|
Also can I get more details about Lucky Luciano? I know who he is, but I've never heard that before. The fact he was a ritualistic serial killer is something I've never heard.
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 20:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 14:46 |
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:That's my point, such a person doesn't exist and the bizarre fictional contortion of this is too ludicrous to mention seriously. We were talking about serial killers in fiction and you asked me why I specifically described this movie as misogynistic I don't know what the gently caress you were expecting except for me to point out at another fictional serial killer. edit not quote dammit
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 20:41
|
|
|
Twee as gently caress posted:Also can I get more details about Lucky Luciano? I know who he is, but I've never heard that before. The fact he was a ritualistic serial killer is something I've never heard. Sorry, what I'm referring to is this: http://www.commandposts.com/2011/07/lucky-luciano-and-wwiis-operation-husky/ The founder of the American Mafia offered his unique skillset as a well connected mobster to the U.S. Navy during WWII to get leniency in his legal troubles. For this page: Twee as gently caress posted:We were talking about serial killers in fiction and you asked me why I specifically described this movie as misogynistic I don't know what the gently caress you were expecting except for me to point out at another fictional serial killer. 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. I also assumed we were talking about women, by some considerable margin the preferred victim of serial killers. HUNDU THE BEAST GOD fucked around with this message at 20:49 on Mar 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 20:44
|
|
|
^^^ and I would classify the original Maniac as a misogynistic film because of how it portrays women and the violence against them. HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:Sorry, what I'm referring to is this: http://www.commandposts.com/2011/07/lucky-luciano-and-wwiis-operation-husky/ Yeah I knew about that, but this is completely different, he offered to help them bust nazi and fascist infiltrators, he wasn't strapping them to a chair and torturing them and dumping their bodies.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 20:50
|
|
|
Vis a vis Dexter, the analogy is appropriate, at least some people considered preying on their fellows to be morally repugnant, it doesn't suddenly become okay when it's state sanctioned. As far as slasher movies go I kind of think Maniac is a bit down on the list when it comes to misogyny, at least the film acknowledges that he believes he needs to punish women for being sexually attractive and available, contrasted with many slasher movies which actually justify this view by actually punishing women for being sexually attractive and available.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 20:59
|
|
|
Welp, you guys were right about GE2. I really hope a demon eats the stupid rear end in a top hat pothead dude's face or something because he is annoying as all hell and quite the douchebag. What kind of friend posts a picture on Facebook of themselves dangling their private parts in your drunken face? And way to make fun of a senile old lady you insensitive fuckwad. e: not to mention their murky motives for going to the asylum. Do they think it's real? Do they think it's fake? If they think it's real, then why oh why the hell would they go there? Also they're the richest college kids I've ever seen Captain Mog fucked around with this message at 23:28 on Mar 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 23:15
|
|
|
SlenderWhore posted:Welp, you guys were right about GE2. I really hope a demon eats the stupid rear end in a top hat pothead dude's face or something because he is annoying as all hell and quite the douchebag. What kind of friend posts a picture on Facebook of themselves dangling their private parts in your drunken face? And way to make fun of a senile old lady you insensitive fuckwad. He's a dick but that's fine. You can go places with that. But things get so loving dumb, so loving dumb later on.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2013 23:16
|
|
|
So I watched The Tall Man and yeah, wow, holy poo poo, was an adamantly unusual film. I don't know what more I can say about it, other than I am down with the people in this thread who think it owns. In a lot of ways I thought it felt like some sort of post-Twin Peaks Hitchcock homage, which is to say, not precisely horror, but well worth your time if you want to see something off the beaten path.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 00:35
|
|
|
I completely agree. Starting out you really think you have the movie down and that it's going to be predictable but then it just turns it all on its head and gets really strange. I like that it only gives you a tiny bit of the insanity at a time. It's enough to make you go "they're not trying to imply that....oh wait yes they are...wait, what??".
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 00:46
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:Don't worry dude, it's revealed in the sequel that the monsters/ghosts are real, but their look is accomplished in post-production. In the fiction of the movies, the ghosts are CGI enhanced. Grave Encounters 2 is insane. I liked the first one a lot, although found it draagggged a lot in the middle, and the ending was probably longer than necessary too. I really wanted to get into 2, I think it's really interesting and funny what it's trying to do, but couldn't get past the frat beer bong teabag party that makes up the first 20 minutes or so. Also the lead doesn't have the same slightly off charisma of the lead in the first, I thought that guy played a great charlatan. I'm gonna do it, I'm gonna try to watch GE 2 again, thermal vision camera farts here I come
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 01:21
|
|
|
H.P. Shivcraft posted:So I watched The Tall Man and yeah, wow, holy poo poo, was an adamantly unusual film. I don't know what more I can say about it, other than I am down with the people in this thread who think it owns. In a lot of ways I thought it felt like some sort of post-Twin Peaks Hitchcock homage, which is to say, not precisely horror, but well worth your time if you want to see something off the beaten path. We turnedi t off as soon as the scene happened where the truck fell over on the road and they were getting stalked around the truck. I don't know if I should be expecting much more but is it worth going back and watching again? It seemed really bad and obnoxious.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 01:21
|
|
|
Yes, you haven't really scratched the surface yet. The movie takes time to get going, and that's my complaint about it, but it's totally worth it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 01:23
|
|
|
Meowbot posted:We turnedi t off as soon as the scene happened where the truck fell over on the road and they were getting stalked around the truck. I don't know if I should be expecting much more but is it worth going back and watching again? It seemed really bad and obnoxious. RightClick above is correct. The movie is melodramatic and weird and over-the-top in ways that are generally very cheesy, but holy poo poo does it manage to go places you would never expect. It also, I think, at least partly justifies its less believable elements, because after a certain point it becomes clear that realism is not exactly what the film is shooting for.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 01:28
|
|
|
I don't really know how I feel about Grave Encounters 2. One one hand I appreciate how loving crazy they went with it and I really loved the House of Leaves vibe they explored as well. On the other hand the plot holes are really huge, especially with the ending.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 01:28
|
|
|
I watched The Haunting of Whaley House on Netflix Streaming, and what really puzzled me about the film was the glowing review on the box cover: So as a public service, I went to the website and chose a different quote from the review. I think it does a pretty good job of preparing you for what's in store: 
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 02:01
|
|
|
I caught hell about a year ago for saying I didn't like Hellraiser and now it's time for this thread to hate me for not like Hellraiser 2, either. The monster designs are (mostly) fantastic and the focus on sadomasochism is kind of interesting and fairly original, but eeeehhhh I just don't see the point of all of it. The characters are barely sketched out, the plot exists only to hang cool ideas on, and things just basically happen so that the next set piece can be trotted out. I'm not sad I've seen them and I want to see good movies influenced by them and their aesthetic, but I can't call either of them great movies. I will admit that if I'd seen them as a teenager I'd probably defend them to the death. As a full-blown adult they just didn't do much for me. I do kind of want to watch the sequels everyone hates because they sound hilarious to me. In a Plan 9 kind of way, I mean. They might slip straight from being interesting and possibly amusing failures into being so bad they'd make me angry, though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 03:48
|
|
|
H1 and H2 are fun movies, the same way most of the Friday franchise are fun movies, but they are far from good movies.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 03:49
|
|
|
I should have turned off The Tall Man pretty much as soon as the movie caught up with the first scene. I would have much rather had some sort of ambiguous ending instead of the goofy bullshit that was there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 04:19
|
|
|
Geekboy posted:I caught hell about a year ago for saying I didn't like Hellraiser and now it's time for this thread to hate me for not like Hellraiser 2, either. I don't hate you, but I do feel very sorry for you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 04:25
|
|
|
Hellraiser is pretty bad but I always feel vaguely guilty for not liking most of the Clive Barker stuff I've seen.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 04:36
|
|
|
penismightier posted:Hellraiser is pretty bad but I always feel vaguely guilty for not liking most of the Clive Barker stuff I've seen. This sums it up perfectly. On the one hand, I recognize how inventive and (in a way) brave his stuff is, but it's also just not very good. There's usually an idea or two I find really brilliant, but it's always hidden in something I can barely make myself care about.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 04:44
|
|
Geekboy posted:I caught hell about a year ago for saying I didn't like Hellraiser and now it's time for this thread to hate me for not like Hellraiser 2, either. Honestly, I dislike the first Hellraiser quite a bit too; it's just straight up boring. It takes a really neat concept and basically just shoves it in the background of a mediocre vampire movie. However, I have to at least appreciate Hellraiser 2 for mostly ditching the aspect of the first movie that didn't really work and going absolutely balls out insane with the aspect that did work.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 05:12
|
|
|
penismightier posted:Hellraiser is pretty bad but I always feel vaguely guilty for not liking most of the Clive Barker stuff I've seen. I like almost every Clive Barker film I've ever seen and don't really like Hellraiser that much. It does Frank and the cenobites' side of the story justice, but totally drops the ball on the dynamic between Kristy and Julie/Frank. (Granted I'm basing this judgment on having last seen Hellraiser in 2007 and might change my mind if I watched it again.) Hellraiser 2 ends up a lot better off for being completely unrelated to the short story. Tuxedo Catfish fucked around with this message at 10:29 on Mar 25, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 08:06
|
|
|
Man, didn't realize there was so much Hellraiser hate out there. I'd still put it up there with one of the scariest horror movies I've seen. I love the slow tension buildup of the cenobites, and the fact that the viewer doesn't encounter them until the very ending of the movie makes it scary in a Lovecraft sight-unseen sort of way almost. There are also some great effects like bloody skeleton Frank reforming, and the "Jesus wept" scene.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 08:34
|
|
|
I just rewatched Evil Dead 1 and 2 after some dissenting comments in preparation for seeing the new one, and I just have to say, both are fantastic, but I just really like 2 so much more. I'm kind of a Raimi apologist. I love the Evil Dead movies (not sure about Army yet), I loved Spiderman 1-3, and even Darkman . I love that Raimi used techniques from Evil Dead to make the FPS Doc Ock tentacle scenes in Spidey 2, and I love his vaudevillian bullshit, but as much as I love the slapsticky mindfuckery in 2, even I can admit that something is lost / gained from the tonal shift between 1 and 2. The reason I love 2 so much is the humor added not only by Raimi theatrics but because Campbell is acting THE gently caress out of this movie so much that it nearly rivals Vampire's Kiss in the realm of overacted emotion. In 1 Bruce is scared and ineffectual and it works since 1 is more of a straight hopeless horror movie, whereas in 2 he gradually moves up to hero status so much that he creates a harness to attach the chainsaw to his arm. Both are fantastic, which is essentially interesting since 2 is a remake / retelling one but with a drastically different tone, yet they can both be judged on their own merits. I'm not sure if this can be said with any other movie series in history. That said, comparatively, Hellraiser is boring as gently caress, and I couldn't give two shits about the guy trying to reform his body or whatever. The last fifteen minutes of Hellraiser 1 are pretty great, but having to trudge through a movie analogous to traversing basically a shitfield of boringness is not worth it, even in 2 where we get some awesome painted background scenes, monster effects, and horrible doctor jokes ("The doctor is in! You need a checkup! You'll have to talk to a dermatologist for that! Surgery! Blahblahblahblah"). Edit: I'll have to add though, that enjoyment of ED2 is actually greatly improved by watching ED1 first , and that's really weird since most of 2 is basically a retelling. Jigoku fucked around with this message at 09:40 on Mar 25, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 09:36
|
|
|
If you have even a passing fondness for Evil Dead 2, watch it again with director's commentary to launch your appreciation into the stratosphere.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 10:11
|
|
|
Oh man, I haven't seen Darkman in years. I loved Darkman. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6r2YxRdyVNo "TAKE THE loving ELEPHANT!"
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 10:24
|
|
|
scary ghost dog posted:If you have even a passing fondness for Evil Dead 2, watch it again with director's commentary to launch your appreciation into the stratosphere. I really like Sam Raimi in general. He's an awesome director if you "get" his sense of humor.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 12:43
|
|
|
I love all 3 Evil Dead movies, but I'd never recommend them to anyone who isn't already a big fan of the Horror Genre. To say that they're great movies is stretching it. The thing I find so frustrating about Raimi, is that he had lightning in a bottle with Evil Dead 2 and never, in my opinion, could really capitalize on it afterward. I don't see the energy in his camerawork or his pacing in any of his subsequent films. Has anyone that is a Raimi fan read anything where he describes trying to "tone down" his style for mass consumption? Because that was always the feeling that I get with Spider-Man and even AOD to some extent. I always wished that he monopolize on that kinetic craziness in Evil Dead 2, and just expand on it. But I never felt he came close to it again. Maybe Drag Me To Hell, I only saw that once. The only time I felt he touched upon what he had in Evil Dead 2, was that scene in Miller's Crossing, where Johnny Caspar beats the guy with the fireplace shovel. (I'm just assuming that Raimi had a hand in that, I don't know for sure.) It's something with the combination of sound, camera-movement, and pacing that when the scene is over, you notice you were holding your breath through the whole thing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 15:30
|
|
|
Man, I cannot imagine being bored by Hellraiser. Every single scene in the film throws a new baffling grotesquerie at you. It may have a couple of bumpy first-time-director moments, but it's still insanely good for a debut film and one of my favorite horror movies of the '80s, or probably all time.scary ghost dog posted:If you have even a passing fondness for Evil Dead 2, watch it again with director's commentary to launch your appreciation into the stratosphere. Definitely this. I'm not even a big fan of DVD commentaries but this one is seriously amazing. Uncle Boogeyman fucked around with this message at 15:39 on Mar 25, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 15:37
|
|
|
Grave Encounters 2 has been discussed to death in this thread but I did love the idea of Lance Preston surviving for years in the asylum eating rats and navigating with his map that tracks the way the building shifts. Even totally deranged he had more charisma than the rest of the disposable cast. Also the reveal of the Vicious Brothers being two dorky interns was nice.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 17:11
|
|
|
Grave Encounters 2 is almost a mock-mockumentary, which is why I can't hate it. It's not funny enough, is the problem.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 17:30
|
|
|
Skywalker OG posted:That said, comparatively, Hellraiser is boring as gently caress, and I couldn't give two shits about the guy trying to reform his body or whatever. The last fifteen minutes of Hellraiser 1 are pretty great, but having to trudge through a movie analogous to traversing basically a shitfield of boringness is not worth it, even in 2 where we get some awesome painted background scenes, monster effects, and horrible doctor jokes ("The doctor is in! You need a checkup! You'll have to talk to a dermatologist for that! Surgery! Blahblahblahblah"). I agree with you on all points, but I don't know if I'd call Hellraiser boring. I enjoyed it while watching, but I've seen it maybe 3 times now and I can't recall a thing about it. There's Pinhead and some dude reforming himself in a basement that was kinda a dick when he was alive previously and hooks and chains, other than that the rest of the movie is pretty forgettable and I can't remember there being any likeable characters.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 18:03
|
|
|
Help I have no idea whether or not I liked The Fourth Kind. What a strange movie.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 18:54
|
|
|
The main thing that sticks out to me about the first two Hellraiser movies is how much the lead actress looks like one of my former coworkers. Like, creepily so. Also, blood, pinhead, chains, etc. The plots are very comic booky in that there's an internal consistency, but no outside source for it. This happens because that did, buy why did that happen in the first place? It isn't inconsistent, but it all comes across as essentially meaningless to me. "We're gonna gently caress with Christy but not with the (possibly) autistic girl" and such. I don't hate them and I think they're innovative as hell, but I just can't bring myself to care about any of it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 18:57
|
|
|
weekly font posted:Help I have no idea whether or not I liked The Fourth Kind. What a strange movie. You liked it. Now let's hold hands.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 19:00
|
|
|
I'm just gonna come out and say that Hellraiser is as good as any of David Cronenberg's films, and better than a few of 'em. And I say that as someone who holds Cronenberg in the highest esteem.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 19:01
|
|
|
LtKenFrankenstein posted:I'm just gonna come out and say that Hellraiser is as good as any of David Cronenberg's films, and better than a few of 'em. And I say that as someone who holds Cronenberg in the highest esteem. This is an interesting thought that I can't agree with. I'd love to parse out why I was bored and ultimately disliked Hellraiser, but adore Videodrome. You would think I'd have some of the same problems with the two movies, but I just don't. There aren't likable characters (which I really don't care about anyway), the mythology is entirely self-contained and only internally consistent, sadomasochism is a definite theme, and they're essentially pessimistic films. Videodrome loving rules and I doubt I'll ever take the time to watch Hellraiser or its first sequel ever again, though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 19:06
|
|
|
Hellraiser is boring as poo poo though, you're rarely bored watching a Cronenberg film.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 19:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 14:46 |
|
|
LtKenFrankenstein posted:I'm just gonna come out and say that Hellraiser is as good as any of David Cronenberg's films, and better than a few of 'em. And I say that as someone who holds Cronenberg in the highest esteem. I love Hellraiser, but IMO, at no point does it reach the heights of The Fly or The Brood. The emotional devastation those films manage to incorporate while being revolting from a visual stand point is hard to match and Hellraiser certainly doesn't come anywhere near it. People do need to like Hellraiser more though. The reverse melting skeleton section is one of my favorite disgusting visuals in film.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2013 19:30
|
|
