|
STAC Goat posted:I'm thinking of dropping a little money on horror. I've been considering those too but I've been hearing a lot of iffy things about the transfers to the point I might just go with tracking down what I'm missing of the Legacy sets and call it good for the time being.
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 06:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 07:11 |
|
|
STAC Goat posted:I'm thinking of dropping a little money on horror. That 30 movie sets absolutely worth it. I got most of them separately as they were being released, I think I'm only missing the Invisble Man and Phantom of the Opera discs, and the sets have some great bonus features, like Spanish Dracula and an alternate Phillip Glass/Kronos Quartet score to the original Bela Lugosi film.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 07:08
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:
This one is a region 2 BR set.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 12:58
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:I'm thinking of dropping a little money on horror. The 30 film set is absolutely worth it. Honestly, the blu-ray version is worth it, even. Originally they released the individual monster-centric collections, and the DVDs would go for at least $20, but upwards of $40, and there was a lot of over-lap between them, so it kinda sucked having to spend so much. I own the Frankenstein and the Dracula collection (both at $20+ still if you buy them separate) on DVD, and they're wonderful. This is basically those sets all bundled together. So even for the blu-ray, you're only looking at $14 per collection, which is a steal.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 13:41
|
|
|
I have the Essential Collection(so not the big 30 film set), and the value there for me has been incredible. I've watched each movie at least twice and the thing cost me like $30. Not sure what the concerns would be about the transfers in the set, as another poster was referring to. They all seem great to me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 14:05
|
|
|
Also, the special features and commentaries and complimentary book all look awesome as hell in that 30 movie set. Maybe one day the Hammer flicks will get as nice of a collection.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 14:14
|
|
|
Whispering Machines posted:I love Bird Box the book, because infinite cosmic horrors seem pretty fuckin' scary. Movie... meh. There was stuff that just didn't make sense in the context of the movie, too many characters, etc. And that monster design is something else. We gonna watch so many horror movies together!!
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 14:23
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:Also can anyone tell what the difference between these two is? Did I just find some weird Amazon bug or are they just different printings of the same thing that weirdly got priced differently? Obviously I won't buy either if I decide to buy the big one. The cheaper one is a UK release, but it should be region-free. That's the one I have and it works fine in my Region 1 player. That more-expensive set is actually only 6 movies, compared to 8 in the UK set - it's missing Creature From the Black Lagoon and the 1943 Phantom of the Opera. The '43 Phantom was an iffy addition to the set, in my opinion, but Creature is absolutely essential. If you're not sold on the complete 30-film set, go with that UK box.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 15:21
|
|
|
Liberal Idiot posted:The cheaper one is a UK release, but it should be region-free. That's the one I have and it works fine in my Region 1 player. That more-expensive set is actually only 6 movies, compared to 8 in the UK set - it's missing Creature From the Black Lagoon and the 1943 Phantom of the Opera. The '43 Phantom was an iffy addition to the set, in my opinion, but Creature is absolutely essential. If you're not sold on the complete 30-film set, go with that UK box. I totally agree that Creature From the Black Lagoon is essential. It's easily one of the two or three best looking films in there, although of course it has the advantage of having been made a decade+ later than most of the others. Edit: ninja edit, drat you
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 15:23
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:I totally agree that Creature From the Black Lagoon is essential. It's easily one of the two or three best looking films in there, although of course it has the advantage of having been made a decade+ later than most of the others. Sorry, I mixed up which set I was recommending and had to clarify.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 15:26
|
|
|
It’s pretty impressive how well the suit in Creature holds up in HD.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 15:31
|
|
|
Drunkboxer posted:It’s pretty impressive how well the suit in Creature holds up in HD. Yea there's a ton of detail in the scales and all up and down his torso, if anything you can appreciate the work put into it even more in the higher resolution.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 15:34
|
|
|
Drunkboxer posted:It’s pretty impressive how well the suit in Creature holds up in HD. There's a reason the Creature has become iconic - that suit looks fantastic in the water and out of the water. There really aren't any monster designs from that same period that were as well-realized. You look at other movies from that time that ended up being regarded about the same, like "Thing From Another World," and it's not the monster's look that makes them work.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 15:38
|
|
|
Plus even today having a suit like that looks that good while still being able to function underwater is an achievement. What's everyone least favorite Universal monster movies of the ones in the 30 film set?
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 17:14
|
|
|
Neo Rasa posted:Plus even today having a suit like that looks that good while still being able to function underwater is an achievement. Probably one of the later Draculas. They're not much above Plan 9 From Outer Space, in that Lugosi mainly did them to buy morphine.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 17:21
|
|
|
Neo Rasa posted:Plus even today having a suit like that looks that good while still being able to function underwater is an achievement. Of the originals? The Mummy. One of the sequels or crossovers? That’s a little harder.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 17:24
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:I have the Essential Collection(so not the big 30 film set), and the value there for me has been incredible. I've watched each movie at least twice and the thing cost me like $30. Mostly I've heard some of the transfers aren't as good as others in the set along with stuff that sounds like quality control slacked in the packaging phase with missing discs or broken cases.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 17:27
|
|
|
Franchescanado posted:Of the originals? Yeah The Mummy’s just kinda blah and boring.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 17:29
|
|
|
Fart City posted:Yeah The Mummy’s just kinda blah and boring. For a mummy movie, it’s really only interested in a boring love triangle where one of the suitors has magic powers by staring at a puddle.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 17:32
|
|
|
The Mummy is also the one where for me Hammer made a completely superior version, so it's hard to sit down and watch the Universal film without kinda wishing I was just watching Hammer instead.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 17:52
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:The Mummy is also the one where for me Hammer made a completely superior version, so it's hard to sit down and watch the Universal film without kinda wishing I was just watching Hammer instead. 100% this. I enjoy all of the Hammer Mummy films, even Blood From The Mummy's Tomb.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 17:58
|
|
|
Neo Rasa posted:What's everyone least favorite Universal monster movies of the ones in the 30 film set? I'm also firmly in the "The Mummy isn't interesting at all" camp, but like I mentioned earlier the 1943 Phantom of the Opera doesn't really deserve to be included with the rest of the Universal Monster movies. It's an upgrade from the 1925 version only in that it has sound and color. Nothing beats Chaney's makeup from the original and it feels like all of the effort went into making the opera portions look lavish. It's watchable, but not much of a horror movie. But as far as my least-favorite of that entire set, it has to be "She-Wolf of London," for reasons that I can't get into due to spoilers. The rest of those movies are either absolutely brilliant or at least stupid-fun.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 18:33
|
|
|
It's been years since I've seen the Karloff Mummy but those movies are kind of neat as a proto-slasher series. Also, it's insane because each sequel takes a huge time jump to the point that the final one is set in 1995 even though it's blatantly the 40s.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 18:35
|
|
|
I like The Mummy just fine, it’s just a gothic romance and not a horror movie. Almost Blue posted:It's been years since I've seen the Karloff Mummy but those movies are kind of neat as a proto-slasher series. Wait which movie is this?
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 18:52
|
|
|
Drunkboxer posted:Wait which movie is this? "The Mummy's Curse" takes place 25 years after "The Mummy's Tomb," which is supposed to be 30 years after "The Mummy's Hand." It's worse than the Friday the 13th timeline!
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 18:59
|
|
|
Liberal Idiot posted:"The Mummy's Curse" takes place 25 years after "The Mummy's Tomb," which is supposed to be 30 years after "The Mummy's Hand." It's worse than the Friday the 13th timeline! It's one of those 'don't think too hard about it' kinda things.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 19:15
|
|
|
Ranking: Frankenstein Creature from the Black Lagoon Wolfman Dracula
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 19:39
|
|
|
Okay but now do it by who’s cutest
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 19:46
|
|
|
Same order, I'd say Depends on if you think Wolfman is cuter than the Creature.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 19:47
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:Ranking: I’d switch Dracula and Wolfman.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 19:54
|
|
|
Are these by movie, or by monster? Because if by movie: Frankenstein Creature From the Black Lagoon Dracula Wolf Man But if by monster: Creature From the Black Lagoon Wolf Man Frankenstein Dracula
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 20:03
|
|
|
If by movie Dracula Frankenstein Invisible Man Creature Phantom . . Wolf Man (aside from the sets and Bela, it isn't very good) Still haven't seen Mummy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 20:08
|
|
|
Lon Chaney Jr. just isn’t as good of an actor as Bela or Boris.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 20:12
|
|
|
Chaney Jr. is a great Larry Talbot and that's about it as far as he goes. Broadening the scope: 1. The Invisible Man 2. Bride of Frankenstein 3. Frankenstein 4. Creature From the Black Lagoon 5. Dracula 6. Son of Frankenstein 7. Dracula's Daughter 8. Abbot & Costello Meet Frankenstein 9. Werewolf of London 10. Ghost of Frankenstein 11. Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man 12. The Wolf Man 13. The Mummy's Curse 14. House of Frankenstein 15. The Creature Walks Among Us 16. The Invisible Woman 17. House of Dracula 18. The Mummy's Tomb 19. The Mummy's Hand 20. The Mummy's Curse 21. Phantom of the Opera (1943) 22. Son of Dracula 23. The Invisible Man Returns 24. Revenge of the Creature 25. Invisible Agent 26. The Mummy's Ghost 27. The Invisible Man's Revenge 28. Abbot & Costello Meet the Mummy 29. She-Wolf of London I haven't seen A&C Meet the Invisible Man yet.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 20:26
|
|
Liberal Idiot posted:Are these by movie, or by monster? Because if by movie: Dude what. How can you rank Lugosi's Dracula lower than the wolfman, but rank his movie higher. He's the best part of the film!!!
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 20:32
|
|
|
The best part of the movie is either the armadillo or the wasp casket, actually E: honorable mention to the Van Helsing PowerStance(tm) Bluedeanie fucked around with this message at 20:45 on Jan 9, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 20:40
|
|
|
I like Arnold Vosloo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 20:59
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:Dude what. How can you rank Lugosi's Dracula lower than the wolfman, but rank his movie higher. He's the best part of the film!!! My rankings do not reflect how thin the margins are between each entry, to be fair. I think Chaney's Wolf Man is a better monster than Universal's Dracula because I like the cursed/conflicted aspect of his character. Lugosi is great and there's a touch of that in his performance, but with only two "official" appearances as Dracula he doesn't as many opportunities to show as many facets of the character. Of course, Christopher Lee's Dracula blows them both out of the water by having literally ONE facet to his character, but that's a whole different thing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 21:18
|
|
|
What about a Dracula with NO facets to his character? Is he mad? Scared? Hurt? Horny? Who knows? He doesn't.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 21:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 07:11 |
|
|
That’s that “I pooped myself” face
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2019 21:39
|
|