your right wing skydaddy wienersucker just can’t make good games or movies. sit the frick down, shitheel
>or maybe your right wing skydaddy wienersucker just can’t make good games or movies. sit the frick down, shitheel
seethe, troony
When leftoids make games you get Hyenas and the Saint's Row reboot
When chuds make games you get literally 95% of every game released up to 2012
You
Will
Never
Be
A
Real
Artist
>leftoids
>chuds
>not rightoids
funny you said "chud" and not rightwingers, rightwingers have no culture or creativity whatsoever
Cry more b***h Black person frick
Guy makes game. People enjoy it.
Guy makes film. People enjoy it.
I dislike both, but that doesn't alter reality, or what he has brought to the world.
Your unhinged shitflinging is not Tao.
Not Tao soon dies.
yeah nothings more christian than killer furry ghost chilldren and saw traps
you’re moronic, it’s more to do with the creator. like troons seething at harry potter content (which has nothing to do with trannies) because it’s creator hates them
So critics rated the Five Nights at Freddy's movie negatively just because they didn't like that Scott is a christian? That's what you're going with?
You say that like critics aren't a bunch of catty parasitic b***hes who would burn down an entire franchise if one of the actors did a wrongthink.
I mean I believe deep in my hart that the movie is actually shit but to what place do you reside that critics aren’t a bunch of dick slopping sycophants?
newsflash moron but most of the media you consume is made by christians
by israelites*
Yeah all the Christians with Israeli dual citizenship where they banned public readings of the gospel.
Based
Shit made $200,000,000 on a budget of $20,000,000
Thats fricking ten times over and the fans loved it. Massive success
FNAF sweep
>the fans loved it
Consensus at the most positive end of the spectrum seems to be "It was alright. Did what it needed to." which is hardly glowing praise.
Why do right wingers simp for box office numbers? Why are they incapable of producing good art
their godking is obsessed with ratings and crowd sizes
meanwhile leftoid """""""""""art"""""""""""
>Why are they incapable of producing good art
ah yes, like the good leftist art that modern disney and marvel is producing?
>box office numbers
Because that’s all that matters. It doesn’t matter if your movie is the finest piece of art ever made, if people don’t like it, then it is shit.
This was good, no matter what a few gay critics say.
>it made 200 billion dollar and my autistic zoomer friends loved it, that mean it good ZASED
You're moronic.
>it's bad because... critics said it didn't have enough social commentary!
You're moronic.
>Five Nights at Freddy's is the profound Christian art of our time
do amerimutts really
It doesn't have to be profound to be Christian-- it just have to display healthy values unlike anti-Christian, dull dreck such as Exorcist Believer
They hate the creator for being a conversative Christian, not because the games or movie are particularly religious.
Based creator but it should’ve been spooky not drama slop
IN
THE
BUTT
Why do conservatards defend movie adaptations of vidya?
It's good. Critics are just homosexuals.
Until they're defending something you like but general audiences dont.
No, that's when you remember a broken clock is right twice a day.
Which is an allegorical way to say you're a homosexual that can't admit when he's wrong. Kek it's literally a metaphor for coping
The movie is geared towards people who wanna see their favorite characters being goofy on the big screen rather than actually trying to adapt the atmosphere of the games into a movie.
It's basically a really high budget version of those Elsa and Spider-Man videos with FNAF characters.
This, except they even failed at that because none of the animatronics do anything cool and the fricking cupcake gets the most kills
The concept of "critic" is dead. A critic judges art against the highest of a timeless, objective standard. What are called critics today are actually just reviewers. Someone like a Hugh Blair would be a critic. These modern reviewers are not.
>A critic judges art against the highest of a timeless, objective standard
Newsflash moron, there is no such thing.
>88% audience score
>sucks
>critic score bad
>audience score good
That's how you know a film is kino
Shill
>normies are NPCs!
>unless they like a film I like then they're based!
The absolute state of videogame movies
Why do they fear videogames?
>why does hollywood hate their main competitors that are making more money than them by miles
Gee I wonder
They feel left out because it's something they are not part of it.
Also because these films have no substance and is basically >videogame thing you know, but for 90 minutes in the silver screen
Super mario was a weak movie with no plot
fnaf was a weak horror movie
but if you like these franchises, you will enjoy it. I did.
They like vidya as long as it's good.
Sonic was awful.
you opinion, not ours
It's legs were not good. So no it's not just me.
Literally the fastest legs in film moron
tasteless
69% is a D
More like they judge it as a movie instead of as a fanboy wankfest.
Vidya is the only white shield left against the threat of Israel + immigration.
Mario proved gamers are absolute morons who watch shit like the MCU obsessively. Nobody over the age of 10 who isnt an autistic moron likes the mario movie
The big mistake is expecting it to be what it isn't.
Sonic is nothing like the games yet its not mind numbingly dull
>mind numbingly dull
It's an action-packed, all-ages movie plus a moderate dose of fanservice: the same reason why Mario and FNAF succeeded (though the latter is the most layered one as far as lore goes: they were clearly establishing the foundations for a franchise with a clear narrative).
Why lie?
>audience loved it
>one of the most successful horror films of all time at the box office
Ok ((critic))
Difference between a commercial success and a critical one. As a fan of the franchise and someone who really wanted to like FNaF, even I can plainly see it's a pretty bad, disjointed, mispaced movie.
I only knew a little about the franchise and I enjoyed it.
cope, it's a video game adaptation for kids, are you expecting picasso or something lol?
>PG13
>For kids
what sort of pussy were you as a kid?
I'm saying it's clearly not created for kids if they're fine with the PG13 rating.
fine, it's a video game adaptation for 13 year olds, are you expecting picasso or something lol?
No but I didn't expect it to be a movie for babies.
so it will be a hit for the kid audience, good to know.
What are you even saying at this point? It's objectively a hit despite being a bad film. People acting like this was intentionally made for babies are moronic though. You can just say you were entertained by it despite it being shit, what is this cope?
Didn't even play these games
I thought it was very average and PG13. Body horror for the mascots could have been fleshed out. Ghost kids seem weird and unexplained. Villain also shows up out of nowhere. Main character and girl were okay.
>Creator is heavily involved with production
>In June 2021, Cawthon became a trending topic on Twitter when his publicly available political donations were shared on the website. Except for one donation to Democratic Party representative Tulsi Gabbard, all of Cawthon's donations were to Republican Party politicians, including U.S. President Donald Trump. He posted on Reddit to confirm his support for the Republican Party, describe himself as pro-life, and state that he made significant financial donations to conservative political candidates. He claimed that he had been doxed and had received threats of violence and home invasion after his donations were publicized. While the reaction to his post was mostly positive on Reddit, it was mixed on other social media platforms such as Twitter, where some members of the LGBT community reacted negatively.[45]
>What happened
You tell me OP, what the frick happened
alphabet hoes mad
>where some members of the LGBT community reacted negatively.
Isn't this anything on twitter? I could post that I prefer diet coke to regular coke and seething anime avatars would be calling me a terf and threatening to kill me and my family.
>He doesn't care if author of something is pro life or something else nazi-coded
Gotta love a purity spiral
Out of context but how stupid do you have to be to give money to a political party? especially when half the members are multi-millionaires.
He even donated to trump, he is a fricking BILLIONAIRE.
Those guys should get guillotined lil bud
Just because the big rigs in a political party have personal wealth doens't mean local structures have that cash at their disposal. maybe he wanted his local mayor to be a Rep?
He donated to campaigns, he wasn't gifting them money.
da share my wife z0ne
Why would the lbgtbbq get triggered by that? They can’t have kids
Really gets the noggin jogging
You skipped the part where he was forced to step down from his own creation because he offended people that mentally rape children
>where he was forced to step down
He hasn't stepped down. He had major creative control over the movie, Jason Blum said that if he pushed Scott on anything then Scott might've just changed producers again.
That's the good part, he's confirmed toxic.
Nah, he hasn't stepped down. He even put out one of those prank games for the movie.
How awfully strange. The totally organic posters on Cinemaphile told me that right wingers are uncreative dullards who don't make games. Why would they spend their time harassing somebody who supposedly can't make games to begin with?
It's almost as if Cinemaphile is fricking Cinemaphile-tier depending on the day
>Implying Cinemaphile isn't fricking /misc/-lite
What are you smoking? You can not go into one thread there without someone having a tantrum about trannies, even if the thread has nothing to do with trannies whatsoever.
isn't the reason this franchise exists is because the developer's failed attempt to make a christian game was called creepy, and then he made a horror game around his shitty designs?
I guess you can't expect a good movie based on a bunch of games aimed to youtubers and their fanbases made of autistic 10 year olds.
I love it when Cinemaphile wants to be contrarian so badly that they end up siding with villains they've hated for the past half a decade.
Since when was siding with the ever the contrarian opinion?
>the ever
Who is that?
I meant critics
Siding with critics is a contrarian opinion here.
If we did a poll on here and asked if anons listened to and respected rotten tomatoes scores, I guarantee you the majority would say no.
Name a good movie that was disliked by critics
Freddy Got Fingered
If we're going by RT, here are the following:
Dracula Dead and Loving It
Jumanji
TMNT 1990
Top Gun
Fear and Loathing
Boondock Saints
Hook
Footloose
A Goofy Movie
The Mummy
I love it when homosexuals leave and
Never
Come
Back
Yeah I love that too.
The creator hates horror and decided to do multiverse wank instead
its mostly this. Its another one of these IP movies thats barely a functional film in its own right because its doing too much lip service to lore that only fricking dorks care about.
Used to be you'd have to make a good stand alone film first then start expanding its lore for sequels but now nobody can help themselves rushes into franchise filler bullshit in the hopes of a massive cash cow.
RATED PG FRICK YOU
The mistake is thinking that Cawthon is some genius creative and not just a guy who lucked out over being really shit at creating appealing kid-friendly cartoon characters. He's been cynically riding the wave ever since (admittedly fair play to him for making it such a success), but these days the lore is written by MatPat more than the actual devs, so it's bizarre to assume he'd be a good filmmaker.
He seems like a pretty chill cool guy to me
It’s kino though
Wasn’t a slasher movie
The problem is always storytelling and sometimes directing. The studio gives too much power to hacks. The FNAF concept is not very original.
Nobody cares what critics think
See
>What happened?
The creator was heavily involved with production.
Blumhouse
>audience score
Legit don't get how, almost nothing happens the whole film and what does happen is just the animatronics just standing and staring at things.
They’re baffled by fnaf’s kino status.
should have been a simple flick about a hapless security guy being chased around a haunted chucky cheese by the mascots. Instead its got loads of extra BS with magic dead kids
You're disappointed the movie actually had a story to tell?
The good stuff from FNAF is the atmosphere and the uncanny/unpredictable monsters, not the stupid convoluted lore.
My problem is that it's supposed trilogy and they pretty much spoonfed almost all of the lore to us in the first movie, the fricking security woman from the future timeline game is in this movie
Next movie is going to start with a whole powerpoint presentation on how remnant works and how they're able to infect multiple animatronics with a single remnant
Being PG-13.
Being R would have at least have the movie some edge.
The last act with William Afton being the villain (despite barely being in the film anmd having no build up) and the resolution.
William Afton as Springtrap should have been saved for the sequel. Have a Batman Begins-seque teaser revealling Afton’s suit (and/or Garret’s toy) in his closet.
>William Afton as Springtrap should have been saved for the sequel
but it is
>believes RT critic scores have a positive correlation to film quality
Zoomers like their cheese pizza cold
and
dead
Frick’n freaks
>caring about critic score
Its a good gauge on how a film is generally being perceived. In this case I wouldn't even think anyone would like this turd without it.
made more money than Antman 3
>What happened?
It was bad.
It focused too much on a story about a missing brother no one gave a frick about. Focusing on a love interest no one gave a frick about. The story was all over the place and doesn't make sense either.
It also wasn't a horror, or scary at all. And the big baddie reveal was underwhelming
It was too confusing. I actually had to go and watch a Let's Play of the game just to understand what the movie is about, and that shouldn't have happened.
This. It didn’t know what it wanted to be. It’s meant to be a horror movie about a security guard with atmosphere. We got drama slop with no spook. Terrible shit.
Freddy Chads keep winning
>videogame movie
>appeals only to fans of the videogame
wow it's warcraft and mortal kombat all over again
Did you forget the videogame movie that came out in April?
Mario is pretty universally loved though and has way larger appeal than warcraft, FNAF, mortal kombat. It's a household name.
I don't see anyone critically acclaiming the mario movie. for the record I've enjoyed all of these movies but I don't really play FNAF so I'm not really interested in watching the movie.
It's Cinemaphileerminshit.
>yfw capeshit will be replaced with bingshit in your lifetime
I hope I get at least get a Danganronpa film trilogy out of it.
The general rule for using rotten tomatoes is simple:
If the audience says it's good it's probably not as good as they say but it's still serviceable.
If the critics says it's not good that means there's not enough Black folk/stronk wimmin, meaning it's a movie that made a movie around characters instead of shoehorning shitskins in for virtue of having shitskins.
Stop acting like you know the rules. There are no rules, man, we're lost
wondering what kind of sicko would be afraid of animatronics
probably some american boomer thing
>Horror/Mystery, Thriller
It's a fricking family drama
It's family horror.
video games are the lowest form of art.
You happened. The movie itself is fine and literally broke 8-10 records.
That's even before going into the feat of making a movie with an all-white main cast and zero woke nonsense-- the very reason why some (irrelevant) critics tried to attack it.
CRITICS NO LONGER MATTER IN ANY WAY BECAUSE THE AUDIENCE DOESN'T TRUST THEM
>to much personal life bullshit to the story
>not scary they have some multi verse junk
>atmosphere sucks
>ghost kids???
Idk it’s not terrible but it coulda been better about halfway through I lost interest.
They couldn't just make a simple movie that takes place in one night and it's just about the security guard trying to survive his first shift.
Willy's Wonderland already did that and it made a better FNAF movie than the actual FNAF movie.
It has to take place over at least five nights, moron. That's the title.
And it still sucked you fricking loser.
Because they were not out to make the movie you autistically expect but the movie the creator wanted to make based on a well-established franchise/lore.
What makes FNAF stand out is that it isn't another random by the numbers movie
It made me fall asleep.
My bad, I should have recognized the title translates to, "Don't bother watching unless your a homosexual who likes the games."
Has there ever been a video game adaptation that is not specifically for people who like the games?
Yeah, and they usually sucked. Shit like those Resident Evil movies and that awful Halo series.
Now they're actually catering to fans and we're getting decent vidya movies like Mario and FNaF.
Since the movie made USD 150 mil ww and counting, clearly many other people who didn't know the games (I didn't) were able to watch, understand and enjoy it unlike you with your moronic expectations
150m isn't very much bro
>150m
It is when you had a budget of 20m. This is one of the most profitable films of the year, literally the biggest release Blumhouse has ever had.
>literally the biggest release Blumhouse has ever had.
Paranormal Activity made more
But it didn't have a bigger release
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/five-nights-at-freddys-box-office-opening-1235630735/
FNaF is also still going to be in theaters for a while, and made money through the deal to put it up day 1 on Peawiener. It's a huge success even if you don't like the movie.
Wrong. FNAF made USD 150 mil so far in 5 days. PA made USD 194 mil in its entire run and it's opening weekend numbers were middling.
so paranormal activity made more...
In several months compared to what FNAF made in 5 days. Take some 30 mins or so and you might eventually understand what that means
... so paranormal activity made more
Not for long
Paranormal Activity had a smaller release and might end up having made less money by the time Five Nights at Freddy's is out of theaters.
so paranormal activity made more
Five Nights at Freddy's has made more money than Paranormal Activity did in this amount of time.
Is this genuinely a difficult concept for you to grasp? What grade are you in?
Trying to compare final to provisional numbers is low IQ
>stating facts is low iq
It's not a fact. Look up "provisional" in the dictionary
but anon, paranormal activity made more money. this is incontrovertible.
150m means ~20m tickets sold. which is not very many.
It is an enormous amount of tickets sold: in 3 days, it made more than what Exorcist Believer did in 3 weeks.
Some additional numbers to get you started:
>3rd biggest horror movie opening of all time
>Biggest box office performance for the Halloween weekend
>Biggest domestic and WW Blumhouse movie opening
>Topped Super Mario's opening day box office
>2nd biggest opening of any video game movie behind Super Mario
>It's a landmark in day and date releases (almost a draw w/ Black Widow, both of which made around USD 80 mil domestic on their opening weekends)
>Made around 60% more than the tracking "predictions"
>Got an A- cinemascore (exceedingly rare for horror movies)
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/five-nights-at-freddys-box-office-opening-1235630735/
It's still 7.5 times the production, which makes it a huge success. Let's simplify it for you. You spend 20 dollars and get back 150. The horror movie Lights Out from 2016 cost only 5 million, but made 150 million in box office. It's much easier and safer to make profit if you keep the budget low. A lot of modern movies cost like 250-300 million and must make more than twice and sometimes thrice the amount just to break even.
its still a small amount of tickets.
For the $20m budget that is a huge amount of tickets
Its the same amount of tickets no matter how much the movie cost.
most people don't want anything to do with this movie/franchise.
They don't look at tickets sold. They look at the fricking money.
>they don't look at the size of the (tiny) fanbase, they look at how hard they can be milked
yeah.
>FNAF fanbase is tiny
It's got a huge and active fanbase on Youtube, Twitter, Rule34, Reddit, Discord server. Furries and zoomers fricking love FNAF. It's because of this "tiny" fanbase the movie was a success.
its so huge it only sold 20m tickets.
so paranormal activity made more
>so paranormal activity made more
No, it made less money in the amount of time Freddy's has been out.
This meme would work if this wasn't one of the biggest horror releases ever. Clearly the fanbase is at least decently sized, or maybe it is small and this movie is being carried by non-fans checking it out.
people can tell when you have to qualify statements into meaninglessness for them to be true
>Its the same amount of tickets
Yeah, more than any other horror film that's ever came out besides two others.
>Its the same amount of tickets no matter how much the movie cost.
That's a meaningless argument but you are ofc low IQ so you're better off left wondering why.
see
That's another cringe non-argument/moving the goalposts. You should simply give up after being humiliated over and over, just learn from the experience and move on.
I'm not the one trying to scream away facts. like the fact paranormal activity made more money, sold more tickets, and didn't need to farm furgays to do so
You're comparing Paranormal Activity's entire run to a movie that came out less than a week ago and is going to be in theaters for weeks making more money.
Why do morons who choose the dumbest hills to die on infuriate me so much? I hope a homeless person kicks you in the dick today. Frick (You).
>its dumb to state facts
Or i'm just pointing out that paranormal activity made more money
>Or i'm just pointing out that paranormal activity made more money
We can't know that until FNaF is out of theaters and has stopped making money. The movie just came out, moron.
There's a chance it could end up beating Paranormal Activity because it's currently doing better.
why does it trigger you so hard that a shoestring budget movie without a franchise behind it made more money than your furgay movie?
Why can't you understand that Five Nights at Freddy's is still making millions in theaters while Paranormal Activity is not? And that by the time the former's run is over it might surpass the latter?
Can't tell if you're genuinely a child with no comprehension of how money works or if you're baiting.
It's a bait. No one shirley isn't that special
Yeah even a literal moron would get it when they have this many people explaining it to him, he's baiting.
Why are you ree'ing so hard at the fact paranormal activity made more on a much lower budget?
You should learn when to stop refuting/humiliating some people. Just reply once or twice for the sake of the non-moronic and move on
It's more than the tickets sold by movies such as Exorcist Believer, Paw Patrol, Killers of the Flower Moon, Saw X etc.
For a Halloween release, it's beyond excellent and there's nobody who really understands money and the movie industry who calls it a "small amount of tickets".
Doesn't matter. It's still a huge success. The producers, writers, and publishers are all happy at all the money they are making for such A sequel is already pretty much confirmed. And this time they are gonna get Markiplier for a cameo.
By what metric? If that's a small amount then there's never been a successful horror movie.
by the metric of tickets sold.
By metrics of tickets sold it's a huge success.
Is this a joke? It's literally the third biggest opening for a horror movie ever, and it was free online the same day it was in theaters.
He seems to be a bit dense like the other (?) person trying to argue that Paranormal Activity making more money (so far) is a meaningful argument
Yes it is, moron-- we're talking about, ironically, 5 days only as it was released last Friday and that sum is up to Oct 31.
It's USD 150 mil clean since the movie's budget (only USD 20 mil btw) was already covered by Peawiener-- making USD 150 on a day and date release is a historic landmark for movies and an absolutely enormous profit for Universal/Blumhouse
Is it true that the lead and the villain weren't even cast until the last year of production, meaning the movie was basically shot in one fricking year?
Yes, we Blume tweeted on the 1st day of filming
>meaning the movie was basically shot in one fricking year?
How long do you think it takes to shoot a horror movie?
the source material sucks
Too dark and visually dull. Needed Suspiria style lighting
not dark enough.
Everything involving the kids, aunt or babysitter were awful and nonsensical and the cop had a bunch of moronic inhuman lines and actions like throwing the guys sleeping pills in the river (plus apparently he has narcolepsy and falls asleep in 2 minutes of boredom at work regardless.)
I don’t know why they made it almost 2 hours long when it could have easily been 75 minutes and better for it.
zoomer horror is ass
I like the franchise and all, but the movie was pretty bad. It wasn't really a horror movie. It failed to capture the creepiness of the atmosphere and the animatronics, of the fear of being isolated, alone, and watched. Shouldn't have made it PG-13.
Cash grab from kiddies
if that was true it would have released 8 years ago when it was announced
How come there have been at least three movies about killer animatronics and none of them have managed to be that scary?
The only one that comes to mind are the Banana Splits Movie and Willy's Wonderland, both are comedies
It was good fun. I disliked that cupcake thing and fort building scene.
nothing happened, he made it incredibly pg to appeal to his core audience and cashed out hard
>pointing out the fanbase is small is meaningless
>It still sucks
Only for people who were never the audience to begin with.
>went from "20 million isn't a lot of tickets" to "paranormal activity's lifetime gross was bigger than freddy's opening"
Kek, why are homosexuals desperate to pretend this movie is a failure?
Probably some discordgay angry that a movie made be le ebil republican donor is crushing the box office.
150m is middling success though. its only "crushing" it if you add qualifiers like "horror franchise" and "video game movie."
>one of the biggest horror movies ever is actually a failure because... it just is, ok?
Do you consider every horror movie a failure? Because this is one of the best box office runs in years for the genre.
Why can't you comprehend qualifiers? we've been watching basically every movie "break opening day records" for the last ten years.
this movie is "breaking records" despite making less, and selling less tickets, than paranormal activity.
Do you seriously not comprehend that it's not making less than Paranormal Activity was?
it has made less than paranormal activity. less gross, less ticket sold, less profit compared to production.
>it has made less than paranormal activity. less gross
But it hasn't. It's grossed more in its opening week so far than Paranormal Activity did.
so paranormal activity made more
Are you illiterate?
are you?
so paranormal activity made more
Yeah you're joking, you're not actually that stupid kek. I don't believe it.
I'm not joking, I'm stating a fact.
Your "fact" of one movie's lifetime gross being more than another movie's 6-day gross is pointless. You obviously know that because you're not actually that stupid, you're fricking with people.
So paranormal activity made more
Your "pretending to be moronic" shtick is getting old tbh.
>only someone pretending to be moronic would state the fact that paranormal activity made more money
Only someone pretending to be moronic would pretend not to know the difference between a movie's opening and it's overall gross when it leaves theaters. It's not even a mistake an actual moron would make, that's how we know you're joking.
so what you're saying is... is that paranormal activity made more money, sold more tickets, and had a larger yield.
good job conceding the two other points.
You don't need to reply twice, and the only thing I'm """conceding""" is profit compared to production because Paranormal Activity was microbudget and that's something that's objectively true, just like FNaF is currently objectively making more money in theaters than Paranormal Activity did.
It was fine for the fans, but in a perfect world it would have been a good film and good for the fans. I suppose trying to cram in FNAF's convoluted lore was to the detriment of the possibility of a good franchise.
I don't think making a horror film that is pg-13 with animatronics is that tough, all you hav to do is follow the game's formula for escalating the horror. First night is just the atmosphere of the creepy night in a chuk-e-cheese pizzaria. Second night you start do deal with the first two roaming animatronics and their creepy behaviour. Third night introduces the more aggressive Foxy and ups the stakes. Fourth night adds in Freddy and all the creepyness that comes with him. Final night is all about dealing with all 4 animatronics, knowing all their behaviours, learning how to get around and then when all seems to be figured out you throw in golden freddy to add back the sense that this isn't at all figured out. You can end with the night guard getting killed or escaping, either way, it leaves the story open instead of overexplaining what the whole thing was all about, and just making it be a solid film about 5 creepy nights hunted by killer animatronics.
You can justify the night guard coming back every night with a B story during daytime, maybe he's curious about the missing children and wants to know if the animatronics have anything to do with it, and you can leave it ambiguous if the kids are the animatronics or were killed by them, just another mystery you can build upon in a possible sequel.
its because someone asked the question
>after the first time someone saw the animatronics walking around by themselves, why the frick would they go back?
So does William Afton really just run a one-man staffing agency all day? Like he does paperwork and gets people hired by other companies in his free time?
And he sometimes kills a random adult man by luring him into a robot deathtrap? Even though he prefers killing kids.
And his daughter coincidentally became an actual fricking policewoman instead of a glorified mall cop / fangirl like in the games
I assume he pushed his daughter to the police so she could cover his ass if they start investigating. She's aware he's a psycho, but does nothing about it
Afton was a child killer back in the day, I don't think he is killing anybody anymore until the plot of the movie.
He seriously hired Mike as a security guard so nobody broke into the building, and Vanessa was supposed to watch him to make sure he didn't try to investigate the animatronics and find out too much. She didn't do her job.
Afton recognised that mike was the brother of the kid he killed
You guys wont believe how much zoomer pussy i pull at fnaf showings at the cinema, ive went to see it every day since release.
Stop feeding the troll
Guise did you know that Titanic made more than FNAF?
Did you know that Avatar 2 made more worldwide by the end of its run than FNaF did on Wednesday? It's joever...
>Did you know that Avatar 2 made more worldwide by the end of its run than FNaF did on Wednesday?
TRU DAT! fACtZZZ
hey look, now you're getting how insignificant 150m is
150m for a horror movie in under a week is groundbreaking success.
see that qualifier in the middle there? that makes the statement meaningless.
and it isn't groundbreaking if another horror movie made more. like paranormal activity
and I don't even need to account for inflation.
That "qualifier" exists because that's how long the movie has been out, you're fricking stupid.
You realize this film just came out, right? It made millions of dollars yesterday and it's gonna do the same tonight.
so paranormal activity made more money
Nah just looked into it and it opened much lower.
It feels like they rewrote and reshot it at least 3 times and stitched what they had together to finally release it which led to pacing and narrative issues
>Audience score good
>Made money
>Creator wanted it made
I don't see a single problem here.
>bad movie
There wasn't any social commentary... yikes.
There isn't. The movie clearly connected to a general audience (got a very rare A- CinemaScore) and it is objectively very well-made, with great visual effects and cinematography.
It's an all-ages drama/horror that doesn't avoid some dark subjects and among those who disliked it there are some testy, aging millennials ranting and being overly harsh because le zoomers. I'm a millennial myself btw
The movie connected to the gays who’ve been hyping the shitty games forever. No one else
Judging by how successful it is, it's connected with general audiences.
The fact that even people here are saying they liked it shows that it's connecting with a lot of people, usually Cinemaphile hates everything.
FNAF furgays and teenagers who grew up with FNAF aren't general audiences.
>teenagers who grew up with FNAF
Except a lot of the people who grew up with FNAF are in their 20s now.
That doesn’t make them any less homosexuals. It’s weird how the people who were obnoxious underage homosexuals 10-20 years ago are still obnoxious.
No, you're the gay and clearly don't understand that the current zoomer generation IS the main audience (as 10-30 yos have been for some time now) and at the same the movie managed to go beyond this demographic.
>movie is successful because a tiny percentage of youth audiences saw it
>tiny percentage
>biggest opening for blumhouse ever
>third biggest opening for horror ever
It's a large percentage.
yes blumhouse is a niche studio
>released some of the biggest horror films ever
>niche
Maybe if you consider everything that's not Disney niche. Normal audiences wouldn't consider them so.
yeah, horror is niche. not sure why you think otherwise.
It's one of the biggest film genres.
It has the most films because it’s easy to do on low budget and doesn’t require much talent or ability. They are only ever, at best, middlingly successful.
Kinda like how paranormal activity is still the highest grossing horror movie.
Five Nights at Freddy's is going to make more money than The Marvels kek, horror is definitely mainstream unless you're saying capeshit isn't either.
Also IT 2017 is the highest grossing horror film, not Paranormal Activity.
So? Why do you think I care that a middlingly successful movie is going to make more than a guaranteed flop? I’m just pointing out that 150m isn’t very much even in horror movie terms, and I don’t even need to break out an inflation calculator to be factually correct.
>bad press reviews
>good user reviews
let me guess... no lgtb and all protagonist are white
Yep. And the creator is a conservative Christian dude who had a lot of creative control of the film.
>you will never dance with Vanessa while she's on duty