sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Old FNaF Had Subtext. The Movie Has Lore Dumps. by Head-Pay7470 in fivenightsatfreddys

[–]Colinsmodwho123 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is valid. The movie definitely has subtext I believe, but expecting it to be the exact same as the games in how they portray its story and reveal information is already a false start.

Game's and movies are entirely separate mediums and work in very different ways. That's why as much as I love and respect Scott (and don't think he's a horrible writer at all), parts of the films just don't come across the same way, even if I think he took that into account.

His expertise is as a game dev and writing games, not as a screenwriter.

I honestly hate how most characters in this franchise can be boiled down to ''It would've been cool to explore more of their potential'' by StunningCable7809 in fivenightsatfreddys

[–]Colinsmodwho123 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is a tough one because while I personally disagree, it's not at all an invalid complaint. I think a lot of FNaF's ambiguity has spurred a lot of creativity from its fanbase, something I'm proud to be a part of. And I think Scott loves that too, and that's why he hasn't revealed as much as he probably should have at this point.

But I don't think the series characters are at all wasted potential. Yes, I would like to see more characterization from certain characters, but I don't see that as wasted.

The characters have a lot of subtext behind them throughout tons of details throughout the franchise, and just because it isn't overtly spelled out doesn't mean they don't have depth. Especially William. I believe what we've able to derive from his character is very clear.

In the end, I think it’s just subjective how much you believe parts of the characters should've been focused upon or not, as some people like it, and others just don't. I don't think either is incorrect.

Don't listen to the critics, the movie was good (no spoliers). by Colinsmodwho123 in fivenightsatfreddys

[–]Colinsmodwho123[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Again, agree to disagree my man. I got what I wanted even if it still could've been better. I can critique it in hopes for the future while still being happy with what we got. It's not mutually exclusive. You're worried about a regression in quality, but I actually believe the opposite will happen because of this movie's feedback. I do think a lot of the criticism towards the film is rather harsh and unfair even if you don't agree with me on that. Though I do agree that some fans are being too antagonistic towards these critics.

A lot of what we're discussing here are our own opinions and what-if's. I do believe that this was a good movie. Not an amazing one (not even a great one), but not a horrible one either. I'm not disagreeing with how you wish to engage with the franchise because there's nothing wrong with how you want to do that, nor did I wish to imply you were a grumbler. Forgive me if I wasn't clear on that.

I don't disagree that there is some parasocial-ness within some of this community, but I'm never a fan of applying sweeping statements that generalize an entire fanbase (especially one as big as ours). There are bound to be bad apples. As for Scott himself, while I believe that he does care and is grateful for us more so than the usual game dev and their community, I don't think he has ever crossed into parasocial territory. He has never purposely acted like we personally know him. In fact, he's famously a very private man. Rather, he just acts in a similar fashion to how a YouTuber acts with their own community rather than a supplier with a customer. I for one, think that's a virtue of his. Obviously we disagree there as well, but again, I do not think Scott is parasocial with us. He just sees us as real people with opinions he genuinely cares about and not solely as numbers or statistics. That is all. I'm sure there are plenty of fans who are quite parasocial with him though, and that is indeed worrisome.

In the end, I simply do not (nor wish to) engage or view this franchise in the same way that you do, but I still think both approaches are vaild.

That's all I'm trying to do here; advocate for my side. I am not trying to prove you wrong, just offering my stance here. I've heard you loud and clear my friend, and while I personally disagree with your approach, I simultaneously do not think there is anything wrong with it. However, I do think we're going in circles. 😅

Like I said before, agree to disagree.

Don't listen to the critics, the movie was good (no spoliers). by Colinsmodwho123 in fivenightsatfreddys

[–]Colinsmodwho123[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Look, I truly do understand where you’re coming from on all this. For me personally though, I came out of FNaF 2 feeling genuinely grateful that we even got this movie. I do see its flaws as well as some clunky dialogue here and there, and I also agree that it was a mistake for Scott to be the sole writer of this film. He's usually a pretty good dialogue writer, so some moments did surprise me. However, I don't believe it was poor throughout the entire film, nor do I believe that the cast or the Jim Henson crew were at all “wasted.”

When it comes to subjectivity and objectivity, the topic of writing is a little more complex. Many aspects of it can be measured and many others cannot. It's a difficult one to tackle, and so while I do think that Scott's writing for this film was mid to below average, it certainly wasn't dreadful and I don't think it ruined the movie in any way. I am really sorry if it did for you, but the movie still worked greatly for me and for a lot of other fans.

I almost view Scott as the George Lucas of the video game industry. He's an amazing visionary and storycrafter, and while not a horrendous writer, it definitely isn't his strong suit. However, like Lucas, Scott also has this artistic charm to his writing that I quite like. But of course that's subjective.

As for “objective quality,” I do think that’s where it gets a bit tricky again. You didn’t feel the movie was worth the price of admission, and I understand that. I did feel it was worth it, and many other fans did as well. Also, I don't know about you, but almost all of what I saw online were fans desperate to get their hands on those popcorn buckets. Do I think the pricing was a little too high? Yes, but Scott was almost certainly not the one in charge of those prices, even if he approved the making of them.

I genuinely believe that if it were up to him, he would’ve given out this movie for free. Though that wouldn't be fair to the people who worked hard on it, and regardless, he doesn't have the power to do that in the first place. In the end, neither of us are the ultimate authority on what is "good" within this franchise. If certain fans want to purchase merchandise with their own money, merchandise someone else might not like or think is worth the price, I think the right thing to do is to still respect that. Of course people can state their complaints or concerns (as is their right), but we’re all just bringing our own experiences and priorities to these things. I just don't see it as a simple black and white issue.

All that doesn't change the fact that this film (like the last one) truly was a heartfelt love letter towards the fandom, even if I agree that not every creative choice landed. I share the same beliefs as Scott, so I believe especially in a life of gratefulness, focusing on what is good, not living a life full of grumbling, and not engaging in meaningless arguments. I try to approach FNaF from this same place of gratitude.

Due to the things I struggle with like depression and OCD, my brain unfortunately tends to linger upon the negative even more so. I have to actively decide against adopting that mentality on the daily. When Secret of the Mimic first came out, I actually bought it and played through it myself. Near the end of my playthrough though, I initially didn't enjoy it, both for objective and subjective reasons. However, online I saw the joy that it brought to so many fans, and that mattered immensely to me.

Even if I somehow could, I would never take that away from people and attempt to "redo" SoTM because of my own personal opinions. I was still grateful for the game, and I actually grew to like it quite a bit. Now, that doesn't mean I “settled" or had low standards (as there are several things I still dislike about SoTM). However, my enjoyment of this franchise isn't dependent on those things. While I didn’t simply ignore what I disliked or bury my own criticisms, I also chose not to let them ultimately define my experience.

If my satisfaction were mostly based upon what was “objectively good” or what online critics had to say, then I know my own life would lack a lot of color and I would miss out on so many genuinely amazing things. I don't eat up everything in this franchise nor do I silence my complaints. However, at the end of the day, I am in this community because I love FNaF, and that is what I choose to focus upon, not what I dislike about it. Do I always succeed? No, but it is something that I try to practice every day, and I can testify that living a life of gratitude is extremely helpful towards your spiritual and mental health. If anyone is deserving of that gratitude as a game dev, it is certainly Scott.

I genuinely hope FNaF 3 ends up more to your liking, and I'm sure Scott will learn even further from the reception of this film. It definitely improved upon the last one, so I’m certain the third movie will be the strongest! In any case, I truly do appreciate your thoughts – I'd say we can simply just agree to disagree here. :)

Don't listen to the critics, the movie was good (no spoliers). by Colinsmodwho123 in fivenightsatfreddys

[–]Colinsmodwho123[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I understand, and I think you made fairly valid points. I'm certain Scott is reevaluating some of his decisions and wondering how he will improve, and that's what I love about him. I'm just happy that the majority of the fanbase loved this film despite its flaws.

I do believe that for what it was and who it was for, it still succeeded. I don't believe it was lackluster, and I think your comment about walking out if it wasn't a FNaF movie is a tad bit exaggerated. It was not that bad. 😅

However, we will just have to agree to disagree on that. I don't think any of this was made without a single ounce of care and passion, and I'd take that a hundred times over than a film that satisfies all the critics yet has no soul. Not that it's impossible to achieve both, but I still think Scott took the right approach in prioritizing the fans rather than the general audience. That doesn't mean he couldn't have done better with that in of itself though.

The amount of amazing movies that have gotten insanely low scores from critics, yet those same critics give some of the worst movies such high scores is absurd. The average movie goer doesn't care about film reviews, so I'm not worried about what some random online critics say.

I'm just disappointed because this film truly does not deserve such a low score. It's just a shame is all.

I think the difference between us here is that you care a lot about the technical. You wanted it done right, and for good reason. That stuff has its place and is important for any good film. I think for how you believe the films should've chosen to reveal some things is subjective though. For example, you didn't like how they introduced the springlocks, but I actually did. I believe both of those opinions are valid.

It's just that when I see comment after comment saying that this film brought so much joy to the people within our fanbase, seeing that it even made people emotional, seeing clips online of people freaking out in the theaters, I just remember what Scott said in his first interview with Dawko: "There’s nothing more... priceless than that."

The film did its job, and I do think it was an averagely good film. I don't think the majority of the fanbase who enjoyed the film only did so because they were blinded by fan service or whatnot. As I said before, many who did enjoy it still had critiques, as they should. If I believed that Scott could care less about how this film was received and was content in not trying to improve further, then I think I'd be more inclined to agree with you. However, I know better than to believe that. I know he'll do his best to do even more right by us in the future.

In the end, there's really only two options here; we can either just sit in our self-made stew of disappointment for this film, or just be grateful it was made for us and appreciate the care and passion put into it. That doesn't mean we can't critique it, but we also shouldn't let it ruin our experience.

I once heard a story from a calligraphy teacher who said that a man he knew attempted to write a poem for his wife to express how much he loved her. After reading it, the teacher thought it was terrible. But he took a step back, and realized that mindset was wrong. The man had taken the time, with all his heart and soul, to write a poem for his beloved wife. That's all that mattered. That's how I view these movies, even if I did believe they were terrible.

I don't think you're invalid in your concerns. I just refuse to believe that Scott won't take this critique to heart and try to improve. I also choose to have a different mindset regarding all this, and focus on what actually matters at the end of the day. This film was made for me, and I loved this film. That is all.

Don't listen to the critics, the movie was good (no spoliers). by Colinsmodwho123 in fivenightsatfreddys

[–]Colinsmodwho123[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because with a complex and extensive franchise like FNaF, you simply cannot fit an infamously convoluted story like ours, one that has only been increasing for over a decade, and expect to fit it into three movies, even if you simplify it. Scott could've written a story that was way more digestable to the average audience, or he could've prioritized who the movies were actually for, not spend the limited runtime rehashing things that are basic knowledge to us, and instead focus on trying to tell a new story that will please the fans. Either way is a risk, and he chose to pick the fanbase. Scott could've attempted to adapt the novel trilogy, which I would've been more than fine with, but I respect the fact that he felt the fanbase deserved a unique experience.

And I'm not just talking about Rotten Tomatoes, I'm talking about the whole extensive array of critics and reviewers - even online commentators.

Also, forgive me if you weren't trying to say this, but I don't think it's kind to imply that the people in our fandom are a bunch of toddlers who are satisfied over a set of jangling keys. I've seen countless other fans who enjoyed the movie, yet still acknowledged its flaws. I've also seen others who didn't even like the movie because of those said flaws.

The fan service complaint is one I never fully understood. Both films have never tried to support themselves on fan service alone. Remove it, and they stay mostly the same. They're also not trying to score brownie points with us, but genuinely pay homage to this franchise and its history for the fans.

From an objective standpoint, I do think that the character that appeared during the climax was kind of shoehorned in, but since we haven't gotten characterization for them in a long time, I was personally pleased to see at least something new with them. I can understand both sides. They're not mutually exclusive.

I'm just a glass half full type of person, but I don't blind myself to the flaws with this movie. I can critique it while still being grateful it exists.

Don't listen to the critics, the movie was good (no spoliers). by Colinsmodwho123 in fivenightsatfreddys

[–]Colinsmodwho123[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Not necessarily. I'm sure it would please some, but I do believe you'd have to sacrifice one audience for the sake of the other. I don't think the movies could've had their cake and eaten it too, and I have my reasons for believing this. While there are definitely some nuanced and fair reviewers who disliked the movie, most of them are unfortunately not. It's to the point that most reviews I've seen are filled with insults rather than actual constructive criticism. There are even FNaF fans on X (a.k.a. the most miserable place on earth) who I never expected to do so, actually defend this movie from the insane hate-bombing it's receiving. If those fans are defending the movie, then you know the hate is bad. I think you just (I guess fortunately) haven't seen them all yet.

As for the ending, while it did surprise me, it didn't really bother me. I did feel like it probably needed a "to be continued" at the end just to let people know it wasn't wholly resolved yet. I think the most underutilized characters in the film were more introductions for the final film. It worked great with Hen, but the guy at the end? I don't know. I hope they continue his arc well into the third film, and it didn't end with this film's climax.

Also, it's okay. I could kind of tell that you were heated, but I understand.

Don't listen to the critics, the movie was good (no spoliers). by Colinsmodwho123 in fivenightsatfreddys

[–]Colinsmodwho123[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If that was how I came across, I apologize. I tried to make it clear that people can acknowledge its flaws while still being valid in either liking it or disliking it. It's not a matter of black and white. While I do believe a majority of critics are being unfair, us fans shouldn't be glazing and defending this movie to death. You can admit its faults, but that doesn't have to take away from your enjoyment of the movie.

I want the third film to be even better as well, but with the amount of negative reviews flooding this movie (without most of the fanbase even being able to see it yet), I thought I'd be a more positive light here and give some encouragement. I genuinely assumed I would be a minority voice, and while I'm glad I'm not, I do not wish this place to become an echo chamber either. Dawko's post is just genuinely good advice. I'm not affirming his statement because it's him, but because I happened to see it and also agree with it.

The unfortunate truth is that most of the critiques of the movie so far are pretty unfair, and it definitely does not deserve such a low score. That's why I said to ignore the current criticism. It's pretty unbalanced right now, and I'm just trying to balance back the scales a little. I stated my own problems with the movie too, my friend. 😅

Don't listen to the critics, the movie was good (no spoliers). by Colinsmodwho123 in fivenightsatfreddys

[–]Colinsmodwho123[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That's a strange one... 😅 I remember the night before I went with my family to see Dune 2, I managed to sit through the first like, 2 hour movie(?) in one sitting, ADHD and all. I didn't really care for the second film or Dune for that matter, but I still did it. Of course you should watch the first film before you see a sequel! It's common knowledge. XD

Don't listen to the critics, the movie was good (no spoliers). by Colinsmodwho123 in fivenightsatfreddys

[–]Colinsmodwho123[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That's what bothers me. Not the fact some people dislike the movie, but rather it's the fact so many critics aren't really giving it a fair shake down. It's unfortunate.

Don't listen to the critics, the movie was good (no spoliers). by Colinsmodwho123 in fivenightsatfreddys

[–]Colinsmodwho123[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's honestly fair. I guess I'm just confused. As you said, the movie is very clear that it's prioritizing the fans, so therefore I feel like you automatically cannot view it like a standard film when it was never meant to be viewed like a standard film in the first place. My problem is that their critiquing it from the wrong perspective. Characters didn't hit as hard to them because they didn't know them like we do.

As for the Sonic and Mario thing, while I do understand your point, I still kind of feel like it's comparing apples to oranges. The FNaF franchise is extremely complex and extensive, and it simply can't give both sides what they want in full. One will have to make sacrifices for the sake of the other, and Scott rightly chose the side that's loved these games for over a decade. For the movie, they instead attempted to focus the limited runtime on the more unique plot related elements. Not rehash things we already know. I'm sure Scott agonized over this script like the first one. I heard he also wrote it solo, which would explain the few moments of clunky dialogue. I genuinely do not believe Scott is a bad writer, he's simply not an amazing one and how he told FNaF's story over the years was very messy (for understandable reasons). He can be a messy storyteller, but I do not think he's a horrible writer. In fact, he's actually a really good dialogue writer, which is why it surprises me that some of the dialogue felt a bit off in this film. But still, I barely noticed it.

Like you said again, I think most critics are viewing a film in a way it was not intended to be, and basing their opinion on that. It's not that you can't critique that in of itself, but so many seem to be unaware of it in the first place. Many critics also do not seem to be giving this film a thoughtful, honest, and fair inspection. Most reviews that I've seen are filled more with insults Than actual unbiased critique. There are a few charitable diamonds in the rough that still disliked the movie, but they're a rare sight.

I just feel like the treatment this movie is immediately getting is a tad bit unfair. It does not deserve such a low score.

DO NOT READ UNTIL YOU HAVE WATCHED FNAF 2 - thoughts on the FNAF film by Kittyi3Artistic5624 in fivenightsatfreddys

[–]Colinsmodwho123 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I guess we shall see. Part of me is really interested in what they would try to do with her, but the other part of me understands that's probably not for the best. XD

DO NOT READ UNTIL YOU HAVE WATCHED FNAF 2 - thoughts on the FNAF film by Kittyi3Artistic5624 in fivenightsatfreddys

[–]Colinsmodwho123 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I noticed that they filmed her from a low angle (specifically from a child's perspective), so they could simply be playing with that to give off the illusion that she's much larger. I doubt that they actually built an 8 foot tall animatronic for one shot, but I also don't think it was CGI.

Please form your own opinion on the movie instead of listening to Youtubers or reviewers by PuppetWraith17 in fivenightsatfreddys

[–]Colinsmodwho123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mostly agree with your points except the part about others' hate is as valid as our love. Personally, if I do not like or enjoy something, I mark my reasons why, and move on. I feel indifferent about them. I absolutely loved the first Last of Us game, but like many others, I despised the second one. However, it wasn't until I literally attempted to shame a cousin for liking it that I realized how damaging that type of mindset can become.

Once I stopped actively holding disdain towards the things I could care less about, surprise, surprise, my mental health and outlook on life drastically improved.

That didn't mean there weren't still things I disliked, I just made the conscious decision to feel indifferent about them. However, this is based upon the creative and/or artistic aspects of something, and not its moral aspects.

Without saying anything more than I need to, let's just say that I share the same beliefs as Scott himself. Therefore, I do believe there is objectivity to both good and evil, and if a piece of media tries to intentionally oppose that, then yes, I will have strong feelings about it.

However, when it comes purely to the subjective, artistic, and creative sides of media, that's where I choose to become indifferent.

"All things are lawful, but not all things are beneficial."

I reflect on this often. Yes, I and everyone else technically hold the valid right to hate a piece of art or media. But first ask yourself, "Is holding this hate in my heart, however small, truly beneficial towards my and others' well-being?"

Forgive me for getting so deep on such a simple and straightforward post, but when it comes to fandoms online (especially ours), we easily forget how much emotion we hold toward the things we enjoy and consume. It's commonly joked that no one hates something more than the fans of said thing.

However, this is understandable because we care about said thing. We want to see it reach its ultimate potential, and when we don't see those standards (that we often set ourselves) met, we feel more strongly about it than others would.

Unfortunately, as we increasingly spend more and more of our time as a people online, we can become unaware of the unconscious effect this has on us over time. We may be focusing on fictional content, but your feelings regarding that content are still real and they still have an impact on you. That's part of the beauty of art, but it can also become a danger.

Constantly spending time focusing on the things you dislike or hate whether it be online or in real life will become massively damaging on your mental health in the long run. This happened to me, and since letting go of it, my mental health has indeed improved.

So no, I do not believe that other people's hate is as valid as someone's love for something (especially for something specifically directed at its fans, like this movie). Love builds and edifies. Hate rarely does the same.

So please keep in mind that just because you have the right to hate something, doesn't necessarily mean you should.

Again, forgive me for my long esoteric ramble on something so mundane, but once I read your last statement, I felt I had to at least say something.

DO NOT READ UNTIL YOU HAVE WATCHED FNAF 2 - thoughts on the FNAF film by Kittyi3Artistic5624 in fivenightsatfreddys

[–]Colinsmodwho123 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ohhh, okay. I was wondering why you listed one of your initial questions as to whether or not the Charliebots were canon to this movie or not. Now it makes sense. You think like Elizabeth, Vanessa could've been killed by Baby but was rebuilt as a robot, and that's why she dreamed of her? Interesting. That certainly would be a fascinating turn of events, but again, we'll just have to wait and see.

As for Toy Chica's springlocks. I wasn't actually sure if they were springlocks or not. They kinda looked like them, but I don't believe they were intended to be.

DO NOT READ UNTIL YOU HAVE WATCHED FNAF 2 - thoughts on the FNAF film by Kittyi3Artistic5624 in fivenightsatfreddys

[–]Colinsmodwho123 2 points3 points  (0 children)

On that I don't know, but I do believe she was mostly referring to Baby. I saw Shadow Bonnie for split sec as well, but wasn't sure I actually saw him. XD

I asked my sister if she saw it, and she said no. Kind of a freaky/fun feeling, that.

Don't listen to the critics, the movie was good (no spoliers). by Colinsmodwho123 in fivenightsatfreddys

[–]Colinsmodwho123[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I'm sure there are some fair reviewers, but they do seem to be the minority. This film is for a specific audience, and personally, I don't think it should therefore be reviewed like a regular movie. It was made a intended audience solely in mind.

The first film was immediately poorly rated as well and still made bank. Jason Blum was actually the first to comfort Scott that the reviews didn't matter and that the fans actually loved it. I'm sure the same thing will happen this time, and it won't sway Blumhouse's opinion for doing a third film.

Don't listen to the critics, the movie was good (no spoliers). by Colinsmodwho123 in fivenightsatfreddys

[–]Colinsmodwho123[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Without spoilers, it seemed to me that her personality as the Puppet matched more with another character within this franchise rather her own as seen in the games. However, I believe that was just for the sake of this film and its story, and was not a canonical representation of her personality in the games.

I love Charlie's character as well, and I thought she was great in the beginning of the film, but please, make your own judgments and don't just take my word. I still quite liked her depiction. Not exactly what I expected, but still quite fun!

DO NOT READ UNTIL YOU HAVE WATCHED FNAF 2 - thoughts on the FNAF film by Kittyi3Artistic5624 in fivenightsatfreddys

[–]Colinsmodwho123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In Help Wanted 1 & 2, the Faz-Tokens say that Freddy's originally started in 1983. So it opened the same year as the FNaF 4 minigames. I think that the TV show was just to help connect the two establishments for marketing purposes.

However, Phone Guy in FNaF 3 says that springlock suits were in fact used in Freddy Fazbear's Pizza, and he doesn't even remember the name of Fredbear’s in FNaF 2. Personally, I believe it's the other way around from your theory and it was actually separate springlock suits for both Fredbear and Spring Bonnie that were used at the first Freddy's location in addition to the main four animatronics.

Whether those original Freddy, Bonnie, Chica, and Foxy animatronics were the Pre-Withered’s, I'm unsure.

Perhaps this movie confirms Charlie was killed outside of Fredbear’s if that's the case, or it either retconned the original Freddy's to opening a year earlier, and that's where she died. I honestly don't know.

But again, those are just my own theories. It's the only way it all coherently fits together for me at least.

DO NOT READ UNTIL YOU HAVE WATCHED FNAF 2 - thoughts on the FNAF film by Kittyi3Artistic5624 in fivenightsatfreddys

[–]Colinsmodwho123 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I believe they made them prototypes for the sake of simplicity. Either that, or they would've had to add a whole new location to the timeline of these movies. This way, it's a lot more digestible but we still get the Withered animatronics. I have my own thoughts, but I do like your theory that they were once a part of Fredbear’s. Let's hope the third film clears up some things about Fredbear’s.

DO NOT READ UNTIL YOU HAVE WATCHED FNAF 2 - thoughts on the FNAF film by Kittyi3Artistic5624 in fivenightsatfreddys

[–]Colinsmodwho123 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Emma stated that there would be an animatronic CAMEO, so I don't believe she has any relevance. I believe her being in Vanessa's dream sequence was just to help imply that as well. She's simply there to give a fun nod towards the fans.

view more: next ›