Hocus Pocus Sequel Being Developed for Disney+

[Prince-1]

You got to love the sound of crickets.

Apologists don't like facts, they wince whenever the light of truth falls on their face.

That isn’t the sound of crickets you hear but the sound of laughter at you thinking you proved anything. True journalists who review movies for a living are not being bought and paid for. It is the wannabe podcast losers who want to get in the good graces of Disney and who will do anything to do so.

 

[MisterPenguin]

4 minutes 55 seconds in

"Every single person that wants to have access to things early. That wants to get access to things so that traffic is drawn to their site will on occasion. Occasionally will play softball. Occasionally has to you know look the other way."

cohost asks what he means.

"In a sense you know I hated a movie, but I won't say that I hated the movie."

I don't know whose sound clip was saying you occasionally, *occasionally* have to play...

But they were certainly emphasizing *occasionally*.

And for those bad reviews that are given out, how exactly does that work? Does Disney put out a spreadsheet indicating which content they're allowed to dis?

Sounds a lot like self-censoring. Or conspiratorial nonsense.

And big time journalistic papers don't play that game. They'll print stories about attempts to being manipulated, like the L.A. Times did once. And they immediately got their access back.

I'll admit that the social influencers that Disney wants to use as free advertising are being manipulated. But big city newspapers around the country aren't sore about not being invited to the early Food & Wine menu preview.

RT and Metacritic combine scores from these unmanipulated critics, often weighting their score compared to small time vloggers/websites.

Anything more than that is conspiracy lunacy.

It got good ratings! [That's just proof people being bought by Disney.]

It got bad ratings! [That's just proof of Disney covering their tracks!]

I can tell at this point there is no convincing you since you posit two contradictory things as proof of a conspiracy. This post is for the reasonable people out there.

 

[LSLS]

Even if I bought into the idea that sometimes the critics are strong-armed into good reviews (and if I did, I definitely wouldn't think it was on that large a scale), I have a REALLY hard time buying into the idea that a straight to Disney+ movie is the kind of movie they would feel the need to provide a very positive review for. I mean, are we making the case that Disney pressured for THIS movie, but decided to let it play out for a movie with the budget the Eternals had? Again, I probably loathe critic reviews more than about anyone on this board, but not for being bought, but for their self-righteousness and constant need to find the biggest words to say the simplest things.

 

[Disney Irish]

4 minutes 55 seconds in

"Every single person that wants to have access to things early. That wants to get access to things so that traffic is drawn to their site will on occasion. Occasionally will play softball. Occasionally has to you know look the other way."

cohost asks what he means.

"In a sense you know I hated a movie, but I won't say that I hated the movie."

If you believe that, then you probably believe this is really Walt's head too....

I have it for sale, cheap price only $1500.....

 

[Disney Irish]

If you believe it doesn't happen, than you must believe in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny.

I did when I was young, but then I grew up and stopped believing something just because "someone" said it.

 

[Disney Irish]

LOL, you can believe what you want man. I'll end with this question for you.

What is more likely?...

A 180 billion dollar company can buy people off and help sell their content.

or

A 180 billion dollar company allows negative reviews that could damage their profits.

I know that you think Disney is "all powerful", but they don't control everything. If they really did control everything they wouldn't "allow" ANY of their movies to get negative reviews.

Plus as someone already pointed out, why would they "pay" to get positive reviews for a D+ movie but not "pay" to get positive reviews for an MCU film released to theaters?

Not to mention if this was real it would be the biggest payola scandal since the 50s and 60s when records companies were actually doing it to get priority play time for their artists. And with today's climate with certain groups trying to take down Disney would bring lawsuits against them so fast you could set an egg timer to it.

So yeah what is more likely in reality.....

 

[BuddyThomas]

You got to love the sound of crickets.

Apologists don't like facts, they wince whenever the light of truth falls on their face.

Maybe it’s the sound of crickets because no one can figure out how you are coming up with such nonsense.

 

[BuddyThomas]

Back on topic

This movie is going to suck!

You don’t know that.

 

[doctornick]

The original is kitschy fun but isn’t a particularly quality movie. Honestly if it wasn’t for the big name actresses playing the witches, it would be easy to mistake it for a Disney Channel Original

 

[BuddyThomas]

The original is kitschy fun but isn’t a particularly quality movie. Honestly if it wasn’t for the big name actresses playing the witches, it would be easy to mistake it for a Disney Channel Original

Agreed but it has become pretty beloved over the years. And yeah, the original is only 39% positive on Rotten Tomatoes. Those damned bought and paid for movie critics, LOL.

 

[Prince-1]

If you believe that, then you probably believe this is really Walt's head too....

I have it for sale, cheap price only $1500.....

I‘ll take two.

 

[oogie boogie man]

You don’t know that.

This is coming from a guy that says every trailer looks great.

 

[BuddyThomas]

This is coming from a guy that says every trailer looks great.

Unless you have seen me post about “every trailer”, which you have not, then save your typing energy. I say plenty of trailers look like crap but I don’t announce to the world that something is going to suck before there is any evidence of that.

 

[BuddyThomas]

67% on Rotten Tomatoes. Not great but not terrible either.

“CRITICS CONSENSUS
Hocus Pocus 2 is basically a boiling cauldron of nostalgia, but that's more than enough for this belated sequel to cast a reasonably effective spell.”

Hocus Pocus 2 | Rotten Tomatoes

It's been 29 years since someone lit the Black Flame Candle and resurrected the 17th-century sisters, and they are looking for revenge. Now it is up to three high-school students to stop the ravenous witches from wreaking a new kind of havoc on Salem before dawn on All Hallow's Eve.

www.rottentomatoes.com

 

[tcool123]

I mean its:

A) higher than the original

B) higher than most of the original films from the platform save for a handful

 

[oogie boogie man]

Rotten Tomatoes gave She-Hulk an 87%, enough said.

 

[Mr Ferret 75]

Soooo. Who has watched it and is giving a review ?

 

[oogie boogie man]

Soooo. Who has watched it and is giving a review ?

RT is being pretty fishy with She-Hulk. You can't see any of the Critics Reviews.

But you can see the viewers reviews though. Most of them are 1 star or less and the 4 and 5 star ones use very little detail in their descriptions. Like they either haven't watched it or they're bots.

 

[Mr Ferret 75]

RT is being pretty fishy with She-Hulk. You can't see any of the Critics Reviews.

But you can see the viewers reviews though. Most of them are 1 star or less and the 4 and 5 star ones use very little detail in their descriptions. Like they either haven't watched it or they're bots.

I didn't ask anything about rotten tomatoes.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Spoiler: Spoiler

I liked it until the end. It was too much of a happy ending for the witches who are child murderers.