Talk:Unfriended

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Horror Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in film, literature and other media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened:

April 12 to 18, 2015 (24th)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kperez18, Mwandell97, Seanyster1.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 04:33, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Poster

I've re-added the poster since there's no good reason at this point in time to remove it. It was originally released as Cybernatural and marking it as a work-in-progress title is factually incorrect. Work-in-progress titles are titles that are used before the film was released, however this film was given a release via the film festival circuit, so Cybernatural is the original title of the film. With that in mind, it's reasonable to keep the poster on the article because not only does it reflect on the original title of the film but we also have nothing to replace it with. When the new poster comes out we can always delete the poster at that point of time or move it down in the article. Until that time comes, removing it doesn't do anything for the article and since it was given a film festival release and was titled this (and most of the coverage refers to it as Cybernatural), it won't be misleading to leave it in the article. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 11:36, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm seeing some teaser posters, so hopefully we'll have a true poster soon to replace this with. Maybe we can move the old poster down to a release section? Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:01, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oh! On a side note I do want to drop a note on here to let people know that the synopsis section is not a copyright violation. There are some sites that have been using the synopsis that was posted on here, so this synopsis predates those articles. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:06, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's since been replaced with the teaser poster. I'm a little leery about adding that since those are designed to be temporary. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:55, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Copyedit

The marketing section needs a copyedit cleanup. I may be seeing things, but you can remove the tag if you want. CyanoTex; The Neutral Wikipedian 14:14, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Any legitimacy on that end credit scene bit?

I can't seem to find any talks of it online. --97.92.93.185 (talk) 22:51, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

movie's gross

the reported $54 million gross is not sourced, is this a reliable source?--Shivanarayana (talk) 06:38, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reviews are too slanted in favour

The reviews section contains only reviews in favour of the film, sometimes with such a chimerical tone as to be vexing (the section itself has a biased tone). This is despite the movie getting mixed reviews at best. A few critical reviews are in order here to better reflect the film's mixed reception. Alialiac (talk) 08:24, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that there could be fewer positive reviews and more mixed reviews. Also, it is good to use Metacritic's breakdown (not just its weighted average score) as a metric. There are 14 positive reviews, 12 mixed, and 4 negative. So maybe have something like four positive reviews, three mixed, and one negative for a reasonable balance. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 13:17, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]