Been reading about the forgettable prequel/remake of Carpenter's The Thing. About how a boat load of practical effects were cut. Really amazing work, gone.
I found this quote on the awesome
Monster Legacy blog:
The Pilot was the Thing perfectly replicating the species of aliens
that built the saucer. It was replaced after a screening that apparently
confused viewers as to what the Pilot was. It was felt that,
since the audience had only been shown iterations of the Thing that were
asymmetrical, split open and grisly, to present a creature that looked
like it evolved through normal biology was a violation of what had been
seen in the 2011 film as well as the John Carpenter film. It was then
decided that the Thing in the climax needed to be more ‘Thing-like’. We
designed the Sander-Thing as a maquette that was scanned and animated.
Alec Gillis, co-founder of Amalgamated Dynamics
Anyone who saw the remake of The Thing and who remembers that dreadful CG chill-inducing nonsense at the end can thank a test audience. Imagine creating something and then asking your coworkers and family members if they liked it and how would they make it better
. It's the bad idea of bad ideas
. Reminds me of the time my dad told me I should make all of my props with glowing red eyes, or the time a coworker told me I should build props with wings - though he used the word "figurines."
The test audience should be a tool only. If it's to be used at all.
But here's a more patient view:
I like test screenings. I like to see a movie with an audience of
strangers. I think it tells you a lot. It’s very difficult to lie to
yourself about certain things. I’m not necessarily convinced about how
information is gathered and I don’t think the credence that’s given to
it is valid. When you ask a bunch of people to see a film, and then
invite them to comment on it and tell them it’s a work-in-progress, they
feel bound to offer an opinion. Also, the kind of people who go to
test screenings are people that have time to go see a free movie. What
they object to is anything that’s unusual about a film. Anything that’s
memorable about a movie is often what a test audience will object to
because they’re being asked to be experts. They just compare the film
they finished watching to all of the other films that they’ve seen.
Films that score very high with test audiences generally tend to not be
so great. But, there’s a lot of money involved in making movies and
it’s a way for people to reassure themselves, who have spent money, and
it’s also a way to work out how to market a movie. It’s also a way to
really clear up confusions in a film. That’s important. As a
filmmaker, it’s important to sit there and feel embarrassed. If you
feel embarrassed by something, you cut it.
Andrew Dominik
Text source.
Thanks, Alex, for sending the
LINK that got me thinking about this stuff.
