Talk:Hellraiser: Judgment

Promotion

To promote Hellraiser: Judgment, Axe Warrior Guitars just released a Hellraiser-styled guitar. I'm not sure if this is an official promotion, or if the company just made the guitar and used the Judgment label to market it ([1], [2]). DarkKnight2149 17:40, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Release date

The film may have received a release date. IMDB (which isn't reliable) said that it was 28 March 2016, then Paul T. Taylor posted this release date to his Facebook page. Reliable source Bloody-Disgusting believes that Taylor may have been reacting to IMDB. They are trying to see if this is the actual date or not. Now it's time for us to sit down and wait for a confirmation. DarkKnight2149 22:17, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Dead Central is also saying that the release date hasn't been confirmed yet. Hold on to your seats. DarkKnight2149 03:16, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Release

Good news - the film is completed. It's got sound, music and everything. A trailer and poster has also been made, and the film may even recieve a limited theatrical release. ([3]) I'll update the article when some of this stuf is released and if the theatrical run becomes official. DarkKnight2149 21:48, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

I'm Confused

The official poster is still not out, there's no release date, and there's no trailer, but Dimension says it's coming this year, how the heck is it coming this year if this year is almost over and all that stuff is still not confirmed!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.165.11 (talk • contribs)

Well, the film was announced to be released direct-to-video for a 2017 release last year (though, admittedly, it looks like that's not going to happen). There was a similar situation with another major horror film, Leatherface, where news went completely dry and the film, which was supposed to come out in 2016, didn't make the release window and was eventually given an October 2017 release date. As for the overall lack of news, we do have a partial explanation. Back in 2016, director Gary J. Tunnicliffe told Dread Central (which they published in this editorial) that there wouldn't be much news because "It seems to me that any images or fodder given out in good faith are kinda twisted around – usually to the negative – so the best response really is the film itself I suppose." Of course, this doesn't explain why the film still doesn't have a release date, especially when the director's website has said "Official release information coming soon..." for months now. I have heard rumours that the film was a lot better than the studio expected and they are considering some sort of theatrical release. However, that isn't confirmed. The short answer to your question is - We have to wait to find out. DarkKnight2149 04:19, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Amazon release date

Amazon claims that the film will be released on 13 February 2017, which a number of sites are reporting on. However, Amazon isn't a reliable source for release dates and have been known to use placeholders. I would imagine that an official confirmation isn't far behind. DarkKnight2149 21:30, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Update: Amazon has (unfortunately) removed the 13 February date and replaced it with the text "This title has not yet been released." Although I personally hope that still ends up being the correct date, this is one of the many reasons we should be careful not to jump the gun. Amazon (and other retailers) have been known to do things like this when no official date for an upcoming product is out. The fact that it's available for pre-order is hopefully an indication that an official date is nigh. DarkKnight2149 01:00, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Children of the Corn

Again, why is this statement--"After a near two year period silence from Dimension Films, it was announced that Children of the Corn: Runaway would also be distributed by Lionsgate on March 13, 2018."--even in this article? What does the release of that film have to do with this film? The fact that they were both delayed and picked by Lionsgate has no bearing on this film's page. It is original research to try to argue that there is some story connection when there is no source to verify that. The fact that they were both picked up by Lionsgate is inconsequential to each other.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 20:29, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Additionally, I'm looking at the development here and there is a lot of talk of the development and rights to Children of the Corn, which has not business being on this page. Just because a source is simultaneously talking about two franchises does NOT mean that we should be talking about both on this page. We should be pulling what is relevant to this film for this page and the other for the other page. You're implying more than a tangential relationship between the films. They do not share stories or universes, and should not be talked about so much on the other's page.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 04:05, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

First of all, ONLY the pertinent information related to Children of the Corn: Runaway is covered in the article. Secondly, numerous sources have pointed out both Hellraiser: Judgment and Children of the Corn: Runaway are (to use an exact quote) "closely linked": [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9]. Both films were filmed in the exact same locations at the same time, with much of the same crew by the same studio in order to maintain the rights, were picked by the same distributor after minimal to zero marketing, ETC. If the coverage of Children of the Corn was excessive, that would be one thing. But it isn't. As for the bolded quote above, that was only meant to convey that the Children of the Corn was picked up by the same distributor. If you want to combine that with the previous sentence, you are perfectly free to do so. DarkKnight2149 05:50, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Their productions are linked, not the actual movies themselves. Don't misinterpret what the sources are saying to suite what you want them to say. The fact that they shared crew and filming locations is a way to save money. We don't need the CotC's development history on this page. It isn't relevant to this article. Lionsgate is known for picking up low-end horror movies. This isn't their first rodeo with horror. What you're doing is taking a statement of how the productions were closely linked (because it saves money) and making it seem like they are connected beyond that. The fact that they shared crew (not abnormal), shared filming locations (again, not abnormal) doesn't make it relevant to this article.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 14:43, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm not misinterpreting anything. Only the relevant bits are covered in the article. At the moment, the article only mentions that both Children of the Corn and Hellraiser were purchased around the same time, the productions were linked by having the same crew filming at the same time as Judgment only to keep the rights (it's even directed by one of the Judgment stars), both films were shelved or went silent after the Weinstein debacle, and then both films were picked up by Lionsgate and released within a month of each other.

"We don't need the CotC's development history on this page." - Considering the linked productions and the fact that one of the sources says "The key to this is that Dimension bought into the Hellraiser franchise at exactly the same time they bought into the Children of the Corn franchise. When I shot Hellraiser 3 in North Carolina in 1991, Childen of the Corn 3 was shot back to back, and Dimension bought into both the franchises at exactly the same time. Exactly the same time Revelations was made, a Children of the Corn was made… At exactly the same time Hellraiser: Judgement was being made they were making another Children of the Corn movie…they were clearly going to lose the rights to both franchises again, I believe we do. And only one sentence is devoted to the developmental history, just as only one sentence was devoted to the Filming section, and only one sentence was devoted to the Release. Like I said, the coverage of Children of the Corn is not as excessive as you're trying to make it seem. DarkKnight2149 18:19, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

That discusses Dimensions business practices, not the Hellraiser and CotC film franchises. The fact that they did that is relevant to them, and each franchise individually, not together. You're choosing to make the link more than it actually is. Hellraiser's productions were fast tracked to save the licensing, we know this, as is true for CotC. But neither needs to be addressing the other's history on their pages. That has more to do with the studio than the actual properties.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:44, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Have you even looked at all of the sources provided (or the article for that matter)? As I mentioned, the coverage of Children of the Corn here is minor at best, and Judgment getting filmed back-to-back with another film of any franchise with the same exact crew does deserve a mentioning in the article, and so would the fact that they were both shelved and picked up by the same distributor. The sentence at the start of the Development section only serves as a precedent for this. This especially goes for if it has been covered by this many reliable sources. If our coverage of COFTC was heavy, mentioned every time the two franchises had been releases together (Hellraiser: Revelations / Children of the Corn: Genesis, ETC), and barely received any coverage from sources, you would most certainly have a point. Hell, we even have a primary source from the producer stating "Blood has been flowing here in Oklahoma City. These are two horror films that are going to be seen by a core audience." Plus, I already reworded that sentence from your first complaint to put less emphasis on the CotC release. DarkKnight2149 03:04, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

• Comment Has this issue been resolved yet? The line currently in the article ("After a near two year period silence from Dimension Films, Lionsgate Films picked up the distribution rights for both Hellraiser: Judgment and Children of the Corn: Runaway, with Judgment being released via digital and home media platforms on February 13, 2018.") is different to the one quoted above. Personally I think this version is fine. Given the closely linked productions it seems reasonable to resolve the fate of the Children of the Corn film in this article, but I agree with Bignole that we do not not need to give specific release info for the other film. Betty Logan (talk) 02:59, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

My issue is that Dimension acquiring the rights to any films other than Hellraiser is irrelevant to this page. It's one thing to point out that a film shared a film crew and filmed alongside another movie. It's another to talk about that other film's rights and release.

For instance: "Dimension Films had obtained the rights to the pre-existing Hellraiser and Children of the Corn film series within the same frame, their first usages being Hellraiser III: Hell on Earth and Children of the Corn II: The Final Sacrifice, having been shot back-to-back in North Carolina in 1991. Since then, the company has been required to periodically produce films in both series in order to maintain the rights to the intellectual properties." --- This isn't relevant here. THey own a lot of films, and it's standard for studios to have to produce movies or lose the rights.

Hell, most of that entire paragraph is really about the development of sequels preceding this film, which has more appropriate placement on the franchise article than this page.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 03:26, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

I concur with Betty Logan. And as previously mentioned, that sentence serves as a precedent for Runaway and Judgment being filmed back-to-back. And all of the information in that paragraph details Gary J. Tunnicliffe's involvement with the franchise and consistently futile attempts at directing a Hellraiser film, which leads into the development of this film. The information pertaining to his scheduling conflict with Revelations is especially integral to the article, as that ties into him believing he lost his chance to direct a Hellraiser film, trying to have Judgment independently funded in 2013, his stubbornness with the studio while pitching the film years later, ETC. But yes, some of that information, such as his Hellraiser V: Holy War pitch, would be useful information to add to articles like Hellraiser (franchise) and Hellraiser: Inferno. DarkKnight2149 03:58, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

No it doesn't. That's easily solved with, "Hellraiser was filmed concurrently with Children of the Corn, which Dimension also owns, using the same sets, locations, and crew." See how easy that is, and I don't delve into the history of when Dimension got that other franchise, because it isn't relevant, nor do I have to go into the history of the films PRIOR to this one because it's anecdotal and doesn't impact this film directly.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 13:26, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

We don't "delve" into anything. It's a single introductory sentence that explains that the rights to Children of the Corn and Hellraiser were purchased near the same time, hence why Judgment and Runaway were filmed back-to-back as rights movies. You make it sound like half the article is about Children of the Corn. I counted and only four or five sentences in this entire lengthy article talk about Children of the Corn in any major capacity (including the lead), and they are all spread out. Only the relevant information (the rights being purchased at the same time, the film's being filmed with the same crew at the same locations, and then getting delayed and picked up by the same distributor) is covered. DarkKnight2149 16:39, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Again, unnecessary. It says "decades prior". Not recently. Decades. That means they've had the rights to both franchises, and the fact that Children of the COrn needed a movie to not lose the rights is NOT relevant to this page. What is relevant is that they shared productions (obviously to cut costs). You're bringing in information that is not relevant to THIS article. You keep trying to make it relevant to this article, but it isn't. What happened in 1992 is not relevant here. There have been 7 films since that point. It's not longer relevant to keep talking about Dimension buying the franchise, especially not another franchise. You're pointing out what they filmed them together because of licensing issues, yet they didn't have licensing issues in 1991 when they made Hellraiser III and CotC II, that was a cost saving venue.

Everything before the sentence "Near the release of Bloodline" should really be removed. It isn't relevant here. Then, the part about needing to meet a deadline for Hellraiser and CotC they offered the director a chance at the franchise, you don't need the CotC bit. Clearly, that had no ultimate bearing because that become Revelations, and there were 3 more films after Revelations. There is needless insertion of CotC information that doesn't have anything to do with this film. The only bit is the part that I rewrote for you just above that is relevant. The rights to CotC and what they are going through with that franchise is not relevant here.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 16:58, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

I already addressed everything you just said. I'm not going rehash what I've already said. DarkKnight2149 18:02, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Rotten Tomatoes

Bignole initially removed the Rotten Tomatoes score because there were only seven reviews, claiming that WP:MOS has a policy declaring it "statistically insignificant". They were subsequently reverted by the appropriately-named user IUpdateRottenTomatoes, who was reverted again for the same reason. Given how little reviews are listed on Rotten Tomatoes (and a lack of a Metacritic score), I honestly don't care either way but this needs to be settled before I request a Peer Review of the article.

What I will say is that I have checked WP:MOSFILM#Critical response and have found no mention of statistical limitations when it comes to RT or related aggregator scores. The closest I could find is "To maintain a neutral point of view, it is recommended to sample a reasonable balance of these reviews", which isn't exactly what Bignole is claiming. The rest of the section pertains to Rotten Tomatoes "Top Critics", which are essentially the big sites like Roger Ebert and the like, and has nothing to do with the number of reviews in general. I also checked the essay Wikipedia:Review aggregators, and once again no mention of "statistical significance" is made besides RT's "Top Critics". None of the critics listed on the Hellraiser: Judgment Rotten Tomatoes page appear to be Top Critics, so that again would not apply here.

Responses? Tagging everyone: @Bignole: @IUpdateRottenTomatoes: @Betty Logan: @Fortdj33: @Ser Amantio di Nicolao: DarkKnight2149 22:53, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

I Can Respond. Manual Of Style Has Recommendation To Put Rotten Tomatoes At Bottom Of Section If Old Film. I Was Made Aware Of This After Making My Edits. You Can Make Change If You Want To Or I Can Do It. IUpdateRottenTomatoes (talk) 00:51, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

@IUpdateRottenTomatoes: I would recommend waiting on Bignole's response, as to avoid conflict. I should also mention that this film was released last week, in case you weren't aware. It is a sequel to Hellraiser, which is an old film. DarkKnight2149 01:10, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Review aggregators, which is linked in the MOS. It's a guide (not a "guideline", but a guide to explain further through an essay, which are used through the MOS and many other MOS's) on using aggregators, and you'll see the part that talks about limited numbers of review. To quote it: "The websites tend to focus on relatively mainstream films. Their collection of reviews for more obscure films is smaller, which affects their scores. For example, Rotten Tomatoes will have a sample of over 200 reviews for a Hollywood blockbuster film, which is large enough for statistical accuracy. However, if Rotten Tomatoes has a sample of 10 reviews for an independent film, the sample is not large enough for the score to be statistically accurate." (statistically accurate = statistical significance) - There are not enough review to quote that percentage. It implies that the score is representative of the critical opinion of the film, but when you don't have enough reviews to generalize back to the whole you're left with misrepresented data.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:38, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

@Bignole: That is a fair point. Hopefully that settles it. DarkKnight2149 01:49, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

It's the reason why, along with the fact that the reviews are from different eras, why we don't (shouldn't) keep review tables in franchises of older films (mostly horror films, because that seems to be where most franchises are). Most are reviews from now, not then, and most barely have 10 to 20 reviews. Even if you said 20 was ok, you can't legitimately compare their reception when they are from different eras (e.g., the reviews on RT for say Friday the 13th aren't from 1980, they're from 2000), but also because you can't accurately compare the reception aggregately between say a film with 20 to 30 reviews and one with 150 reviews.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:03, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

There was recently a long discussion pertaining to the cut-off limit for the number of reviews at List of films with a 100% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. Virtually everyone involved favored a cut-off in the 20–40 review range. In the end we went with the lower-bound number (20 reviews) so we could actually get on with something, with special dispensation for films with fewer than 20 reviews that have a "critics summary". I think the arguments put forward at that page pretty much apply here (i.e. under 20 reviews is certainly not enough to get a meaningful statistic) and support a similar threshold for this article (with the same dispensation should a critics summary materialise). Bignole's point about reviews from different eras is also a very salient: review aggregators work best for modern movies (from the last 20 years) because they tell us how the film was received. In the case of many older films the aggregator can be misleading due to their revisionism. For example, Vertigo (film) was a critical failure on its release but now has a 95% rating, so the score is not indicative of its contemporary reception. Betty Logan (talk) 04:50, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

@Betty Logan: Now knowing that such a discussion has taken place, I will now be using 20 reviews as a standard for including Rotten Tomatoes scores in articles I work on. DarkKnight2149 06:31, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

I agree with the naysayers. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:54, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Hellraiser: Judgment/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: SL93 (talk · contribs) 19:38, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

I will review this. SL93 (talk) 19:38, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

• I'm not sure if " Paul, Zachary. "Doug Bradley Speaks (Again) About Hellraiser: Judgment". halloweenlove.com. Retrieved February 9, 2018" is a reliable source. The About page states that it is a horror blog that also allows guest contributors.  Done
  • @SL93: I would consider this article reliable. It's written by Zachary Paul, who has also done work for the professional news site Bloody Disgusting. A frequent contributer to Halloweenlove is also John Squires, the editor of BD and a reporter for a few different reliable sources including Dread Central. If reporters this well known faked quotes from someone such as Doug Bradley, they would definitely be under scrutiny. DarkKnight2149 23:03, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
    • That makes sense. SL93 (talk) 15:40, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
• "Princess, The Angry. "EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW WITH FILMMAKER GARY J. TUNNICLIFFE". Morbidly Beautiful. Retrieved February 7, 2018." - The reference title should not be in all a capital letters. This is a blog, but the editorial staff has a lot of experience with independent film projects in multiple ways.
  •  Done DarkKnight2149 23:10, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
• "Hamman, Cody. "CHILDREN OF THE CORN: RUNAWAY CONFIRMED, DETAILS REVEALED". Joblo. Retrieved February 9, 2018." The title shouldn't be in all capital letters.
  •  Done DarkKnight2149 23:13, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
• "Bibbiani, William. "HELLRAISER: JUDGMENT REVIEW". IGN. Retrieved February 14, 2018."
  •  Done DarkKnight2149 23:14, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
• Wampler, Scott. "Review: HELLRAISER: JUDGMENT Makes Hell A Place On Earth". Birth.Death.Movies. Retrieved February 13, 2018.
  •  Done DarkKnight2149 23:16, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
• Sprague, Mike. "DOUG BRADLEY SAYS HE WOULD ABSOLUTELY RETURN AS PINHEAD". JoBlo. Retrieved February 4, 2018. - Same as above.
  •  Done DarkKnight2149 23:07, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
• " https://variety.com/2019/film/news/clive-barker-hellraiser-spyglass-david-goyer-1203205895/" It shouldn't be a bare URL.
  •  Done DarkKnight2149 23:07, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Sorry, an IP editor added that. I'll fix it. DarkKnight2149 23:03, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
• "Interview with Gary J Tunnicliffe". 60 Minutes With. Archived from the original on November 12, 2017. Retrieved February 7, 2017. Cite uses deprecated parameter |deadurl= (help)" - An error.
  • The error message is gone now. SL93 (talk) 22:04, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
• The Doug Bradley quote isn't the full thing for some reason, which would be fine if it wasn't cutting out middle sections such as the full "his detached, ordered piece of mutilation or self-mutilation, so carefully and lovingly executed."
  •  Done DarkKnight2149 23:03, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
• There shouldn't be any contractions such as "isn't" unless it is part of a quote.
  • From what I understand and from articles that I have nominated for GA status, minor edits are always alright for the reviewer to fix so I took care of the last two contractions.  Done SL93 (talk) 15:47, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

As for everything else, it is all reliably cited, meets the MOS, is broad in its coverage, and the images are properly tagged for fair use. SL93 (talk) 19:38, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

I saw your edit summary which stated that "mutilatio" was a direct quote. At least in the reference that it is using, it is not the case. SL93 (talk) 22:01, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

I was going off of memory and I was mistaken on that one. Probably should have double checked beforehand. DarkKnight2149 23:03, 7 September 2019 (UTC)