CFI - Cinematic Forecasting and Investment Assurance LLC ™
Investor Opportunities in Motion Picture Profits through Feature Film Box-Office Forecasts / Pre-Production Script Development / Cinematic Archetype Casting / Component Formulation Design / U.S. and Global Market Consulting & Mass Audience Forecasting
Why CFI Doesn’t Evaluate or Forecast for the ‘Horror Film’ Genre
The psychometric software that can recognize patterns and identify the audience’s reactive microexpressions in either a positive or negative response to the source material, cannot in itself also analyze whether or not their consistently negative expressions are appropriate or inappropriate to the source material, when the source material is specifically designed to only originate a negative response from its audience. The process of comparatively analyzing the appropriateness of either a positive or negative response, requires a visual evaluation of the source by an analytical intelligence capable of correlating the negative reaction of the respondent to the immediate contextual reference (the ‘way’ the subjects are being applied) from the source and separately translating the positive or negative value of the audience reaction in relationship to the content references (the ‘how’ the objects are being applied)within the source material. HERE’S AN EXAMPLE:
The audience is watching a horror film.A monster appears on screen and the biometric software identifies the overall microexpression of the audience to be one it identifies from historical patterns as “appalled”. Why are they appalled? Was the monster itself appalling in content or in context … or was it both? 1. Was it contextually a bad time for the monster to appear? (please see A. below) – or – 2. Was it a great time for the monster to appear and the contextual condition created an appalling expression with the audience, which was exactly what they bought tickets for? (please see B. below) – or – 3. Was it contextually a good time for the monster’s appearance - but when it appeared, its space was so poorly constructed or photographed that the audience’s expectations (of a quality monster) were decimated – and they were appalled at the sight of the immature content? (please see C. below) – or – 4. Was the content so carefully crafted that its appearance appalled the audience as planned?(please see D. below) These answers could only be defined by a computer using a artificial intelligence that is capable of visually interpreting concurrently, both the emotional context and content nuances of a negative human sub-culture.(And since no such a computer exists, a human interface and human interpretation is required for processing this data.) Now under normal film forecasting conditions, a human interface software is only required to evaluate a positive expression in correlation to the contextual application (the ‘way’ the subjects are being applied), or to evaluate the negative expression in correlation with the content application(the ‘how’ the objects are being applied)– one or the other – but is never required to process both evaluations running in two opposite times (the context) and two opposite spaces (the content). The problem in horror genres arises when a human interface software (as compared to both the context and the content of each specific scene) is requiredto decide if whether or not; A.The context of the audience’s negative microexpression is deserving of the clearly negative valuation it would normally receive if it was only the faulty organization of a contextual application, or B.The context of the audience’s negative microexpression is deserving of the clearly positive valuation it would normally receive for the correct organization of a contextual application. and C.The context of the negative microexpression is deserving of a negative valuation for a faulty component found to be disappointing in a content oriented application,or D. The context of the negative microexpression is deserving of the clearly positive valuation it would normally receive for a component found in a content oriented application (because the content was good enough to illicit an appropriately negative response), or These four choices forced together into the evaluation of the interface create an environment for a completely subjective interpretation, obscuring the clarity of a forecast, and confusing any objectivity in the evaluation of this genre. An effort to verify the positive valuation of a negative expression using two opposite content applications within two opposing contextual applications is objectively impossible.
IN OTHER WORDS; It is impossible to validate or quantify any positive valuations for a film … that is specifically designed to reinforce negativity … because it is objectively impossible to identify either truly negative or positive conditions during any negativity’s appearance. Psycho/horror, evil incarnate, insane mass-murderer, or other negative emotion-inducing genre films without strong True-Hero action/adventure through lines are not forecast by CFI due to instability in tracking responses to the genre’s component formulations skewing an objective audience analysis.This dilemma also creates an inappropriate psychological platform for the application of the audience’s suspension of disbelief.