Late last week, Den Of Geek reported that according to their source, a not-quite finished version of “Batman v Superman: Dawn Of Justice” screened on the Warner Bros. lot and received a “standing ovation” from those in attendance. In fact, the movie was so good, that the studio was reportedly looking to ink Ben Affleck to a three-picture Batman deal. Villain Smash debunked that report with a fairly level-headed take on Affleck’s current slate at WB, and his role in the larger DC universe for the time being. However, this recent rumor is a good reminder that, like early tracking numbers, very early test screening reports tend to be inaccurate and/or hyperbolic.
I recently spent a bit of time digging around test screening reports of yore, and the results are pretty eye-opening. Big claims have been made about movies months before they’ve opened that often don’t quite pan out once they’re released. Let’s start with Zack Snyder‘s “Man Of Steel,” which five months before it opened was called by one source from a test screening “the best movie of the year” with others reporting they had heard the film was “the ass-kicking, action-packed and heartfelt Superman movie you can’t wait to see.” Of course, the final film largely wasn’t embraced that way by the fanboy set or critics.
And it isn’t just limited to superhero films or comic films: “Grace Of Monaco” (“Nicole Kidman may be throwing her hat in the Oscar ring for Best Actress”); “Dumb And Dumber To” (“Jim Carrey is back and it’s funny as hell”); “Scream 4” (“It was phenomenal…easily the best of all the series”); “August: Osage County” (“…easily one of the best films of the year”) have all had exaggerated early responses.
To get an idea of how random screening scores can be, last spring Disney chairman Alan Horn told folks at CinemaCon that “Million Dollar Arm” (that Jon Hamm baseball movie you didn’t see) tested higher than any movie at Disney or Warner Bros. ever, “and that includes the first ‘Harry Potter,’ which was so highly anticipated.” Total box office for “Million Dollar Arm”? $38.3 million worldwide.
Both inside and outside the industry, people like to see movies first, and excitement can steer the valuation of a film. Or, sometimes a randomly assembled group of viewers have an opinion that’s out of sync from how a movie will be generally received. But either way, this sort of talk is worth taking with a grain of salt. Or kryptonite.
As for “Batman v Superman: Dawn Of Justice,” there is still a very long road ahead. While WB themselves might be pleased at the moment with the picture, they have a lot riding on the film — its success or failure (which is not an option, as far as WB is concerned) will determine the future of their DC universe movies. And there will certainly be more test screenings ahead, with responses swinging both positive and negative. What if the studio loves Affleck but early viewers take to another character or actor instead? Or what if viewers find Snyder’s movie too violent or grim? There are likely lots of little questions about the movie WB wants answered by test audiences before the movie opens. And Snyder will likely be spending the next seven months tweaking and shaping his picture to be the best, most widely pleasing it can be, while still retaining his overall vision.
For studios, test screenings serve a variety of functions, from how to market a picture to figuring out if it even works. And sometimes they can be totally off base. Let’s not forget that Alfonso Cuaron‘s “Gravity” had mixed to disastrous test screening reports very early on, before going on to win seven Oscars.
It’s easy to hear and find rumblings about movies early on. And while it’s sometimes fun to dive into that buzz, positive or negative, the best movie experience you’ll have is the one that’s all your own, not weighted by what others have been saying.
A lot of people have been wanting to see this movie forever, and you are just trying to lower their expectations.
Funny, if it was a marvel movie, you would have no question. But since it\’s WB and Zack Snyder, you question it. This is why I can\’t take people like you seriously.
I get your overall point of cautioning people about a film by listing infamous examples of horribly opposite critic & audience reception vs. test audience reception. However, why didn\’t you also mention the most statistic : The overall average of test audience receptions being accurate? Or also include examples of movies they were right about after test viewings? That\’s much more important than the handful of examples that became disasters in the end? On wait, I know why… I forgot that you never have anything good to say about any big movies.
I can\’t believe I had to look so hard for someone to give an honest, sensible, report on this \’early screening\’.
Full disclosure, I\’m not a big fan of this movie, I think DC are rushing things, and packing too much into it, plus Snyder has somehow managed a career without the creativity to justify it.
That said, the fact that so many have immediately accepted such hyperbole, and simple restated it verbatim under the guide of \’news\’, is a sad indictment of the many \’film\’ websites out there.
Reminds me of the commercial for the film Dutch (starring Ed O\’Neil, written by John Hughes) in which the previewing audience said things like "It\’s the best thing I\’ve seen since Home Alone." Months later it came out and was quickly forgotten… except by me.
I think the observations are good.
My big question with this whole movie is why is batman and superman just meeting when batman is older and superman is still in his prime. The two are supposed to form a long relationship which eventually leads to the hard choice of epic battle.
A great filmmaker doesn\’t need focus groups to guide a final product, or a studio breathing down with commands and demands. A great filmmaker needs to start a project with a distinct vision, sell that vision to the studio, and then execute it in confidence. A wise studio would trust in the talent of the filmmakers\’ team of writers, directors, and producers, to create the vision as intended. Audiences always prefer an authentic film product to something that was hashed, slashed, and compromised by studio dictates and public polls.
Seeing that Henry Cavill has all the talent, skill and charisma of a cardboard cutout the studio decided to bring in the one actor worse then George Clooney to play Batman, Ben Affleck will make Cavill look like he deserves an Oscar
the author is a tosser. A movie people are looking forward to being given a standing ovation is a good thing.
I have been saying the same thing for over a year. Snyder has NEVER made a movie that in retrospect would have garnered a standing ovation and the mixture of what in my opinion is bad casting, overstuffed amount of characters and what seems like shallow reasoning for the premise of the film and I have real doubts this movie can live up to its hype.
Gravity did suck. I don\’t care how many Oscar\’s it won. I suppose My Left Foot which was nominated for serveral Oscar\’s as well was a great film… which it wasn\’t.
Can\’t help but feel that if this were being said about "Civil War", then no one would question the validity of the claims and it would just be accepted as possible, but because it\’s Snyder and DC – everyone wants to call bull. Who really cares?
i loved \’Monsters\’ then the Godzilla reboot was poor to say the least
i loved Moon then Source Code was disappointing
i loved District 9 then Elysium was poor
Can\’t believe you just put August: Osage County next to Scream 4, Dumb and Dumber Too and Grace of Monaco. Seriously.
Even if there was an early test screening, and even if it did receive wild raves, so what? How big of a sample size could it be relative to the shear number of people who are going to see the film?
In December 1965, the first episode of the Batman television series, despite (according to Adam West) three different versions being shown, received what was at that time the worst preview audience ratings on record. But it became a true phenomenon when it actually hit the airwaves.
I have actually noticed this trend as well. The most recent case — it was a little less formal, as they were twitter reactions to an early Fantastic Four (2015) screening — was overwhelmingly positive.
This article seems to be on one side of the fence instead of being on it.
Actually, based on this manufactured rumor, I would say the film has serious problems. It\’s fishy. Man of Steel was actually offensive, and not remotely for children. It was a morally repugnant film, wasted the actors and was completely tone deaf. I expect a megaturd with this jet black, pretentious bilge.
Guys let be frank, the movie is as great as the say and we can prove that from the awesom trailer we watched at comic con last month.
I loved the first movie. Just because the masses don\’t like something doesn\’t mean its not good and vice versa.
Ok this clearly another person who thinks they can type can write what ever they want and think people stupid enough will take it as the truth. Man of steel was awesome and well received. If you actually did your job you would know that.
This is nothing more than a WB PR stunt. They did this with all the Nolan Batman movies and with Man of Steel. And we all know those movies weren\’t exactly the cure to cancer.
This wasn\’t a test screening audience. It was the film\’s crew and studio execs. So not exactly a random or impartial audience. Also, I place no value in the judgment of studio suits when it comes to what is a good movie.
I do not believe this Captain Guyliner is the bomb and Captain Guyliner wears lots of guyliner like Chris Evans and Robert Downey Jr. no way this is true I love marvel and captain guyliner.
Point taken. But was this article really necessary, Kevin? Maybe you should go out and slap some ice cream cones out of kids\’ hands.
Man of steel grossed over 600 million and was given great reviews by the viewers. The only ones that dumped on it where the Batman fanboys and old movie critics that are stuck with the old campy Reeves Superman movie. Batman begins barely cracked 400 million world wide.
I loved MoS and I would have been one of the people raving about it had I seen an advanced screening. And lots of other people loved it too – really, the majority of haters come from the tiny fan boy clique that basically hates everything. Having said that, everyone has their own taste in movies, so you could find someone to rave about pretty much any movie, just like you could find someone to put up a negative review for just about any movie – which really says something about the whole movie review \’industry\’ – it\’s pretty useless. I\’ll never see a movie or not see a movie based on reviews or popular opinion, because of that fact. Just because you don\’t like a movie doesn\’t mean I won\’t like it.
There is no cachet to being able to claim to have seen a movie of average quality prior to release. It\’s only cool and Twitterworthy if it\’s the "best thing ever" or the "worst thing ever". So people tend to exaggerate.
Actually, based on this manufactured rumor, I would say the film has serious problems. It’s fishy. Man of Steel was actually offensive, and not remotely for children. It was a morally repugnant film, wasted the actors and was completely tone deaf. I expect a megaturd with this jet black, pretentious bilge.
So they screened the make-or-break WB superhero film on the WB lot and it got a Standing-O? What might have happened to the employee who DIDN\’T stand and cheer? Nothing good, I\’m sure. I want this movie to be good, very much so, but nothing I\’ve read or heard or seen about it gives me much confidence.
And really a lot of this stuff is just people trying to be Nice & Polite. A lot of people who are not critics will just try to play nice in the public spotlight, rather than give a real opinion. Do you think if Stan Lee saw Fantastic Four and hated it that he would actually tell the public that he hated it? No way. Stan is a stand-up guy, and not out to trash anyone.
That\’s EXCATLY what Man of Steel was. Well for those of us who aren\’t closed minded idiots and can appreciate artistic vision, which there are few of us apparently, but that\’s what happens when a majority of the populace eats up all that reality tv garbage instead of being creative and passionate themselves.
Great piece! And thanks for the Villain Smash shout out!
Yet Man of Steel was indeed "ass-kicking, action-packed"…showing Superman finaally doing things I\’ve always wanted to see. Just because some (mostly unfamiliar with Superman comics over the past few decades) were expecting Chris Reeve Part Tres is irrelevant. The movie was Supes first outing on the journey to what he will iltimately become. I recognized that and I look forward to BvS (the trailer for which was terrific).
Am I the only person that actually like "Man of Steel". I didn\’t think it was a bad movie at all. Did I leave thinking "Wow, that movie was the movie of the year." . No, but I didn\’t leave thinking it sucked.
Zach Snyder is going to ruin Batman/Superman. Ben Affleck was a horrid choice to play Batman. Affleck is a poor actor. He has one, (and only one) facial expression. Watch Argo again and you\’ll see. I don\’t understand how a \’deadpan\’ facial expression translates to \’good acting\’. Snyder ruined Superman in \’Man of Steel\’. It wasn\’t the last sequence that bothered me, it was how he changed the origin story. It was just stupid. The other problems were cast choices for the other characters as well, and the dull/uninteresting music score. If he continues on this path of poor casting choices and changing the origin stories, (which he already has), he\’s going to ruin everything. I call for a reboot. That\’s what everyone\’s doing these days. Might as well do it over and do it right.
Speak for yourself, I completely enjoyed Man of Steel, thought it was a great launching pad for this DC Cinematic Universe.
I think this movie will make people hate the avengers movies.
Yeah. You actually have to watch the flick to make a determination. I tend to ignore reviews because they rarely reflect my own opinion.
I was a regular listener to Howard Stern around the time the Private Parts movie was being made. He made a big deal over how it was "the highest testing movie in Paramount history", doing better than Raiders of the Lost Ark. Well, it ended up making just over $40 million at the box office, and has since been largely forgotten to time. So no, these sorts of things don\’t end up meaning a whole lot.
See I am in the minority in the fact that I really liked Man of Steel its a shame it doesn\’t get more credit.
Excellent stuff, really glad someone is outing this nonsense hyperbole.
I could not care less if a bunch of studio executives gave their own movie a standing ovation.
The fact that many websites just released the PR friendly "standing ovation" anecdote without much comment (if any) just goes to show how lazy movie news writing can get.
Another example of this that jumps to mind is Peter Sciretta (/Film) who tweeted this a year before the film came out: "Ran into someone who saw Neill Blomkamp\’s Elysium and was over the moon about it, claiming its better than Blade Runner."
I think this movie will make people hate the avengers movies.