We’re tired of walking out of movies always thinking, “I knew it was gonna suck. The preview had all the warning signs of assness.”
Trust your movie instincts, but, just to be sure, double check the Warning Signs. Created via the scientific method, of hypothesis, observation and testing, a pattern has been recognized and these signs have been named.
Especially since a preview is a genetic sample of the larger movie organism. If we analyze the cell samples, or, the scenes/images, we capture and understand the bigger picture.
Why waste or precious time, money and energy if we know what we’re getting? Life is too short and there are too many good movies that deserve our attention.
The fist step in not having a bad movie experience is paying attention to the warning signs.
(Below the Signs are listed along with a poster for a movie whose preview is a great example of that Warning-Click to see the preview).
It’s not really clear what the story is, or, if there is one
Not really sure who the characters are
Totally focuses on Genre
No name actors bring into question the thespian performance level
The preview whores out “Academy Award Nominee” or “Academy Award Winner.”
Same old jokes, explosions or scares
The preview whores out “From Director of...”
When there is NO mention of the actor’s Oscar nominations or Oscar victories.
There is more than 2 writers on the movie
The actors in the movie look like other more famous actors
The poster / title design looks a little too much like another movie that was a great B.O. Success
The director’s less successful movies aren’t mentioned.
ADD/MTV style editing makes you ask, “what the f#ck’s going on.”
You didn’t laugh once during the preview... and it’s suppose to be a comedy!
The “hottie factor” is all that’s being used to attract attention to the movie
Illogical! Story makes no sense if you take 2 seconds to think about it
When the preview says, “From pulitzer prize winning author...” but doesn’t say, “From the pulizter prize winning book.”
When there is NO mention of “from the director of....” and it’s helmed by a big name director
Four words: “From the Producer of...”
The title is trying to hide the fact that this is a sequel.
You have to suspend not only your disbelief, but also your belief
Movieja Vu: You feel like you’ve seen this before...and done better
The preview promotes B-list actors as if they were A-list stars
Promotes itself as the greatest thing since viagra
A celebrity trying to add “acting” to their resume
The actors aren’t mentioned during the preview
You have one question after seeing the preview: “Is this a straight-to-video movie?”
It doesn’t one-up the prequels it sequels
It’s obvious the actors are in it for an easy paycheck
Trying too hard to get Academy Award attention
It’s not better than what’s on Network or Cable TV
Not only is it a sequel of a remake, it’s a remake of a sequel!
You’re already annoyed by the movie’s catch phrase / tagline
It has only one A-List Star, and it’s not and “art” film
A-List supporting actors given starring roles
You’re laughing during the preview for all the wrong reasons
Doesn’t mention that it’s a remake / Pretends to be original
The movie’s release date has been delayed many times
Obvious oscar winners / nominees not giving Oscar worthy performances
The preview reveals TOO MUCH of the story
The director does not have an impressive resume
The movie’s marketing is totally misleading
Sex sells this, because the actor, director and story don’t
The preview overuses a new special effect
The roles seem miscast - ex. the actress playing the mom isn’t believable
The title of the movie is mentioned in the dialog
The preview reveals the ending!
The director/writer responsible for the actor’s previous hits is not involved in this project
The movie acts like we don’t have smart brain think
The preview reveals the best parts!
The preview vocie over guy is bullsh*tting us
The preview focuses too much on featuring the special effects
It’s based on a non-fiction, non-story, non-narrative book of facts or opinions.
The movie has no balls. It could push boundaries, but it plays it safe instead
There’s nothing new about this movie except the gimmick, like 3-D
It should be rated R, but is PG-13 because it wants a bigger Box Office
“Based on a true story” means “we changed a lot of sh*t”
Michael Bay is involved in the making of this movie
It’s not clear who the opponent/bad guy/villian is
“From the director of” is used instead of the directors name
All star cast may be a sign of compensating for lack of story quality
A holiday release day is the main focus of the preview
The preview uses the success and/or quality of another similar movie to give credibility to this one
There’s way too much cliche dialog featured in the preview as if i were awesome
The score is a bit over the top trying to force an emotional reaction
The script wasn’t complete before filming/being rewritten during
The Sequel makes the same mistakes as the original
It’s obvious the actors aren’t committed 100% to their characters
No mention of the big name producer(s) involved
The directors SUCCESSFUL movies aren’t mentioned?!? WTF?
The screenwriter does not have an extensive and/or impressive resume
This is obviously being made to quickly cash in on a passing fad or celebrity death/scandal
The movie is trying too hard to be eccentric, quirky and/or hipster cool
The source material it’s adapted from doesn’t have enough story to fill 90 minutes of screen time
The Main Character has had a rewrite sex change.
M. Night Shyamalan is involved with this movie.
The director’s background is special effects/CGI
The studio’s only hope for a big box office score is the opening weekend before the movie truth gets out.
The preview has more than 5 warning signs.
Small budget pretending to be big budget.
First name only character development = story<CGI<$$$.
The sequel is greenlit before the original hits theaters.
Is this made by The Asylum?
The movie is not being screened for critics.
“From the studio that brought you...”
The director has never made a movie in this genre before.
“From the makers of...”
Musician trying to be a movie director.
Filmmaker ego alert!
Marketing not promoting a recognizable director.
Gives itself credit it hasn’t earned.
Running time is less than 90 minutes.
Not sure if it’s a spoof.
Star’s personal life prevents movie enjoyment.
Attempt to repair public image.
It’s based on a F’n board game.
From a F’n toy company.
It’s a “sidequel.” Same universe, different main character.