|
priznat posted:I haven't seen the Grave Encounters movies but the still photos of the monsters give me the heebie jeebies.
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 16:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 06:19 |
|
|
The only copy I can find of Ken Russell's 'The Devils' is missing the last 8 minutes. Fuuuuuuuuck. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 17:12
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:It's not a particularly hated movie. The main issue I had were a lot of the scares were predictable. It also bugs me that there is the big reveal about the front door just leading to more mental hospital, but they still try to shock you with stuff like the stairs not leading to a roof exit. It's supposed to shock them, I don't think it's supposed to shock the viewer
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 17:13
|
|
|
God I hated Grave Encounters. My Criticker review: Every horror movie is derivative to some extent. Actually, EVERY movie is derivative to some extent. But there's a threshold of acceptability of the amount of un-originality a movie can have. Grave Encounters crosses that line, sprints past it and doesn't look back. There wasn't a SINGLE moment in this film that wasn't lifted directly from one of a list of about 7 particular horror movies. I don't need to name them, I'm sure. The result is a mercilessly uninteresting experience.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 17:14
|
|
|
caiman posted:God I hated Grave Encounters. My Criticker review: Actually, yes I do need you to name those movies and tell us why exactly you think that please.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 17:18
|
|
|
Twee as gently caress posted:Actually, yes I do need you to name those movies and tell us why exactly you think that please. You really didn't find it to be a blatant imitation of other movies? It's been quite a while since I watched it so my memory is failing me. Paranormal Activity is the most obvious one. Oh, and I remember a sequence that was a flagrant ripoff of a sequence in the House on Haunted Hill remake. There were plenty more but I just can't remember right now. But even if the film was 100% unoriginal and somehow managed to be good, I'd give it some slack. But Grave Encounters was not well made. Every scare was predictable and the whole thing reeked of lazy film making.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 17:36
|
|
|
caiman posted:You really didn't find it to be a blatant imitation of other movies? It's been quite a while since I watched it so my memory is failing me. Paranormal Activity is the most obvious one. Oh, and I remember a sequence that was a flagrant ripoff of a sequence in the House on Haunted Hill remake. There were plenty more but I just can't remember right now. But even if the film was 100% unoriginal and somehow managed to be good, I'd give it some slack. But Grave Encounters was not well made. Every scare was predictable and the whole thing reeked of lazy film making. It seems that your conception of 'blatant imitation' is so broad I could say that Death Proof was a rip-off of Cars. How is Grave Encounters a blatant imitation of Paranormal Activity, outside of the fact that they are both found footage based? PA revolves around demons, while GE revolves around ghosts. PA builds its scare around normalcy then boom demon activity, while GE builds its scare around restless hopelessness and being unable to leave. Literally the only thing they have in common is the fact that they are both found footage, and well PA certainly didn't invite that specific genre. I can't comment on the HoHH remake, I haven't seen it since it came out, but I'm going to guess that since you couldn't even name that sequence, your complaint about GE is just as baseless regarding HoHH as well.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 17:44
|
|
|
Twee as gently caress posted:It seems that your conception of 'blatant imitation' is so broad I could say that Death Proof was a rip-off of Cars. How is Grave Encounters a blatant imitation of Paranormal Activity, outside of the fact that they are both found footage based? The sequence in HoHH is when the girl was video recording an empty room, and when she looks in the viewfinder she sees the room filled with ghosts. Back to the room, they're gone, back to the viewfinder, they're there. Then the ghosts look at her. This happened nearly verbatim in Grave Encounters.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 17:51
|
|
|
caiman posted:The sequence in HoHH is when the girl was video recording an empty room, and when she looks in the viewfinder she sees the room filled with ghosts. Back to the room, they're gone, back to the viewfinder, they're there. Then the ghosts look at her. This happened nearly verbatim in Grave Encounters. This has happened in ghost fiction ever since we developed the first polaroid camera. Oh wait no, that has happened in ghost fiction ever since we discovered mirrors. This is a staple of ghost fiction, where a character cannot trust his own eyes, but through another medium, sees the ghosts appear and realizes the danger. It's like complaining about a knife-wielding killer walking slowly toward its victim as she tries to flee as derivative. Please tell me the last horror movie you found was original and did not take anything from any other movie/staples.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 17:56
|
|
|
Volume posted:So this popped up on my facebook. A little late to this but I really dug You're Next. It's a bit of a twist on the usual home invasion horror and has as many genuine laughs as scares (if not a little slanted towards comedy). It's a lot of fun and I liked all of the characters. Definitely a more mature work than A Horrible Way To Die (though, admittedly, I liked that too). Also, Resolution - I really want to see this again and it's totally the kind of movie you can't help rooting for, just because of how well-written and acted it is, and how fiercely likeable the two leads are. I know it probably sounds like I worked on it or something but I really just want people to see it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 18:01
|
|
|
I've been waiting since 2011 to see 'You're Next'. I heard rave reviews from anyone else, and I've been checking the news every couple of months for a release. So, really, what I mean is: loving finally!
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 18:04
|
|
|
Twee as gently caress posted:This has happened in ghost fiction ever since we developed the first polaroid camera. Oh wait no, that has happened in ghost fiction ever since we discovered mirrors. Actually yes, the knife-wielding killer thing IS very derivative. But I'm not asserting that a movie that uses it is automatically bad. Twee as gently caress posted:Please tell me the last horror movie you found was original and did not take anything from any other movie/staples. Go re-read my original post. EVERY movie is unoriginal to some degree. My problem with GE wasn't that it wasn't 100% original, but that it was nearly 100% UNoriginal. Look, we could nitpick all day about the originality of particular sequences (although that would probably require me to go back and re-watch GE to jog my memory, which I'll never do), but it's missing the point. The movie was a cash-in on the success of the PA series. If you disagree with me, then I don't know what to tell you. But more importantly to my point, I got the sense while watching the movie that the film makers didn't have anything new to say. They watched a lot of horror movies and compiled a lot of ideas and threw them together. Their output was stale from the start. It was bland and boring. It offered nothing new, and it ultimately failed to do what it set out to do. My opinion is that the movie sucked. I've given my reasons for my opinion and I feel they're valid.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 18:07
|
|
|
Then please name me four or five horror movies from the last five years that you consider original.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 18:10
|
|
|
Twee as gently caress posted:Then please name me four or five horror movies from the last five years that you consider original. That I consider 100% original? If that's what you're asking then you're still missing my point.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 18:11
|
|
|
caiman posted:That I consider 100% original? If that's what you're asking then you're still missing my point. No, that you consider original period. Say 51%+ original.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 18:12
|
|
|
Twee as gently caress posted:No, that you consider original period. Say 51%+ original. I don't understand what this is proving, but I'll play along: House of the Devil Antichrist Drag Me to Hell Pontypool Teeth
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 18:17
|
|
|
caiman posted:I don't understand what this is proving, but I'll play along: So the first movie you decided to use to showcase originality in horror movies is literally a homage to 70s and 80s movies where great pain were taken to recreate the exact style of cinematography and ambiance used in hundreds of those movies?  Two words: Rosemary's Baby.You didn't like GE, and that's your prerogative, but we'll have to agree to disagree on why, because you certainly have not convinced me. Twee as Fuck fucked around with this message at 18:35 on Mar 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 18:32
|
|
|
Twee as gently caress posted:So the first movie you decided to use to showcase originality in horror movies is literally a homage to 70s and 80s movies where great pain were taken to recreate the exact style of cinematography and ambiance used in hundreds of those movies? "Originality" isn't just a matter of plot outlines and story ideas. A movie can be original in all sorts of less tangible ways like tone and atmosphere. Which makes it a difficult, if not impossible, thing to quantify. As for House of the Devil, the fact of it being an homage is NOT a mark against its originality: it's the only 80s throwback I've seen that actually feels like an 80s movie. That feat alone is something I'd deem "original." Think Tarantino. But aside from that, HotD was filled with a kind of slow-burning tension that I've never felt before. Hence, originality.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 18:43
|
|
|
I dunno, I didn't really care that it was derivative. I still jumped at the tongue scene, still dreaded every rounded corner, still felt creeped out by the wailing, and still managed to find the girl standing in the corner to be scary as hell. Then again, I've never been one to mind derivation much as long as it's creative and works. In this instance- at least, for me- it was. Paranormal Activity wasn't scary in the least (although I do enjoy those movies), but this was. They couldn't leave. There was no hope. None at all. In PA, they could've at least left the house and gotten away from the demon. There wasn't any escape from the asylum.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 18:43
|
|
|
Alligator Horse posted:The only copy I can find of Ken Russell's 'The Devils' is missing the last 8 minutes. Fuuuuuuuuck. Do you mean the theatrical cut (111 minutes) vs the restored version (117 minutes)? Basically WB likes to pretend The Devils doesn't exist at all (to the point where there was a midnight screening of the theatrical cut here and they had to use Digibeta for the showing) and when BFI finally got an okay to release a DVD of it in the UK WB would not let them use any of the restored footage or do a Blu-Ray release. There was an even shorter than the 111 minute version available on iTunes for a while but last I heard it was mysteriously pulled, no idea if it returned (I didn't buy it). I figure that some day before I die someone at WB will let someone release it in good quality without all the cuts so I'm holding out 
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 18:46
|
|
|
SlenderWhore posted:I dunno, I didn't really care that it was derivative. I still jumped at the tongue scene, still dreaded every rounded corner, still felt creeped out by the wailing, and still managed to find the girl standing in the corner to be scary as hell. Yeah exactly I found Grave Encounters to be terrifying by moments. And well I thought that PA certainly had its moments, but overall wasn't nearly as terrifying as PA3. I found that movie to be absolutely scary. Watching it on my own on a huge television in the dark with volume cranked up, it was incredible.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 18:50
|
|
|
Twee as gently caress posted:It's supposed to shock them, I don't think it's supposed to shock the viewer
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 18:59
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:It just lacks any sense of escalation. The stairwell which leads to nowhere is at this point expected and not even the biggest issue that they're facing. It would have just been more effective if they tried the roof first since you could write it off as the building being weird. Then try to go through the main entrance, and they an the audience realize how truly hosed up this is. Uh that wouldn't make any kind of sense whatsoever and in fact is a pretty stupid horror trope that has no excuse: The main character, when pursed by the killer, decides to go up the stairs rather than run outside I mean no sane human being, in such a situation, would actually think to do what you suggested, even as overwhelmed by emotion and terror as they were. It's 'fight or flight' mode, and the lizard brain is screaming FRONT loving DOOR MOTHERFUCKER RUN 
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 19:04
|
|
|
Twee as gently caress posted:Uh that wouldn't make any kind of sense whatsoever and in fact is a pretty stupid horror trope that has no excuse: The main character, when pursed by the killer, decides to go up the stairs rather than run outside
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 19:18
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:The situation in the film is that the front door is locked from the outside. They have to break it down. There is also nothing chasing them. It's not a huge thing. It's just weird to essentially have the same reveal twice when the first reveal is much more unnerving. Well, I suppose that they are not literally chased, but the fact is that the door was locked from the outside, they remember, and then when they get to the stairs, there is no door leading to the roof and for me, it worked really well as a tension building and oh poo poo moment, even though I knew it'd be coming
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 19:20
|
|
|
Worldwide Panther posted:I spent a while looking for this too, I think the movie you're thinking of is "Resolution." Yes! Thank you so much
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 19:24
|
|
|
I've never seen the original, but I saw the remake of Maniac last night at a horror convention, and I enjoyed it quite a bit. Creepy as poo poo Elijah Woods is my favorite Elijah Woods. The PoV perspective of the movie was pretty interesting. Did the original use it?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 20:13
|
|
|
Zyklon B Zombie posted:I've never seen the original, but I saw the remake of Maniac last night at a horror convention, and I enjoyed it quite a bit. Creepy as poo poo Elijah Woods is my favorite Elijah Woods. The PoV perspective of the movie was pretty interesting. Did the original use it? Yeah it was rather famous because of it. The original had shock value but it's mostly low-budget shlock, I wouldn't work that hard to get a copy. And I say that as someone who owns one.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 20:15
|
|
|
Twee as gently caress posted:Yeah it was rather famous because of it. Um, this is actually not true at all. Have you seen the original Maniac?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 20:17
|
|
|
It's worth it because Joe Spinell is the man and has one of the most brutal Savini effects ever.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 20:18
|
|
|
LtKenFrankenstein posted:Um, this is actually not true at all. Have you seen the original Maniac? What? Granted I haven't given it a watch in like 5 years (it's really not that good) but I am sure I remember the movie having POV shots, it's just that the remake went full hog and did it all that way. Or do you mean about famous? It's pretty notorious for being a relentless misogynistic violent low-budget piece of poo poo Edit: you made me bust out the DVD and the movie literally opens with a POV shot on the beach from the killer looking at a couple so what the gently caress are you talking about? 
Twee as Fuck fucked around with this message at 20:22 on Mar 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 20:19
|
|
|
Twee as gently caress posted:What? The remake is shot entirely from a first-person POV cam. The original might have a few of those shots, but so does like every slasher movie. It is not a component of why the original is well known.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 20:21
|
|
|
LtKenFrankenstein posted:The remake is shot entirely from a first-person POV cam. The original might have a few of those shots, but so does like every slasher movie. It is not a component of why the original is well known. Oh that's what you meant. I wasn't saying that the remake was specifically famous for this, it's notorious for using those POV to feature really loving gruesome and misogynistic deaths through it
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 20:23
|
|
|
How would a serial killer murder someone in a non-misogynistic way?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 20:26
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:How would a serial killer murder someone in a non-misogynistic way? Man on man crimes? Edit: Unless he hates women so much he'll only kill men.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 20:29
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:How would a serial killer murder someone in a non-misogynistic way? Kill dudes? e: beat
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 20:29
|
|
|
Is he killing because he feels a compulsion to kill and is unable to stop, or is he killing because he hates women and he enjoys seeing them die or suffer? Dexter is a very good example of serial killer who does not kill out of hatred or because he enjoys it, he kills because he has a compulsion to due to childhood trauma. Whenever he's killed women on the show, it's never been in a misogynistic way, even when one of them literally tried to set his family on fire. Maniac, on the other hand, comes from a place of deep hatred for women and it's a pretty disgusting flick. People who love it say poo poo like quote:Silver Screen Review: or quote:if you care for my humble opinion, I say you should give it a shot if you’re not, for lack of better terms, an over-sensitive and/or feminist/feminist sympathizing wimp. I only say that because Maniac can be seen as very mean-spirited toward the fairer sex. What Maniac has up its sleeve though, is an unique experience, one of which I can’t directly compare to anything else I have seen, which is highlighted throughout by some very tense and simplistic-yet-innovative cat and mouse stalk sequences complete with mostly impressive gore. If this sounds like a good time to you, and you’re a woman between the ages of 18-26, please give me a call at 555…I mean give this one a shot if that sounds like your cup of tea. Maniac fans are amongst the creepiest of the horror community, and its not like we lack any
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 20:31
|
|
|
I guess you'd just have to cite a relevant statistic pointing out how serial killers are overwhelmingly misogynistic white males.quote:Dexter is a very good example of serial killer who does not kill out of hatred or because he enjoys it, he kills because he has a compulsion to due to childhood trauma. Whenever he's killed women on the show, it's never been in a misogynistic way, even when one of them literally tried to set his family on fire. Dexter is a character I find far more vile, an exoneration of this weird logic and ethic that says that the victims actually deserved it and he's like Lucky Luciano in WWII, ritualistically murdering people to help the status quo and get the people who are really ruining society off the street. HUNDU THE BEAST GOD fucked around with this message at 20:35 on Mar 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 20:32
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:I guess you'd just have to cite a relevant statistic pointing out how serial killers are overwhelmingly misogynistic white males. Are they? While this is obviously true in America and Western Europe, it's not like South America, Africa and Asia lack serial killers. In fact, the vast majority of the worst serial killers we know of in the last 100 years have come from outside of the Western world. Not because they are more sadistic, mind you, just happened to be in countries where it was easier to get away with it. edit: In fact, in the top 5 of serial killers with the most official victims recorded, not a single one of them is white. HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:Dexter is a character I find far more vile, an exoneration of this weird logic and ethic that says that the victims actually deserved it and he's like Lucky Luciano in WWII, ritualistically murdering people to help the status quo and get the people who are really ruining society off the street. Now that's a completely different discussion, you just wanted an example of serial killer who killed women without hating them Twee as Fuck fucked around with this message at 20:37 on Mar 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 20:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 06:19 |
|
|
Maniac isn't about the Ogre of the Andes or whatever, it's clearly inspired by guys like the arsonist/compulsive masturbator/misogynist David Berkowitz.Twee as gently caress posted:Now that's a completely different discussion, you just wanted an example of serial killer who killed women without hating them That's my point, such a person doesn't exist and the bizarre fictional contortion of this is too ludicrous to mention seriously. What I'm talking about is the difference between a misogynistic film and a film about a misogynist. New York Ripper is a similar movie that is far more misogynist because it has this strange intersection of a brutal murderer on a collision course with a future victim that really wants it, despite the fact that the film ostensibly condemns the actions of the titular villain. HUNDU THE BEAST GOD fucked around with this message at 20:42 on Mar 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 20:37
|
|