Warner Bros Reportedly Refused To Test Screen Joker Folie À Deux

[RAMROD 104,132]

Despite the costly budget of Joker: Folie a Deux, a new report claims Warner Bros. elected not to have any test screenings for its latest comic book film.

Part of what made the first Joker so profitable was its low budget of $55 million. Warner Bros. had more faith in Joker 2 and gave it a budget of $200 million. The studio is taking many risks with this film as it's also a musical, a strange but bold choice for a follow-up to a global success. According to a report on Matt Belloni's Puck newsletter, Warner Bros. may have put too much faith into its gamble as it declined test screenings, despite the film's massive price tag.

Test screenings aren't always the most reliable tools for studios to predict a film's success, but it's also a gamble to avoid them. The first Jokerwas a hit, but there is no guarantee that the sequel will be as successful, especially if audiences don't like it. Based on early results, Warner Bros' decision to decline test screenings could cost the studio millions.

Since Warner Bros. declined test screenings for Joker 2, they are at the mercy of critics and audience word-of-mouth, which, so far, is leading to disastrous results.

Joker: Folie à Deux is not off to a hot start. The film only earned $7 million from its Thursday night previews, almost 50% less than the original, and word of mouth is terrible to put it lightly. Joker 2 currently holds a 36% critic score and a strikingly low 36% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes. This indicates the sequel won't have great box office legs, since poor word-of-mouth means many hesitant viewers will likely avoid it. Warner Bros' decision to avoid test screenings is currently backfiring and could lead to another DC box office flop.

https://screenrant.com/joker-2-folie-a-deux-test-screenings-denied-report/

https://puck.news/newsletter_content/what-im-hearing-caas-scare-tactics-wicked-vs-gladiator-joker-folies-3/

[Edonis 28,622]

I've said it in other threads and although Todd Phillips made very questionable decisions and is taking the heat for them (as he should), Warner Brothers is absolutely at fault as well. I fear we're about to learn some very interesting behind the scenes things about this film in the coming weeks. 

[LG2008 2,971]

They didn't? Well... It shows. Maybe they could've added more to develop Gaga's character and make her crazy crazy like she should've been!

Warner Bros. is a mess so I'm not surprised

Edited October 5 by LG2008

[Reality 71,870]

That's so bizarre. From the movie's inception, we knew that it was a gamble. The first movie was already pretty divisive, but add in Gaga & the musical elements, and it'll inevitably be more divisive. I don't understand the mindset of opting out of screen tests when you know that movie is a huge risk. I guess they really just had too much faith in it after the first film got > $1 billion & a ton of Oscar noms.

[YASKALE 432]

I sorta hate we live in a world where art gets focus grouped but here we are. 

[ALGAYDO 29,945]

Yeah we can tell 

[RAMROD 104,132]

I fcking hate WB for this.
They could've done at least one. No wonder the movie looks so lost and out of direction. They released the supposed early version where test screeners would've seen, not the final cut. 

Edited October 5 by RAMROD

[RAMROD 104,132]

Gaga move to MCU please, Feige will treat you much better  

[Ashley 8,598]

That’s so unfortunate. Based on the reactions, I wonder if they would have cut the musical part out entirely. I actually didn’t mind them, but removing them would have made more time for developing Lee’s character. What could have been.. 

[LadyEnigma 1,027]

17 minutes ago, Ashley said:

That’s so unfortunate. Based on the reactions, I wonder if they would have cut the musical part out entirely. I actually didn’t mind them, but removing them would have made more time for developing Lee’s character. What could have been.. 

I think the main thing that would’ve changed was Lee’s development/involvement in the story, MAYBE how the ending played out but I feel like there’s no changing what it is outright.

[Schwerk 6,984]

That's odd and very tricky. I wonder why they didn't bother with such a risky film. On paper the idea of shared madness sounds great, but that shared madness seems to refer to Joker and Arthur and paint Lee as a one dimensional crazed fan, and not even in the intriguing Baby Reindeer type way, which is something an audience was ready for I feel.

I mean, I have seen fans at Gaga's shows or hotel act more crazy than Lee does in this film, arson aside.

I don't think the movie is that bad, it just could've been a better movie if it didn't 'repeat' the first movie that much and dare to really dive into the new story and the new main character, the woman in this case. 

I know people that actually like this better than part 1. And I still prefer it over the polished Marvel stuff, the rawness of this really appeals to me.

[Sorcerer 12,045]

That's just ridiculous. I'm sure WB executives have seen the film before the premiere, and it's IMPOSSIBLE that they all thought it would be successful.

I think WB actually forced to shorten a lot of the musical numbers. And what resulted is a half-baked musical that doesn't commit to anything.

[Real Panda 7,598]

The movie itself has a certain tone to it, I dont want to say depressing but it has a down/dark tone to it and I get the first movie had that but its a musical as well. Some people are put off by musicals but you add the layer that its somber/dark and musical numbers that are not visually appealing or striking.

So many musical movies get grand or creative when a musical number happens but not this one.. The song choices are also not wow enough, so many villain type and prison-themed songs out there like Feeling Good, I Put A Spell On You, Bad, This Is How Villains Are Made, Seven Devils, No Rest For The Wicked, We Must Be Killers, Jailhouse Rock, etc. Like it wouldve been fun to see The Joker do a reworked version of Cellblock Tango or Gaga/Harley singing Play With Fire or Riot during that arson scene. I just feel like the Musical aspect of the film was half-baked and not pushed all the way through.

[andy232000 9,870]

Stupidest decision they could’ve made. This movie was a huge risk from the get go. If they had tested it maybe would’ve been salvageable. They could’ve gotten rid of some musical numbers and give Gaga more time

[Future Lovers 6,446]

1 hour ago, YASKALE said:

I sorta hate we live in a world where art gets focus grouped but here we are. 

I agree with you, especially in light of the news yesterday that students are looking to do this.

But I want to make clear that a test screening is not a focus group and does not do what that article was talking about.

Test screenings have been done in the film world for decades. Every film that you love has had a test screening. What test screenings do for filmmakers is it allows them to fine-tune a film’s final cut. Test screenings can only happen once a film has already been made and all they dictate is the edit of a film. They’re good for filmmakers because it allows them an unbiased reaction to what was shot and edited. A lot of times, tesr audiences are total random people pulled from the street who don’t even know what film they’re going to watch.

The story that came out yesterday is about Studios wanting to focus group BEFORE a movie even gets made, which would not do what a test screening does.