|
So I finally watched Insidious and The Last Exorcism thanks to this thread, and I liked both. I think Insidious definitely works somewhere on the level of a Raimi horror movie (though not as over the top), and I enjoyed it on that level - however, barring jump scares, I didn't find it particularly scary. So I guess what I'm saying it I was entertained by it, but not scared (which is fine by me). As for The Last Exorcism, I liked it more; where as I found Insidious to be a fun-house/roller coaster type movie, I found The Last Exorcism to be a psychological thriller. I thought it excellently handled the found footage/fake documentary genre, and I thought the acting was superb. While I can see how some of its inconsistencies could definitely pull one out of the movie, I myself didn't seem to have this problem (which I expected to, so that was a pleasant surprise) and overall really enjoyed it. Tonight, I'm going to take on a double header of The Exorcist and The Exorcism of Emily Rose; has anyone else here compared/contrasted these films?
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2011 23:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 07:40 |
|
|
JessJezzz posted:Tonight, I'm going to take on a double header of The Exorcist and The Exorcism of Emily Rose; has anyone else here compared/contrasted these films? They are both very different movies, Emily Rose is more of a courtroom drama that makes you think if you're watching is supernatural or a sickness.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2011 23:21
|
|
|
JessJezzz posted:Tonight, I'm going to take on a double header of The Exorcist and The Exorcism of Emily Rose; has anyone else here compared/contrasted these films? The Exorcist is good, the Exorcism of Emily Rose is bad. Slasherfan posted:They are both very different movies, Emily Rose is more of a courtroom drama that makes you think if you're watching is supernatural or a sickness.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2011 23:23
|
|
|
flashy_mcflash posted:Please stop watching the Quarantine movies. Just go watch the [rec] flicks. Please. I've seen [rec] a bunch of times. I've owned [rec] for quite a while. Quarantine wasn't bad, just ... unnecessary and didn't really need to exist. Q2 was unnecessary in a burn all copies of the movie way  Now I need to convince someone to go have a bad movie night with me at Final Destination 5.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2011 00:19
|
|
|
Alhazred posted:The Exorcist is good, the Exorcism of Emily Rose is bad. Emily Rose is indeed garbage. Watch Hans-Christian Schmid's Requiem instead. It's the same story, but an infinitely more mature presentation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2011 00:31
|
|
|
Ooh, I think Requiem is on Netflix instant. I'll check that one out tonight. I remember seeing Exorcism of Emily Rose in high school and being depressed by it, and I saw The Exorcist with some friends and I really don't remember that movie other than we had a lot of candy and caffiene and there was giggling. My opinion might be different now, but I just remember thinking it was far too goofy to be scary.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2011 00:48
|
|
|
I'm looking for some scary documentaries, in similar fashion to 'Cropsey' (although I'd prefer more sensationalist)... any suggestions?
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2011 01:10
|
|
|
I started watching Insidious the other night it seemed to be a well made but very by the numbers ghost story with quite a few jump scares. I got bored roughly halfway through and turned it off. I made it far enough to learn the boy was doing astral projection. Knowing that, is there any payoff worth watching the last half or should I send it back and get the next DVD in my queue?
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2011 07:41
|
|
|
wormil posted:I started watching Insidious the other night it seemed to be a well made but very by the numbers ghost story with quite a few jump scares. I got bored roughly halfway through and turned it off. I made it far enough to learn the boy was doing astral projection. Knowing that, is there any payoff worth watching the last half or should I send it back and get the next DVD in my queue? If you didn't dig that concept, then you probably won't enjoy the end. You find out that the dad used to be able to astral project too, so he astral projects and goes into The Further and rescues the son. Did you see the part where the team of ghost hunters goes around the house trying to find out what's wrong and eventually goes into the kid's room and it gets loving destroyed by the demon? Or the seance-like scene with the main ghost hunter woman putting on the gas mask and convulsing while one of her assistants writes down what she's hearing the demon saying and it's all stuff like "I'm coming to kill you, you loving bitch" over and over again? I don't know, I thought it was pretty loving awesome and a nice change of pace from other recent horror movies I'd seen. The last horror movie I can remember really enjoying before it was The Last Exorcism. Well, either that or Paranormal Activity 2. They both came out around the same time, I think. Rageaholic fucked around with this message at 08:02 on Aug 9, 2011 |
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2011 07:58
|
|
|
Rageaholic Monkey posted:I don't know, I thought it was pretty loving awesome and a nice change of pace from other recent horror movies I'd seen. The last horror movie I can remember really enjoying before it was The Last Exorcism. Well, either that or Paranormal Activity 2. They both came out around the same time, I think. I'm just not into those kind of films, no fault of the filmmaker.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2011 09:07
|
|
|
wormil posted:I'm just not into those kind of films, no fault of the filmmaker. I also thought it was a good haunting film for a while, but I ended up watching it all. In my opinion after the photographs scene the film turns to mush (I liked the astral projection stuff but didn't think the film pulled it off really well). If you've seen the photographs then just find out the ending word-of-mouth and get your next film a day early or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2011 14:25
|
|
|
Whispering Machines posted:I've seen [rec] a bunch of times. I've owned [rec] for quite a while. Quarantine wasn't bad, just ... unnecessary and didn't really need to exist. Q2 was unnecessary in a burn all copies of the movie way It shouldn't be that hard. By this point, "Final Destination" knows exactly what kind of movies they're going to be, and if you like over the top horror blood and special effects, then they're perfect for you! If that doesn't work, show them this video. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lNEQAXX43g
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2011 14:34
|
|
|
Whispering Machines posted:I've seen [rec] a bunch of times. I've owned [rec] for quite a while. Quarantine wasn't bad, just ... unnecessary and didn't really need to exist. Q2 was unnecessary in a burn all copies of the movie way I just think people should stop supporting the Quarantine movies entirely because they are literal wastes of film. We had Paco Plaza and Jaume Balaguero up here in Toronto for the premiere of [rec2] and they basically said that the Quarantine movies are the american film industry making GBS threads on their work. gently caress an audience that can't handle subtitles. BisonDollah posted:I also thought it was a good haunting film for a while, but I ended up watching it all. In my opinion after the photographs scene the film turns to mush (I liked the astral projection stuff but didn't think the film pulled it off really well). If you've seen the photographs then just find out the ending word-of-mouth and get your next film a day early or whatever. That sums it up for me. Really good 2/3 of a movie with some genuinely creepy elements but when it gets into the astral projection stuff it was so poorly executed I thought I was watching a cartoon. Do not want. flashy_mcflash fucked around with this message at 15:28 on Aug 9, 2011 |
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2011 15:24
|
|
|
CobiWann posted:It shouldn't be that hard. By this point, "Final Destination" knows exactly what kind of movies they're going to be, and if you like over the top horror blood and special effects, then they're perfect for you! Yeah, the Final Destinations were never "bad movies"; I don't know what that guy is talking about. 1 and 2 are very good at what they're both trying to do, and 3 is "ok." 4 is not good; but it's not the type of bad movie he's referring to.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2011 16:55
|
|
|
I don't have whatever upgrade is required to search this thread but have you guys seen The Loved Ones? It's a pretty good, if not great, Australian horror with one of the best female villains since Kathy Bates in Misery. Don't sleep. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1316536/ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cb5BFm4qIow
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2011 17:00
|
|
|
I'm really getting tired of the played out "found footage" genre. I mean it has merits and is generally a good solid subgenre I just haven't seen anything other than [REC] that was a solid film. Sure, Blair Witch did it but overall I think that was just a testament to a small group of filmmakers creating something that went viral before viral became a word. [REC] I will say is my top one so far. Although the Poughkeepsie tapes is a disturbing one, either you love it or hate it. So what we have like 1 major one and probably another of the Paranormal series coming out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2011 17:02
|
|
|
^Yes, a PA3 is coming out, and it's a prequel. Trailer/teasers are up online. What, me? Not a he Bad might have not been the right word, although I certainly don't think the movies are "good" when compared to something like Rosemary's Baby or 28 Days Later or whatever. I hated 3 and 4 (the tanning bed death was brutal though) but liked 1 and 2 well enough, especially the opening sequences. Maybe "cheesy gorefest" would be more appropriate. Also, most of my friends who are into horror don't live locally anymore, so I sort of have to find whoevers around and convince them to go see anything scary with me. I need new friends. CobiWann posted:It shouldn't be that hard. By this point, "Final Destination" knows exactly what kind of movies they're going to be, and if you like over the top horror blood and special effects, then they're perfect for you! This is amazing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2011 17:18
|
|
|
Hollis posted:I'm really getting tired of the played out "found footage" genre. I mean it has merits and is generally a good solid subgenre I just haven't seen anything other than [REC] that was a solid film. Sure, Blair Witch did it but overall I think that was just a testament to a small group of filmmakers creating something that went viral before viral became a word. [REC] I will say is my top one so far. Although the Poughkeepsie tapes is a disturbing one, either you love it or hate it. Last Exorcism wasn't terrible and was sort of in that style, though I'm not sure if you're making a distinction between documentary style and 'found footage', where there's no interviews and things.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2011 17:19
|
|
|
Let's call it Point of View Horror? I mean that pretty much encompasses documentary, mockumentary, found footage, etc... It's all from a POV. I retract my previous statement though the last solid one I saw was Trollhunter. The genre does have interesting and solid entries into horror, but for instance something like Paranormal Activity etc.. just to me don't really get a visceral feeling while you're watching it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2011 17:45
|
|
|
Well PA is a pretty bad metric for anything horror in general, haha. Blair Witch, even, is a better POV horror, and of course the [REC] flicks. I think it's probably just a hard thing to make, and if it's not done well it's very very bad. Probably not something a whole lot of studios are lining up to finance.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2011 18:51
|
|
|
flashy_mcflash posted:I don't have whatever upgrade is required to search this thread but have you guys seen The Loved Ones? It's a pretty good, if not great, Australian horror with one of the best female villains since Kathy Bates in Misery. Don't sleep.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2011 19:13
|
|
|
Seriously, you won't regret it. There's so many weird left turns and it does get pretty gory at times (though the gore is largely earned). One of the best horrors I've seen, actually.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2011 19:27
|
|
|
flashy_mcflash posted:Well PA is a pretty bad metric for anything horror in general, haha. Blair Witch, even, is a better POV horror, and of course the [REC] flicks. I think the Apollo 18 has a 5 million dollar budget. Paranormal Activity 2 has a 3 million dollar budget grossed 174 million. I mean they want to have a hit you know. Something that makes them a gently caress ton of money and is interesting to watch and sort of captures that Zeitgeist. I mean the studios want to get a "Blair Witch" and they did that to a degree with Paranormal Activity 1. So that's why I think we will see more and more of those styles of specific films , cheap production etc.. their cheap and if you finance 8 of those and one of those is a hit then you've made your money. It's the betting game, I make 5 , 5 million dollar movies. 1 of them becomes a hit and makes me 200 million dollars. or even 60 million and you've justified the expense. It's also why horror is kind of popular to fund. Hollismason fucked around with this message at 19:31 on Aug 9, 2011 |
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2011 19:27
|
|
|
Paranormal Activity might hold the record for the most profitable film of all time, depending on how they fudge the numbers.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2011 19:30
|
|
|
I think it does actually. Looking at Blair Witch Project it says it cost 500 to 700 thousand dollars to make. That's got to include marketing. Although Paranormal says 15,000 dollars, but Paranormal had a huge marketing budget from what I've been reading up on it. I mean trailers etc.. etc.. it was very well marketed and marketed as the next Blair Witch.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2011 19:36
|
|
|
Hollywood accounting never accounts for marketing, otherwise practically everything would be a bomb.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2011 19:40
|
|
|
Hollis posted:I think the Apollo 18 has a 5 million dollar budget. Point taken. I just can't think of any other reason why more films like that aren't made. I mean, you could do a 'Blair Witch' with minimal crew and cast. Something like Paranormal might require a little more. But I don't remember a rash of horrors that tried to recapture Blair Witch's lightning in a bottle (unless you count Blair Witch 2, hahaha) after that movie was successful either.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2011 19:48
|
|
|
flashy_mcflash posted:Point taken. I just can't think of any other reason why more films like that aren't made. I mean, you could do a 'Blair Witch' with minimal crew and cast. Something like Paranormal might require a little more. This is just the wikipedia entry for it but here is the found footage films http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Found_footage_%28genre%29 That's probably not even a accurate count. Basically they get produced, I think a lot of film companies are just okay what can we market well? I'm sorry but I didn't think that Paranormal was very good at all.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2011 21:54
|
|
|
flashy_mcflash posted:But I don't remember a rash of horrors that tried to recapture Blair Witch's lightning in a bottle (unless you count Blair Witch 2, hahaha) after that movie was successful either. Two reasons for that: 1) At the time Blair Witch's found footage aesthetic was so distinct that anything coming out after it would have been a little too "it's just a Blair Witch RIPOFF!" 2) The Blair Witch Project had the most severe case of movie hype backlash of all time. A lot of people HAAAAAAAATED it (and still do). To this day I have still not seen a more polarizing mainstream movie.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2011 22:09
|
|
|
flashy_mcflash posted:Point taken. I just can't think of any other reason why more films like that aren't made. I mean, you could do a 'Blair Witch' with minimal crew and cast. Something like Paranormal might require a little more. If you get a found footage movie wrong it's unwatchable. Just try watching The St Francisville Experiment.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2011 22:12
|
|
|
Or the recent one about the Gacy house. What the gently caress was that?quote:2) The Blair Witch Project had the most severe case of movie hype backlash of all time. A lot of people HAAAAAAAATED it (and still do). To this day I have still not seen a more polarizing mainstream movie. Also, it was very hard to watch on a very big screen. I definitely remember getting motion sickness if not outright nausea watching it in high school. It's one of the few movies that plays better on TV.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2011 22:20
|
|
|
That's how I felt about Cloverfield (which I did enjoy)- the handheld/shakycam effect was absolutely nauseating on such a large screen. Plus the girl in the makeshift hospital exploding freaked me out really badly and I was sitting next to dudes who smelled of week old bong water
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2011 22:48
|
|
|
Technically the Paranormal Activity movies count as "found footage", since they open with something about a police report, etc.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2011 00:00
|
|
|
I think as a genre if you're going to make a low budget you might as well write it as a "found footage" film. Not only for niche purposes but because you don't have to deal with a lot of issues "normal" films have. You can kind of chop things together and abuse the poo poo out of night vision. Aesthetically speaking I don't think they are bad and can be fantastically wonderful, ex. [REC] , Trollhunter. I am interested in the Apollo 18 film, as its supposedly based on "found footage" of the Apollo 18s supposed moon landing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2011 00:13
|
|
|
I think [REC] is one of the few times that the use of night vision hasn't been a massive "oh, for gently caress's sake" moment for me. When I saw the "creature" looking around for her it was genuinely chill inducing. 98% of night vision scenes just mean there's a lame jump scare coming, which usually consist of them panning around, all freaked out, then panning back to OMG THE (insert bad guy) IS RIGHT BEHIND (insert character)!!
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2011 00:39
|
|
|
I found The Exorcism of Emily Rose to be quite bland, like others in the thread. As for The Exorcist I'd seen it before and think it's quite scary. When I rented it, the guy at the video store asked me what I thought of it and said a lot of younger people find it to be 'silly' as another poster mentioned. Any thoughts on this divide?
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2011 02:38
|
|
|
Darko posted:Yeah, the Final Destinations were never "bad movies"; I don't know what that guy is talking about. 1 and 2 are very good at what they're both trying to do, and 3 is "ok." 4 is not good; but it's not the type of bad movie he's referring to. What? Final Destination 5 looks AWFUL. The deaths are just soo ridiculous and over the top that it completely takes me out of it. I know it's supposed to be "Death causing things" or whatever, but when 50 little things have to happen perfectly in succesion to cause some overly grisly death, I'm just completely not impressed or interested. Plus the "accidents" they escape at the beginning of the movie are starting to get ridiculous too
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2011 03:27
|
|
|
JessJezzz posted:I found The Exorcism of Emily Rose to be quite bland, like others in the thread. As for The Exorcist I'd seen it before and think it's quite scary. When I rented it, the guy at the video store asked me what I thought of it and said a lot of younger people find it to be 'silly' as another poster mentioned. Any thoughts on this divide? I think that is the reason for the divide. The Exorcist is generational gap horror throughout the whole movie - The younger priest and the relationship he has with his aging mother - and the relationship between Regan and her mother are a big prt of the groundwork for the horror that comes in the third act and if it's missed then that third act is nothing more than a girl spinning her head around and masturbating with a crucifix. But with the relationships being what they were; Regans neglect, the priest battling with the fact of his sick mother and how it has caused him to question his faith, there's a level of helplessness throughout the first two acts (the scenes in the hospital scared me worse than the exorcism itself) and of course the whole idea of "Our kids locked in his/her room all day, doesn't talk to us, when they do it's some smartarse response, I ask how they are and they grunt at me, it's like his possessed!" being tied in nicely as a metaphor for puberty then you're going to be scared. It's not the demon that is possessing Regan that is where the horror lies in The Exorcist it's what it's doing to everyone around them and how easy it is to just replace the demon with pubescence and still have a very similar Regan (substitute pimples for face welts though.) Puberty is a time of helplessness for both the teen and the parent and they did a wonderful job running with that idea. The scene where Regans mother is sitting at the end of a long table with all these medical people telling her that there is nothing that they can find wrong with her or that they can correct works so well in isolating Regans mother from the scientific community and her reasonable assumption that there must be something medically wrong at the center of Regans behaviour that in effect what it is saying is that there is no help to be had and that this is perfectly normal. In fact I seem to remember the line, "She seems to be a normal adolescent," mentioned which was a nice touch if my memory is correct. That's where the horror is and if you're coming at it from the teens perspective it doesn't seem so horrible at all. But as an adult? Whew, that movie has a lot to say about how your children grow into little monsters and there isn't anything you can do about it except wait it out and meet them on the other side of it. (The scene at the end when she is being led out of the house under the blanket.) It was released in what? Late 70s? I'd imagine there were a lot of public awareness about the widening generation gap post 1960 which gave the movie such a wide audience to freak the gently caress out. Of course they hosed that all up in the second movie, but the third is just as good as the first in my opinion because it goes back to the method of slowly building up tension, of a different kind in this case, before unleashing the horror. Local Group Bus fucked around with this message at 03:35 on Aug 10, 2011 |
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2011 03:31
|
|
|
Local Group Bus posted:It was released in what? Late 70s? I'm always curious about how audiences must have handled Exorcist at release. Even seeing it the first time as a kid, it was scary right up until the priest catches a high-pressure stream of pea soup directly in the face, and then it just wasn't threatening anymore.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2011 04:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 07:40 |
|
|
XIII posted:I think [REC] is one of the few times that the use of night vision hasn't been a massive "oh, for gently caress's sake" moment for me. When I saw the "creature" looking around for her it was genuinely chill inducing. 98% of night vision scenes just mean there's a lame jump scare coming, which usually consist of them panning around, all freaked out, then panning back to OMG THE (insert bad guy) IS RIGHT BEHIND (insert character)!! The nightvision scene in Cloverfield was one of the only good scenes in that piece of poo poo movie.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2011 04:58
|
|