Comments on: Pathology Review

By: Sahil

Sahil — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 09:05:10 +0000

Just saw it and it was ok. 2.25/5

By: Willy

Willy — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 19:55:15 +0000

The film promises to be sick, intense and sexy.

http://yourfreemoviedownloads.com

By: darby

darby — Tue, 13 May 2008 23:03:20 +0000

(Type your comment here. Make sure you’ve read the commenting rules before doing so)i am seeing it this weekend im sooo excited

By: Steph

Steph — Sun, 11 May 2008 00:29:34 +0000

I read a Pathology review on the BBC and one from another magazine and they gave it a terrible review. However, I was glad to find your review and another one on bloody disgusting. I thought it was really entertaining visually, it had a great story, and it was pretty shocking at times. Although I agree about what you said about the flow, and not using enough of the characters. I also think Milo was pretty “wooden” as I’ve heard people say!! But maybe that’s what the film needed. I also think the pretty disguting review had a good point about it having a little message along the lines of humans being animals that kill. As for the biast argument, that’s what I thought straight away when I read your first paragraph. However, I definitely think you tried your best not be and it didn’t come across like it either! Anyway enjoyed reading ! :D xxx

By: Haole

Haole — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 18:12:20 +0000

There were reviews in San Francisco, in the advertiser I believe.

Just watched Pathology on Saturday and while I thought it was good, I gotta agree that the supporting cast was not used at all. My sister watched it with me (she works at a local theater so we watch stuff for free) and she was unaware of one of the characters in the back so when he died she didn’t know who he was.
Perhaps, because of Crank, I was expecting a bit more energy, but this movie just didn’t deliver all that it could. That being said, I did enjoy.

By: dan

dan — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 16:02:56 +0000

this film did terrible!!!!! according to box office mojo.

By: sfsilver

sfsilver — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 17:26:04 +0000

So they’ve relied entirely on web banner ads and appearances on your show? Don’t you think this is a weak marketing plan? I’m serious when I say I have not seen even one trailer showing in theaters for it. I think by almost any measure this is an incredibly weak marketing campaign. I’m surprised you haven’t discussed this more.

I’m just really fascinated that this site is the only place it’s discussed. The enthusiasm with which you’ve engaged with the filmmakers has been fun to listen to and if that kind of engagement was spread more around the film community, and reflected in the overall marketing of the film I’m sure it could have had a stronger opening. The numbers are abysmal and surprising.

I thought you guys had really effectively created some buzz for it. I was excited for the film, but realized I wasn’t hearing anything about it anywhere else.

I plan to see it this weekend hopefully, but it has been reduced to one daily showing – yes, just one screening time on one screen in San Francisco. It’s a matinee screening at 12:20. That can not be good.

By: dingo101

dingo101 — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 17:44:40 +0000

Here’s a bit of info on how’s it doing SF Silver:

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=pathology.htm

By: sfsilver

sfsilver — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 17:17:28 +0000

I just checked my local reviews in San Francisco (I was out of town on business over the weekend so didn’t see that it had opened here). The SF Chronicle, the big daily in SF didn’t even write a review. Yikes.

Didn’t crack the top 50 in box office either. How did it do? Any per screen numbers? When is wide release scheduled?

By: John

John — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 17:16:29 +0000

Hey SFSILVER

Actually, Pathology ads have been up all over the web. There was no TV campaign.

And yes, I really can say I’m not a critic… because I’m not. I never identify myself as a critic during interviews… so I’m not sure where you got that from.