The Pitch Meeting of Five Nights at Freddy's

Article Overview

The Five Nights at Freddy's movie has been met with critical backlash, however, it has managed to garner a significant following among audiences, smashing box office records.

Our website's latest installment of the Pitch Meeting series playfully critiques the adaptation for its emphasis on hidden references and catering to fans, underwhelming character development, and absence of thrilling death scenes.

Lessons to be learned for a potential sequel involve the need to maintain secrecy, enhance the execution of frights, and address criticisms regarding predictability from the initial film. Our website's renowned Pitch Meeting series has recently released its latest episode, which delves into the world of Five Nights at Freddy's. Despite facing several years of development, this adaptation of Scott Cawthon's horror gaming franchise received negative reviews from critics upon its release in October, largely due to the film's lack of scares, predictable storyline, and excessive fan service. However, audiences have responded positively, resulting in Five Nights at Freddy's breaking numerous box office records during its opening weekend.

Five Nights At Freddy's 2 Has A Lot To Learn From The First Movie's Mistakes

On the heels of its highly anticipated release, Our website's Pitch Meeting series delves into the Five Nights at Freddy's movie. In this episode, host Ryan George playfully suggests himself for a cameo in the film, only to have his Studio Guy character reach out to renowned YouTube gamer MatPat instead. The video proceeds to highlight several criticisms of the adaptation, including its heavy reliance on Easter eggs and fan service for gaming enthusiasts, the underwhelming characterization of Josh Hutcherson's Mike as a passive observer amidst unfolding events, and the lack of thrilling kills depicted on screen by the animatronic characters.

Similar to the early years of video game adaptations, the reception of Five Nights at Freddy's has sparked a significant divide between critics and audiences. Critics, with a meager 29% approval rating on review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes, have largely expressed negative opinions. However, audiences have overwhelmingly embraced it, awarding it an impressive 89% approval rating on the platform. They commend the movie for effectively presenting the extensive lore of Cawthon's games and capturing the essence of the source material.

Regardless of one's opinion on the movie, there are several important lessons that a potential Five Nights at Freddy's 2 must take from its predecessor. Firstly, there needs to be a stronger effort to keep the movie's secrets concealed during production and leading up to its release. The first movie suffered from an example of this with Matthew Lillard's role in the project. Initial casting reports claimed he would play the main antagonist William Afton, only for subsequent reports to contradict this. This resulted in theories of a plot twist revealing Lillard's character as the game character, which turned out to be true and became a target for criticism regarding predictability.

Additionally, Lillard had already disclosed his involvement in a three-picture contract with Blumhouse and Universal before the movie's release.

The sequel to the Five Nights at Freddy's movie must improve its approach to creating scares. The original games gained popularity due to their sudden jump scares and the overall eerie atmosphere of the titular setting. While the movie included a few jump scares, it primarily focused on a general sense of foreboding associated with the murderous animatronics. Some argue that this was a good decision, as many modern horror movies rely heavily on jump scares. However, others felt that the movie lacked the same impact as the source material, leading to numerous requests for a different approach in planning the teased sequel, Five Nights at Freddy's 2.

Editor's P/S

As a Five Nights at Freddy's fan, I have mixed feelings about the movie. On the one hand, I appreciate that the filmmakers attempted to stay true to the source material and include as many Easter eggs and references as possible. On the other hand, I feel that the movie suffered from some of the same problems as the games, such as a lack of character development and a predictable plot.

I think the biggest problem with the movie was that it tried to cram too much into one film. The games are relatively short and straightforward, so they can get away with having a simple story. However, the movie tried to cover too much ground, and as a result, it felt rushed and disjointed. I also think the movie could have done a better job of developing the characters. In the games, the player doesn't really interact with the characters all that much, so it's not a big deal if they're not particularly well-developed. However, in the movie, the characters are front and center, and their lack of development makes it difficult to care about them.