|
 Week 6 Bracketology Streams!  Only on the CineD Discord All times are in EST and may not reflect reality.  Saturday, February 6th 1900 Human Lanterns 2045 Doctor Sleep* *Not the directors cut, because 152 minutes is bad enough  Monday, February 8th 1900 Audrey Rose 2105 Ghostwatch
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2021 16:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 15:28 |
|
|
Shrecknet posted:Just watched Human Lanterns: it rules Debbie Does Dagon posted:
Nooo I'm missing Saturdays as usual
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2021 17:00
|
|
|
As always, if anyone needs anything re-streamed I'm always available 
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2021 17:43
|
|
|
OK, so I watched Audrey Rose. The first 45 minutes of the film are relatively tense and interesting as you try and puzzle out who Hoover is and what he's up to, but once you solve that mystery, things get pretty slow and plodding. It eventually turns into a series of speeches about reincarnation and a courtroom drama of sorts, with exactly zero scares. It does, however, have Anthony Hopkins with a fake beard. On the other end of the match-up, you have Ghostwatch, which I just watched about 6 weeks ago so I don't need a rewatch. Ghostwatch's format, of a 'real' BBC special investigation into paranormal activity at a reportedly haunted house, gives it such a unique feel. I didn't grow up in the UK so the personalities are nobody to me (except Craig "Lister" Charles) but I can only imagine what this would have done to me as a kid if it was set in Canada with familiar Canadian news personalities. It has tons of flavor, feels really real (for example I love the one on-camera personality trying to fit in with the blue collar crew and it not working at all), and the pacing just feels spot on. I think once you hit the moment where the kid is caught being the cause of the spooky sounds etc., you think you have it sorted out, and that's when things escalate in an extremely satisfying way. Last year, I watched the WNUF Halloween Special thing, and I liked it a lot but it leaned into the cornball nature of the subject matter and I actually think Ghostwatch does it better by playing it straight. Also, the ending is amazing. Easy vote for Ghostwatch.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2021 18:11
|
|
|
Ghostwatch is a fuckin' masterpiece. I need to watch Audrey Rose, but Ghostwatch is a truly terrifying, amazing work.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2021 18:49
|
|
|
MacheteZombie posted:Co-signed. Who could ever sit through an indulgent 2+ hour film from a creator who can't edit himself? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2021 20:11
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:Who could ever sit through an indulgent 2+ hour film from a creator who can't edit himself?  Wait a god drat minute!
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2021 20:13
|
|
|
Human Lanterns was good but it didn't knock my socks off, it didn't blow me away like I thought it might. The horror was probably the most effective aspect of it, because when it wanted to do that it was pretty goddamn horrific. But overall every element felt like a B or maybe B+, there wasn't any A stuff in there. The fight scenes, the sfx, the characters, the story, it was all solid but not overly impressive. The most compelling thing about the movie is that as a total package it's weird and somewhat unique but for me Legend of the 7 Golden Vampires(made 10 years earlier) and The Seventh Curse(made 4 years later) are a lot better. I still might vote for it but now the rewatch of Doctor Sleep is important because I could go either way at this point.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 02:41
|
|
|
It's been a month since I last watched Human Lanterns, and I had broadly the same experience. I think it's a matter of the central conflict being a little uninspiring. I'm not at all invested in the petty squabbles of two obscenely wealthy people. Perhaps there's a place for that story to be presented in a compelling manner, but it's not here. The villain is excellent though, for the brief amount of time we actually spend with him.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 04:18
|
|
|
Very coincidentally, I had watched 3 out of 4 of these very recently. I watched Audrey Rose over the weekend. Human Lanterns vs. Dr. Sleep I liked both of these. Martial arts horror is something I'd definitely like to see more of. I liked the goofiness of the killer jumping around and all the cheeseball style of a Shaw Bros movie. I expected to be bored by Dr. Sleep, TBH, but was pleasantly surprised. Some cool world building, and some cool visuals. The story was dope, expanding on the horror of The Shining (though shamefully I've never read it, I only saw the Kubrick movie). It did feel a bit overlong at times and I would have preferred it be a little shorter. Dr. Sleep may be the better movie, but I had more fun with Human Lanterns, so I'm going with that. Audrey Rose vs. Ghostwatch Audrey Rose was a brand new watch over the weekend, and... it was slow. I just couldn't get into it. It's an interesting premise, but I found my thoughts drifting and the movie couldn't hold my attention. Unlike Ghostwatch, which I've seen a few times and every time it remains an intense watch. I was able to introduce this to a bunch of (remote) people last Halloween as well, and that's a great experience! My vote is going to Ghostwatch!
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 18:28
|
|
|
5. (married but discreet’s Wuxia Horror) Sun Chung’s Human Lanterns vs. 12. Mike Flanagan’s Doctor Sleep I think Human Lanterns was a boring, lovely, misogynistic and rape, drag of a film and one of the worst film watching experiences I’ve had of this tournament. So I’ll move on because others enjoyed it and they’ll have more to say on it. I really, really like Doctor Sleep. I love King's whole thing with "special" people and "the shining" and the idea of a predatory community of them that feed off the others is not only really interesting to me but a very cool spin in King's stories where something anciently evil like It preys off people. Here its not some great unknowable evil force. Its just evil people who got a taste of power and wanted more. And to then play that against the old evil of the Overlook is really cool to me. I also really like Rebecca Ferguson's Rose the Hat and think her mix of cool, seductive charm and seething anger and fear creates a really compelling monster. Ewan McGregor is real good, I love the headscape stuff, and Cliff Curtis plays like the best guy in the world, and I thought Kyliegh Curran did a great job in a role that demanded not only the child actor to be front and center the whole way scaring monsters but to even do a pretty good Ewan impersonation at some point. The scene where she traps Rose is a highlight for me from all angles. The Overlook finale has its hurdles and I understand some of people's issues with them. I do NOT understand people who are just offended a sequel would reference an original or incorporate it, but there's other decisions Flanagan made himself that are more debatable. I’m no Fran but I’m gonna make an effort to justify those decisions. For the record from this point on there will be spoilers not only for Doctor Sleep but also The Shining, film and novel. So here’s the thing with Doctor Sleep. We’re all horror fans. We’ve all seen The Shining and love it. And we’re all big enough horror fans that we probably know Stephen King hated the movie because Kubrick massively rewrote his story. In fact even Kubrick’s writing partner Diane Johnson didn’t like a lot of the things Kubrick changed and cut out such as Wendy being a stronger character and Jack being more sympathetic and driven to it by the Overlook. But King really didn’t like it. Part of that is probably pride that his work was changed. A lot of that is that the story really is dramatically differently in the novel as King writes about places that absorb evil and prey on people like the Overlook, and special people like Danny who can tap into that and unlock it for better and worse. Basically the Shining novel is heavily inspired by The Haunting (perhaps not coincidently another story Flanagan adapted). But the big thing is that in the book Jack isn’t the bastard he is in the movie. He’s an alcoholic and he hurt Danny, but he’s riddled with guilt and loves his family. He’s genuinely trying to change and make amends and he fights the house and ultimately protects his family. And Jack is in many ways a self insert for King who was struggling with addiction and anger issues and the guilt he had for how that affected his family and son. So when Kubrick made Jack an abusive rear end in a top hat who seems to barely stand his family and tries to kill his son… well… you can see why King hated it, right? I tell you all this because its important to understand Mike Flanagan’s decisions in this film. He was adapting King’s Doctor Sleep novel but he had to decide whether to be a sequel to King’s novel as the book is, or a sequel to Kubrick’s film as many fans would expect. The two are wildly different because King's Doctor Sleep incorporates key elements of King's Shining that weren't in Kubrick's Shining or were the exact opposite. So do you just ignore Kubrick? Flanagan’s thoughts on that? quote:"The Shining is so ubiquitous and has burned itself into the collective imagination of people who love cinema in a way that so few movies have. There’s no other language to tell that story in. If you say ‘Overlook Hotel,’ I see something. It lives right up in my brain because of Stanley Kubrick. You can't pretend that isn't the case” The solution Flanagan came to was to rewrite the ending of Doctor Sleep to include the key elements of The Shining that Kubrick cut out. Nearly the entire ending of the Doctor Sleep movie is actually the ending of The Shining novel, with Dan taking the place of Jack and Abra taking the place of Danny. Flanagan incorporated King’s ending where Dan and Abra draw Rose to the sight of the Overlook Hotel (which was burned down in the first novel) into these scenes from The Shining. Flanagan went through painstaking details to recreate the Overlook as close to identically as he could to Kubrick’s film. Like he was matching painting positions and the color of the typewriter (Kubrick’s film is apparently inconsistent and uses 2 different ones). The entire thing is practical effects except for CGI blood in that iconic hallway scene and CGI ceilings because they couldn’t make it work with the lights. The Kubrick estate provided him blueprints and he consulted with Steven Spielberg who was also recreating the Overlook in CGI for Ready Player One. A big part of this endeavor was the bar scene. Not only is this an important character moment for Dan but its an important character moment for Jack that Kubrick ignored. Because again, Jack wasn’t a total bastard in the novel. He loved his family and resisted the Overlook. And a big part of the novel is that the Overlook used Jack’s father against him, in part through Lloyd. That of course created a problem of whether to use Jack Nicholson or not. Flanagan didn’t want to do any CGI nonsense and figured even if he got Nicholson they’d have to de-age him. So instead h turns to an actor in Henry Thomas he’d worked with who he trusted to be familiar enough without feeling like an impersonation. Obviously viewers are conflicted on if this worked but Flanagan arguably pleased his primary target. King hated Flanagan’s idea to go back to the Overlook until he read that scene. Flanagan manages to in that scene give Dan the development that was denied Jack. And King’s thoughts on that? quote:“I read the script to this one very, very carefully,” the writer tells EW. “Because obviously I wanted to do a good job with the sequel, because people knew the book The Shining, and I thought, I don’t want to screw this up. Mike Flanagan, I’ve enjoyed all his movies, and I’ve worked with him before on Gerald’s Game. So, I read the script very, very carefully and I said to myself, ‘Everything that I ever disliked about the Kubrick version of The Shining is redeemed for me here.” Now admittedly that begs the question of who Flanagan’s target audience was. I could certainly understand if someone felt like Flanagan was too focused on satisfying King instead of the wider audience, but I’d point out that King has plenty of fans and fans of his books as well so trying to resolve this stuff and bring in what Kubrick left out was as much for them as any fandom/adaption. And Flanagan did clearly try and pay reverence to Kubrick and satisfy the fans of his film, although the possibility exists that some of them felt the film shouldn’t exist and would never be satisfied with a Stephen King story as a follow up to a Stanley Kubrick one. Ultimately I think Doctor Sleep was a bit of an impossible task. Too many people love Kubrick’s film and elevate him on a pedestal. And most of them don’t care that he changed King’s novel or that King was unhappy, and many probably think its funny and better for it. Flanagan couldn’t just make a straight adaption of the novel because it wouldn’t really have made sense the way Kubrick wrote his film and characters (including the Overlook). If he had tried to ignore Kubrick as much as he could tons of fans would have been pissed. If he had ignored King he would have been screwing him a second time and sounds like that was something he was unwilling to do. I think obviously we can nitpick his decisions such as whether it was worth drawing the direct comparisons of recreating the classic Shining scenes. But I honestly think Flanagan did a pretty great job coming as close as possible to adapting three different sources into one coherent (and IMO satisfying) piece. quote:"Part of what I said to King was, yes, I completely understood his objections to the way Kubrick changed — especially the ending — of The Shining. But if you’ll let us celebrate that movie, then can you imagine a version where we changed the ending of Doctor Sleep, but back to that ending you never got for The Shining? What if we could pull all three of these sources together? And he got very excited about that. And if he hadn't, I wouldn’t have made the film.” So you know… if you hate Doctor Sleep or like Human Lanterns more vote for it. Its all fair. I just really am defensive about this and there’s so much toxicity about it that I felt like i had to try and make the effort to explain part of why I respect and really enjoy what Flanagan did here and why it deserves a little bit of consideration before its gets dismissed with an lol because it dares to reference the film that hacked up the book its a sequel to. So I mean, my vote is obvious. P.S. In the Doctor Sleep novel the True Knot die of the measles and Ghost Jack beats Rose. So… be kind to Flanagan. He had a lot on his plate here.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 20:10
|
|
|
Audrey Rose VS Ghostwatch And undeniable classic, Ghostwatch, takes on a much slower mood piece. I liked Audrey Rose, the cast was great, but the plot is pretty thin and drags on for far too long. The hypnosis scene was dope and I really liked how it all concluded. Ghostwatch, however, is a incredible example of the power moving pictures have on people. It was quite the controversy on release and received a 10 year ban as a result. Now that doesn't make it a shoe in, plenty of banned movies are outright terrible. Ghostwatch isn't one of them. It's entertaining from beginning to end, features some down right spooky scenes, and has such an incredible ending I just can't pass it up. Human Lanterns VS Doctor Sleep Human Lanterns is a fun kungfu black magic movie. I loved the set designs, probably my favorite parts of the whole movie was just how well decorated every set is. The villain also brings a ton of energy to the movie. Doctor Sleep is a movie a I was ready to dislike. Didn't have a great rep among people here and other places. I can kinda see why, it's overly long, slow start and if you don't think the Overlook needs revisiting then it'll do nothing for you in the finale. I'm going to copy my thoughts from letterboxd: I did like the use of Danny managing his alcoholism compared to a magic cult that huffs the essence of others to stay alive, that's a neat premise. Abra Stone was a great protagonist, but it took a long time to get deep into her story. It delivers on it and she was absolute joy to watch as she got to deliver magic justice. I did have a big laugh that the confrontation with the cult scene was a gunfight instead of a magic fight. That just felt off in a way. There's some great visuals, the mind scapes, Danny's boxes, when the ghosts meet hat lady. I didn't mind the shining references but also don't think they work on the whole. No offense to E.T's Elliot but he ain't Jack Nicholson, which is a bummer because he shares a scene with Danny that is a fantastic character moment for Danny, but it's dragged down by an unnecessary impression. Right now I'm leaning Human Lanterns, but I could be talked into Doc Sleep tbh.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 22:23
|
|
|
MacheteZombie posted:I did like the use of Danny managing his alcoholism compared to a magic cult that huffs the essence of others to stay alive, that's a neat premise. Abra Stone was a great protagonist, but it took a long time to get deep into her story. It delivers on it and she was absolute joy to watch as she got to deliver magic justice.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 23:06
|
|
|
Doctor Sleep 4k digital code: 7NEJOL3JYFS4CHA3
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 23:11
|
|
|
Dr. Sleep What if they made Ready Player One but only for The Shining, plus it looked worse than both movies? Ok, that’s an exceedingly unfair blurb to give to a movie that I actually enjoyed watching. There’s something primally satisfying in watching bad guys encounter something that’s way out of their league and just get wrecked, especially when it’s tied in with nostalgia. Scream 4 did it well, new Star Wars did it well too I think (I haven’t actually seen new Star Wars), it’s an effective shorthand to make people like a movie. Lazy too of course, and the more I think about the movie, the more I sour on it. The first 40 minutes or so felt to me like the first episode of a TV series to me, but I got into it, McGregor is great, the True Knot are interesting, the throwbacks are a bit irritating but not terrible. One thing I really loved was the exact recreation of the office where Jack interviewed for his job, it was comparatively subtle and far less in your face than the rest of the references. The other thing, McGregor's breakdown, when he cries out for Tony in his desperation, that hit hard. Overall, the first 2/3 of the movie kind of got a chill vibe with some great scenes inbetween, I’m watching some B-tier King TV show and that’s fine with me. Then they go back to the Overlook and the movie takes a huge nosedive for me. Not only does the place look like poo poo compared to the original, it looks worse than Ready Player One. RPO used CGI and this one actually went through all the effort to build physical sets, and they look more fake than the fake ones. One reason for this could be the CGI ceilings, which probably make all the lighting look off. Either way, this could be forgivable, but at this point the movie just devolves into constant references to a vastly superior movie, with the subtleness of a Star Wars prequel– Danny swings the axe exactly like his dad, it rhymes! Remember the axe swing remember the hole in the door (let’s give you a recreated flashback in case you don’t remember) remember the tricycle remember that room remember all the ghosts (except bear blowjob, good job on the furry erasure) remember the elevator, imitating a good movie must mean our movie is good too. And again, at first I figured this might be forgivable, Flanagan is just struggling with a bad hand that was dealt to him in the form of a weird, untranslatable Stephen King ending, plus studio demands. But no, it was entirely his idea, the damned fool did it all on his own accord, ruining a perfectly fine movie with a completely embarrassing submission to nostalgia. Now, Human Lanterns. First of all, yes it’s misogynistic, it’s rapey, it’s very gratuitous, and upon rewatch I came to the awkward realization that all 4 movies I suggested heavily featured sexual violence against women, and only one (Haneke) actually treats it appropriately. Not a good look for sure. I think we’ve all more or less learned to deal with questionable content in our horror movies, and of course different people have different tolerances. A lot of people don’t like giallos specifically for being rapey, misogynistic and gratuitous, and I don’t blame them. Human Lanterns is heavily inspired by giallos and other specific aspects of western horror, so of course it’s all these things. What’s fascinating is exactly this intrusion of horror into a classical wuxia movie, both thematically and visually. The central conflict between two unrelatable rich people, the costumes, the sound effects, the fights, it’s classic wuxia. When we see the flashback of the swordfight that sets the whole story in motion, it looks exactly like your average wuxia movie. The sets are brightly lit, the action framed properly, the camera held steady, you can see action and reaction in the choreography, it’s objective. But when we first see the lantern house, the lighting is wild, the camera is low to the ground, it’s handheld, it’s shaking, it’s looking inside the house from outside, things are blocking the view, it’s subjective, it’s the voyeuristic view we all know and love from horror. The difference between those two scenes, one after another, is striking. Throughout the movie you see this dichotomy in styles, but they slowly blend, move apart, and blend back again. I’ve seen a lot of horror and wuxia movies, but I’ve never seen anything like this. BasebF55 noted that The Seventh Curse (very fun movie, but y’all didn’t vote for it so it’s not in the tourney) amd Legend Of the Seven Golden Vampires (a member of team wuxia horror) did the same thing better, but I disagree. Seventh Curse is A Hong Kong Action/Indiana Jones/Horror mashup, a very different beast. Golden Vampires is a very different kind of horror too, and in a way it’s a perfect pairing because Hammer and Shaw Bros movies look so alike in the first place. It fits but you don’t get the lovely blend that Human Lanterns gives you. What other things to praise about the movie? The sets of course. Not only are they built and lit impeccably, this movie is one of the few instances of the notorious ShawScope fisheye lenses to a positive effect, with sweeping horizontal movements showing the entirety of the sets like lovely little dioramas. The colours – lights are positively glowing in this movie, and the titular human lanterns are gorgeous as a result. The fights – a lot of people don’t like this kind of choreography, but like many elements of wuxia movies, they’re derived from Cantonese opera – it’s supposed to be theatrical, a dance, everything is theatrical, it’s all clearly fake, from the sets to the the fighting the acting the story the gore, the movie looks an feels extremely artificial, and that’s the secret for why all the objectively gross stuff doesn’t really bother me. It’s a play, the blood is paint, nobody is actually harmed, we get our thrills, the curtain drops, we go home. Easy vote for me, Human Lanterns. married but discreet fucked around with this message at 15:23 on Feb 9, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 15:13
|
|
|
I rewatched Doctor Sleep last night and I actually liked it more the second time. The first half is very strong. Certainly a big part of that is Mcgregor, he was a great choice for the role and he injects a lot of emotion into basically every scene and almost every line. But the True Knot as well, they're just very cool villains and it's interesting to watch them and learn their habits and their rituals. Rebecca Ferguson was another excellent casting choice, because she's stunningly beautiful, which feels important for this character who is obsessed with maintaining her physical peak. But she's also a legit actress and is able to play the other side of that coin too, when you find out how dangerous she is. Watching the movie on UHD, there's definitely a clear difference in the way the Overlook appears here vs. The Shining. And sure, some of that is because the place has been mostly untouched for decades, it's supposed to be decaying. But even with that taken into account, it's just not on the same level as Kubrick's Overlook. There's even a rehash of the elevator/blood scene and you can do a direct comparison. The blood in The Shining is almost startling with how deep it is, just how red red can actually be. The blood in this film is just there, it's a very muted red that doesn't really stand out. I feel like a better way of handling these scenes would've been to start out with the dilapidated Overlook, and then as Danny "wakes it up", it returns to it's former glory and you see everything as if it were in it's heyday. In terms of story and themes though, I think the return to the Overlook works. It's fanservice, but it's not just fanservice. Danny really did need to go back there and face his past, he needed that final victory. Locking the ghosts of the past up inside his head was only ever going to be a band aid. I love the way he confronts his father and says no, I won't be like you, I will learn from you in order to be better than you were. And that's a very relatable message. I think I'm gonna actually vote for Doctor Sleep here, which is unexpected. I love martial arts and combining it with horror can be amazing but Human Lanterns just didn't do enough to make me want to ever see it again or even think about it again. It was decent, sometimes genuinely fun to watch, but not enough to overcome what I consider to be a legitimately good movie with real pathos and excellent performances. Basebf555 fucked around with this message at 19:54 on Feb 9, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 16:56
|
|
|
Human Lanterns is one of the lesser wuxia horrors in my view, but it's still pretty fun. I can see why some people dig Dr. Sleep and it has a few chunks I enjoyed, but a whole lot more that should have been cut and the entire mess just ends up being a little below Flanagan-average. I think a big part of this is that I was never that into the original, either movie or book, so I don't really have any nostalgia to tap into and I don't care how deftly it ties them together. I don't hate Dr. Sleep, and I won't blame anyone for not being able to look past some of the content in Human Lanterns, but it easily takes the win for me. It's a great title that delivers on what it promises.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 19:43
|
|
|
A message from Master Lung  That is all.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 17:15
|
|
|
35 hours or so left to get your movies in and vote. I had the date mislabeled as ending 3 AM Feb 11th, when its 3 AM Feb 12th. My bad on that but if you were misled by it congrats, an extra 24 hours. Vote until 3 AM EST Feb 12th (or when I wake up)
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 21:57
|
|
|
Audrey Rose If we judged movies by how often people in it said the title out loud, Audrey Rose would win by about a million points. In any other category, this for me this is pretty much the worst movie in the competition so far. A slight hint of The Exorcist, a dose of orientalism and straight up religious propaganda with a 2 hour runtime that goes nowhere. I enjoyed the lighting of Ivy’s bedroom, the car crash that sets things in motion and the glance that the dad gives to the Indian couple in the restaurant – some meaning there eh? Shame that such an interesting director drew such a bland movie. Ghostwatch I don’t think I have many thoughts about this other than how it’s a really fun experience. I wish more movies went for audience participation like this one. Priming the viewers for weird stuff happening via phone calls, then actually playing sounds that will make people’s pets act weird? Ingeniously devilish. Ghostwatch, easily.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 21:59
|
|
|
4. (MacheteZombie’s The One n Dones) Lesley Manning’s Ghostwatch vs. 13. (STAC Goat’s Team… I don’t know… Cat People?) Robert Wise’s Audrey Rose I didn’t dislike Audrey Rose as much as others did, which is kind of always what I expected would happen. It had a bit of a throwback feel to Wise’s early work with Val Lewton and has the same kind of use of supernatural as a plot device to get to the humanity of the characters and the horror of their choices and states of mind that better films on this team like The Haunting, I Walk With Zombies, Curse of the Demon, or Cat People have. Unfortunately its not those films. Its clearly one of the weakest if not the weakest movie that could have been drawn here and that sucks. But the problem really comes in the pacing. I don’t care about “religious propaganda.” Like no one minds that The Exorcist submits that Catholicism is right and most horror movie basically start with a set of supernatural rules they put forward as true. I don’t personally really believe in reincarnation but I’m also pretty open theologically and philosophy so how the gently caress would I know if its real or not? And if it gives people comfort in their grief, awesome. That’s part of where I like this movie. Anthony Hopkins’ father is rally intriguing as someone who just wants to find some peace for himself and his daughter’s soul. I think its interesting that as the story starts he claims he’d be content just being a small part of her life until it becomes clear that denying the Audrey Rose of it all from Ivy is an issue. And played against him is the mother of Ivy who believes him and wants to help her child, but is also desperately afraid of losing her child if all of this madness is true. And then you have Ivy’s father who is kind of an rear end who makes things worse, but can you really blame his skepticism? He’s right to not want to let this stranger stalking his daughter into his life. Its all a lot of really compelling tension and melodrama. But the basic structure of the story and pacing fails everything. The film doesn’t need to be 2 hours and it feels longer. Done right the tension should build up until the finale, but it just kind of meanders about in this film and that kills it. Its not a film I hate and its not a film I’d tell anyone to go out and seek, but its a film that has a number of interesting elements than a lot of the other films we’ve seen so far. Maybe even one in this round… Ghostwatch on the other hand isn’t really terribly original. Its a pretty basic adaption of the Enfield Haunting by way of War of the Worlds. Still, while its not creating anything terribly original its unique in its approach and more so in how well it works. A lot of mock horrors like this just don’t work, or work once but not after that. But in Ghostwatch’s case even decades later and without the context of who these broadcasters are or the possibility of confusing it for a real event its still just incredibly effective. The familiar parts of the story and broadcast work to ease us into a comfort level with the piece and it does what Audrey Rose failed to do and build that up. The key of the film is when the girl is caught faking things and immediately everyone lets their guard down except for the lady who gets super defensive and starts piecing the big pieces together. If I have a critcism its that the money like of “we’ve created a national seance” doesn’t rally have room to breathe and kind of guts run over by the chaos of the final act. I wouldn’t minded stretching that out a little. But overall its just a package that works and over the last few years its become a Halloween staple of mine. So yeah, I’m sad because I wish Wise/Tournier had drawn better here. But I suspect even the best of their stuff would have fallen here. Sure The Haunting of Curse of the Demon would have put up a better fight but this one felt done as soon as I saw the matchup. And I’ll be contributing to that by voting Ghostwatch.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 22:42
|
|
|
I watched Audrey Rose, and I definitely didn't dislike it as much as some did, although in the end the vote for Ghostwatch is an easy decision. I think both Anthony Hopkins, and also Marsha Mason elevated it from bad to at least mediocre. Any scene they're in has real intensity to it, and that emotional intensity is really all there is to latch onto in the film. There are some atmospheric and stylish moments, but not enough in a 2 hour runtime to overcome Ghostwatch. Still, I'm glad I watched it because seeing Hopkins in his prime is always a treat. Anyone in this thread who hasn't seen Magic definitely needs to check it out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2021 22:21
|
|
|
Ok, lets not drag this out with fake suspense.  That was decisive. Still no upsets in this tournament but we have our first shutout. My poor Team Cat People gets slaughtered and Robert Wise is out of the tournament for the first time and for Jacques Tourneur its his second 1st round elimination. Although not his fault this time. Mike Flanagan puts up a slightly better fight but ultimately that’s just maybe a little sadder as he gets destroyed as well and does himself get eliminated for the second year in the first round. That’s what my guys do, but every tournament needs its 12 seeds. So MacheteZombie’s The One n Dones and married but discreet’s Wuxia Horror head into the second round to face off against each other. New pair of matchups. Any upsets this week? 4. Stuart Gordon’s Re-Animator vs. 13. (STAC Goat’s Just Two Weirdos Writing About Quirky Ladies Clumsily) Lucky McKee’s The Woods  Oh boy. Well, lets be real. Nothing drawn here would have stood a chance in hell against Re-Animator. But I would have liked to see one of the more interesting films get drawn just for people to see it. Instead we get easily the worst of the field and what felt like a job for hire for McKee. I guess based on reviews its more liked in general than I remember it being but c’mon. Its Re-Animator. I forfeit. Re-Animator is on TubiTV (free), Shudder, Showtime, fubo, and AMC+ in the US. The Woods is on Amazon Prime in the US. 5. (Debbie Does Dagon’s The NYC Grime Connection) Abel Ferrara’s Ms. 45 vs. 12. (Debbie Does Dagon’s Bon Appetit!) Pier Paolo Pasolini’s Salò, or the 120 Days of Sodom  I love Deb but I hate everything about this matchup. Ms. 45’s actually been on my watchlist but I keep pushing it away and the more I read about it the more I don’t wanna. But Salo was firmly on my “Do Not Watch” list. I’ve made a lot of noise these last few weeks of burning out and needing to avoid the movies that just put me in a terrible place, fill me with negativity, and make me not want to watch anything else. This might be the week I follow through on that. Sorry about making this all about me but I don’t even want to read up on this matchup. I’m sure Deb can rep her teams better. Ms. 45 is on TubiTV (free), Pluto (free), and Hoopla (free with a library card) in the US. Salò, or the 120 Days of Sodom That’s it. I dunno. I might skip them all this week. Or maybe I’ll show up for Re-Animator and end up watching them all. Who knows? I hope everyone else enjoys this week more than me. Vote until 3 AM EST Feb 19th (or when I wake up) Bracket & Noms Spreadsheet Letterboxd List
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2021 09:00
|
|
|
Most people might feel some pang of indignant anguish at the thought of two of their teams facing off, head to head, in the first round. I am not one of those people. Instead I am cackling like a triumphant banshee, beckoning you all to enjoy firstly my favourite Abel Ferrara horror film, Ms .45, which is simultaneously both absolutely traumatic and incredibly fun, and of course Pasolini's most infamous work, Salo, which is indeed unrelentingly torturous and hard going, but with a significant point! I can't promise you that you'll like what you see, in fact I would hasten you all to familiarize yourselves with the I'm sure lengthy content warnings both films come with, I can however definitely promise you that you will have opinions, that these films will make an impact, that they will shake off the dust, and that no match up between two of my teams will ever feel ho-hum or who-cares. E: Stream details to come, once I wake up. Debbie Does Dagon fucked around with this message at 12:20 on Feb 12, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2021 12:01
|
|
|
The first choice is easy. It's Reanimator by a mile. I love that movie so much. The second one, my gut feeling is Salo, because I do actually love it. When I was younger I watched it as a "lol gross out" movie and obviously it didn't click with me, but I watched it in October for the challenge thread and it REALLY clicked with me. Sure, it's harrowing, it's shocking, etc., but it's simply a well made film with interesting characters and an actual point/message behind it. I haven't seen Ms. 45, but I'm excited to! I won't lock in my answer until then.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2021 14:10
|
|
|
Just gonna repost why Saló is dumb from earlier:Paolo Pausilini posted:“Fascism . . . had not been capable of even scratching the soul of the Italian people; this new Fascism {he means decadent Italian life in the 70s, televisions and mass media}, armed with new means of communication and information . . . has not only scratched the soul of the Italian people but has lacerated, raped, and besmirched it forever.” Roberto Chisei, writing for the Criterion Collection posted:It is the story of choosing a group of young people, at first from among the victims, and then atrociously eliminating those who do not, or cannot, submit to the codes stipulated in the regulations, that is to say, to the “laws that shall rule your life in here,” I'm not passing a value judgement on Pausilini or Salo, just saying what I got out of it is it felt like a movie chastising the victims of fascism (everyday Italians) for not fighting back harder, for acquiescing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2021 14:35
|
|
|
I'll give The Woods its fair shot as I've never seen it, but seems likely that we're about to have our second shutout. Not sure if I will vote in the second match-up. Like STAC, I don't know if I can really handle Salo right now. I guess that is the problem with these types of tournaments, there are certain categories of horror that are sometimes too much for me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2021 14:54
|
|
|
Gah I forgot to vote!
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2021 15:05
|
|
|
Wow, have we ever had an unanimous vote like that? I'm also sad that Robert Wise/Jacques Tournier got eliminated, I'd have voted quite differently if it had been Cat People! Not sure I'm gonna watch Salo purely based on reputation and content warnings on imdb.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2021 15:08
|
|
|
I'm definitely gonna watch The Woods just because it's easily accessible. We'll see about Salo, it'll depend on if I can make it to the stream. I've seen Ms. 45 though, it's really good and I love Ferrara and NY Grime so it'll probably be two easy decisions in the end(assuming I remember to vote this time!).
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2021 15:16
|
|
|
Shrecknet posted:Just gonna repost why Saló is dumb from earlier: gotta be honest I'm not seeing the relation between the quotes you picked out and your thesis at all, could you explain how you got from A to B?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2021 15:24
|
|
|
Seen 3/4 this round (everything except The Woods, though that seems like a runaway). I will say this: Once you get past the initial assault sequences in Ms .45 the movie is actually kind of a blast. Like, whereas other rape revenge movies like I Spit On Your Grave and The Last House on the Left really make you feel grungy, Ms .45, from my memory of it, makes you feel vindicated by the end. It's certainly scuzzy and morally ambiguous and upsetting, but it didn't leave me feeling like poo poo at the end of the day like others in the genre do. It also has a great visual riff on Woody Allen's Manhattan that has aged with a *chef's kiss*. Salo, I think, is truly deserving of its title as one of the Great Movies. A lot of people find it to be viscerally unpalatable for obvious reasons, but mostly I just find it overwhelmingly sad. Because it's about the powerful and the powerless and there's almost no light in it. Pasolini was a brilliant artist and I think Salo is far, far more than just a cheap shock value movie. It is wild though how last tournament was full of fun, goofy movies and feels like this time around we're just in the pits of despair from the get-go. Cannibals and European auteurs and animal slaughter and rape and misery abound. edit: One thing to contextualize Salo is the political environment of Italy in the 70s. After WWII they did a terrible job of scrubbing their government of fascists and many Mussolini loyalists were still in the same positions -- or worse, had been promoted -- as they had during the 30s and 40s. These were the years of lead, when the country was plagued by an ongoing civil war between communist and fascist terror cells, the Red Brigade and all that jazz, that saw what could feel like near daily bombings and shootings and assassinations. Much like America's mass shooting epidemic post-Columbine, people weren't sure if just going to work was going to get them killed. Meanwhile, you still had fascist politicos and police attempting to force their will on the people, while socialist politicians attempted to move the country left. Salo is the most visceral depiction of this, but this regular violence is sometimes lost in the contextualization of Italian horror from the period and why it was so depraved, nihilistic and graphic. As well, you can see more politically astute films such as Investigation of a Citizen Above Suspicion that tackle this in a head-on, contemporary means rather than genre metaphor. Salo is about much, much more than just the fascism of mass media. If Pasolini is indeed blaming victims, which I think is a very ungenerous reading of the film, it's because there was a complacency among much of the populace. I'm no expert on this era, though I'm trying to learn more about it, but Pasolini is one of the most fascinating Italian political filmmakers of his generation, alongside Elio Petri. TrixRabbi fucked around with this message at 17:56 on Feb 12, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2021 17:47
|
|
|
Hey, I got a pull quote in! For a movie that's gonna lose in a landslide, but still, that's fun!
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2021 18:12
|
|
|
Ms .45 is definitely a rape revenge movie, but I am agreeing with TrixRabbi that it ends on a quite positive note. If nothing else, the directors of John Wick liked it enough to pay homage to it in one of the pivotal scenes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2021 18:57
|
|
|
Any movie where this is the most memorable, defining image is going to be good:
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2021 19:01
|
|
|
e:nm
Debbie Does Dagon fucked around with this message at 21:11 on Feb 19, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2021 20:46
|
|
|
4. Stuart Gordon’s Re-Animator vs. 13. (STAC Goat’s Just Two Weirdos Writing About Quirky Ladies Clumsily) Lucky McKee’s The Woods The Woods isn’t bad. Its not great either. Its a solid witch tale that has a moody throwback feel to Val Lewton like stuff from the 50s and 60s and a finale that will remind you of Suspiria. I don’t know if its helped or hurt by reminding you of better films. Ultimately there’s just not enough meat in this movie’s story, I think. You don’t really get a clear sense of why anything is happening until the very end. Some people are cool with that and some films can survive on style and mood but the Woods probably isn’t stylish enough to pull that off There’s worse witch movies out there and it might be a better Three Mothers film than Mother of Tears but it theres better stuff out there too and nothing in this really stands out enough. Its also not written by Lucky McKee so its pretty lacking in the style that he has and that I put this team together with in mind. But what can you do? Re-Animator is Re-Animator. Its wild, its crazy, its fun, its tight, its brisk. Combs is great, Crampton is great. Makes me just want to watch more films of hers as I always do when I see her. Comb’s West is an all timer on the Mount Rushmore of horror mad scientists and its fun as you watch and realize just how much of a sociopathic gives no shits crazy person he really is through the film. Other guy never stands out that much but he works as that foil who is completely traumatized and shell shocked by everything that is happening and can you really blame him? I love how Crampton is the most rational person from “your new roommate is creepy” to “I think this relationships is over.” It always cracks me up how matter of factly West carves out a zombie’s heart, moves on to the next fresh corpse, or just stakes a severed head on a spike because hey, maybe that will come in handy later. He basically treats corpses like I treat old shoe boxes. Its just a very fun movie and i only a little bit am bothered by the complete nonsensical nature of the finale and where the hell West gets dragged to or why. I’d love to hear how they came to that decision. I wish my team had gotten a better draw because pretty much every other film on their team is at least more interesting and I’d be curious to see the reactions. I’ll probably run the same team out there next time and eventually one of those films has to be drawn. But none of them would have stood a chance against Re-Animator. This is basically just a race to see if its the second shutout.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2021 19:51
|
|
|
Re-Animator This has everything you could want in a horror movie: amazingly gruesome effects; a simple, effective narrative; a reasonable length; and a delicate-featured, bespectacled creep. All in all, it's goofy fun that respects your time. The attempted head from the decapitated head scene and the cat scene were probably my favourite parts. However, my participation in the previous bracketology may have dampened my enjoyment. The fact that I am now more familiar with Gordon/Yuzna productions may have made this film feel conventional. It feels very "been there, done that." The narrative centred on a hubristic scientist wanting to play god isn't particularly novel either, as entertaining as they made it here. There's also the fact that I'm not exactly sure if this was a rewatch or not, which is a bad sign in either case. It would imply that it's either unoriginal or forgettable. The Woods On the other hand, the law of lowered expectations may have played a hand in my enjoyment of The Woods, which you all found extremely mediocre. Frivolous as it is, an atmospheric horror with a majority female cast featuring witches and lesbian subtext is very much relevant to my interests. The set pieces are great, Patricia Clarkson gives an excellent performance, as usual, and I liked a lot of aspects of the world-building. Granted, it does feel like it could have developed certain things more thoroughly, but it's better to leave an audience wanting than to have them checking their watches. It's a nice little YA, coming-of-age horror. As it stands, I was equally entertained by both films, albeit for different reasons. So, I'm going to be a lovely contrarian: The Woods has my vote, which is very likely to be the only one. Yesterdays Piss fucked around with this message at 23:45 on Feb 14, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2021 23:08
|
|
|
I voted for Re-Animator and Ms. 45 because I'm 99% sure that's the way I want to vote and I'm scared of forgetting like I did last week. I am gonna try to catch at least some of Salo tonight though. I think it's gonna be close to impossible for it to win my vote though just because of the type of movie it is. Deb was saying in the stream the other night that Ms. 45 is "fun", and in a vacuum maybe that sounds a bit odd but from what I've heard about Salo I do think Ms. 45 is probably fun by comparison. And that's not to say that Salo is some sort of obscene abomination that's beyond what I've seen before(I'm pretty sure it's not), but I'm expecting it to be relentlessly dour. And that's not something you'd ever say about an Abel Ferrara film, there's a manic energy to Ms. 45 and all Ferrara films that does add that "fun" element, or whatever you want to call it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2021 16:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 15:28 |
|
|
I recently watched Smash Cut, the Sasha Grey-led pastiche/love letter to 70s sleaze, and it wasn't good but it wasn't good for a specific reason: it needed to be a lot sleazier. It was just too nice to really land, while not being good enough to be legitimately good. So yeah, I get that endorsement of Ferrera; sleazy can be hella fun if it's done well.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2021 16:43
|
|