A Quote by David Nutter

I believe in the value of test screenings. — © David Nutter
I believe in the value of test screenings.
I love test screenings. Some directors don't, I know. But I love it. I think it's because I come from the theatre and in the theatre, previews are where you really have to listen to the audience and really feel how they're responding. I found our test screenings incredibly useful.
A key part of the process for me is having screenings: not official test screenings, just gatherings of people, some I know and some I don't. We ask what is working and what isn't. So it's not as if I'm shutting out input.
I'm the biggest proponent of test screenings now. There's two ways to face test screenings. For dramas, I don't know if I would rely on them as much, although I still think you need them, because you're making a movie for an audience at the end of the day. But with comedy... You could go through a script or anything I ever worked on, where you go, "This is hilarious," and you put it in front of people and you get nothing. And then the other side of it, is something you're like, "I think this is really stupid," and it gets a giant laugh.
The Weinsteins believe in test screenings. I don't. I don't think good films are made that way. Call me crazy, but I'd like to think you need a singular vision to make good art.
We couldn't afford test screenings. This is a relatively low-budget movie [Don Jon]. But what we did have was the festival circuit.
I think test screenings with an audience are useful because they have no dog in the fight, they just say how they feel.
I like test screenings. I like to see a movie with an audience of strangers. I think it tells you a lot.
We test everything on a one- and a three-year cycle. And you want to stress-test a model, and the three-year test usually does that because you have a growth and value bias. You have different interest rate environments.
My experience of test screenings is that you don't know what kind of mood people are going to be in, and sometimes the studios accept what Joe Blo says - and this guy could just be a frustrated filmmaker, or not paying attention.
I think the purpose of test screenings is different for the studio and for the filmmaker. For the studio, I think they want to know whether the film works or not.
With 'Good Will Hunting,' Miramax made certain the recruited audience wasn't expecting to laugh at Robin Williams like they normally do. From my limited experience, you can really blow test screenings by conducting them in the wrong way.
If we are given gold, would we not test it to determine it's value? If we doubted its genuineness - we would test it by fire...and so God with us.
When teachers are forced to teach to the test, students get bored and genuine education ceases, no matter what the test scores may say… The examination as a test of the past is of no value for increased learning ability. Like all external motivators, it can produce a short term effect, but examinations for the purpose of grading the past do not hook a student on learning for life.
More than 90 percent of what Planned Parenthood does nationally is preventive care - including cervical cancer screenings, breast cancer screenings, and family planning - mostly for women with low resources and income below the poverty line.
We do not quite say that the new is more valuable because it fits in; but its fitting in is a test of its value - a test, it is true, which can only be slowly and cautiously applied, for we are none of us infallible judges of conformity.
I am sure every movie I've made, even as an actor, had multiple test screenings. And I am sure there have been horrible things written about me. But I never have to see them!
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!