|
Finally! I did 31 years of 2017 to 1987 2 years ago. I did 31 years of 1986 to 1956 last year.   So it seems pretty self explanatory what I'm gonna do this year. Except then I realized a certain movie I was gunning for was actually older than those 31 years and did the math on my total and well... the goal became newly obvious...  1920 to 1955 plus I'll get in a 2019 movie so that I've officially covered 100 years over the last 3. That's the goal. That should get me past 31 new watches and my total from last year was 58 new, 64 total. We'll see if I can beat that this year. I've been prepping this and recording/buying/cataloguing movies for 11 months so I am ready to go. October 1st. None of this September cheating.
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2019 22:11
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 16:39 |
|
|
Random Stranger posted:The 20's are going to be interesting. Once you get out of the well known greats, you're going to have to stretch for a couple of the years. I'm looking forward to what you turn up. Yeah, I bought the big box set last year when I decided I was going to do this. I've never seen any of those Universals besides Frankenstein/Bride (and I only watched Bride this year) so I'm really excited. I've got a list of "essentials" I'm absolutely watching but I'm sure I'll watch more to fill in years around Hitchcocks, Vincent Price, and other "essentials". My viewing from these years is pretty sparse so if you can name it I probably haven't seen it. I expect 90% of that chart to be absolute classics. There's gonna be a few "this is the only movie I could find" years, but there have been each time I've done this. Its kind of fun to pick just a random film anyway, even if it sucks.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2019 00:41
|
|
|
I considered doing the Children of the Corn marathon during this or May (along with other franchises) but I've learned my lesson that doing Franchise marathons is just kind of drag for me. I prefer to be able to switch around to stuff more organically and helps me keep going. If I'm feeling a franchise I'll run with it. If not even with the years I can go find something different. No "ugh, I have to go back to the next mediocre/bad sequel".
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2019 15:21
|
|
|
Ok, I'm still waiting for October 1st (as hard as that is). But I actually was kind of "pre-gaming" all month because I was in the mood, but it kind of shifted into mostly TV horror and stuff that isn't really horror but was kind of tangentially on my list anyway. I'm trying to fast now until the 1st to make sure I'm real hungry and have a lot of room, but here's what I pre-gamed so far in very quick writeups I did as I was going. 1. NOS4A2 (2019) Available on Watch AMC and Shudder. An adaption of Joe Hill’s (Stephen King’s son) book about a young woman who discovers a magical ability to harness her creativity in a way that could help stop a fellow “creative” who has been preying on children like a vampire for decades. I liked it, but didn’t love it. I went in expecting a vampire story and its something else entirely, which took some adjustment but I eventually really liked. I dug the whole crazy, no limits idea behind “creatives” and what it meant for the expanded world and the little easter eggs dropped about Hill and King’s works. That was one of many things about this that felt inspired by King, although I don’t know what came from Hill’s writing and what came from the tv adaption, but there’s a lot there. The really out there but interesting magical idea. The very full and real feeling characters. The maybe slightly too long pacing. Even a little maybe unnecessary creepy sex stuff. Not totally sure if it nailed the landing? Very, very King and I like King. I also really liked Ashleigh Cumming’s performance and she’s now on my radar to see her other work and it might have bumped Hounds of Love up my watch list as its been lingering on the far end of it for awhile. The rest of the cast is pretty good too. Zachary Quinto as a deranged monster, Ólafur Darri Ólafsson as an unexpected force, and Jahkara J. Smith as the damaged walking example of the cost of the magic. They all did a good job, Cummings just really stood out to me since she had to carry must of the series. I think it was hurt a fair bit by the obvious setup for a second season rather than a true ending. But that’s TV for ya. I will say that while I thought a second season was a terrible idea most of the way through I thought they set it up ok. Wouldn’t be my choice creatively but I’ll come back for the solid cast and interesting idea. I might check out the book this October too. In general its put me in the mood to rewatch/read some King and visit some Hill.  - (2). Splice (2009) Available on HBO Go. Vicenzo Natali (Cube) tells a modern Frankenstein story when Adrien Brody and Sarah Polley splice human DNA with other stuff and create a whole new species that is one part scientific breakthrough, one part child, and one part monster. This is freaky loving movie. That’s mostly what I remember from my previous watch and that I was left too freaked out by it to really shape an opinion. I’m not really sure anything changed on the second go, except that I knew the freaky stuff was coming. But that didn’t really make it any less freaky. I don’t know if its a good film but its an ambitious one with lots of weird psychological, moral, and sexual stuff thrown in there. I’m not really sure it has anything say about them, more that it just kind of had a bunch of stuff. Guillermo del Toro is listed as an Executive Producer and while I can’t find any evidence that he really had anything to do with the film the evolving creature designs definitely feel like they have his mark and is one of the main reasons to watch. Good, complicated acting performances from Brody and Polly is another. But the main reason you’d want to watch this - or not want to watch this - is for some really hosed up poo poo on multiple levels.  - (3). Drive Angry (2011) Available on Showtime Anytime. Nicolas Cage has escaped from hell and with the help of Amber Heard is on a blood, sex, and bullet ridden road trip to hunt down the satan worshiping cult who killed his daughter and rescue his infant granddaughter from becoming their sacrifice, all while a demonic Accountant is hot on their heels. Also his name is John Milton. Because someone remembered their high school english classes. I mean, if you hear “Nicolas Cage on a demonic revenge killing road trip” not only do you have to ask which one it is but you have to figure you’re in for a fun time right? But this film is completely soulless and artless. I didn’t expect Mandy or anything but I thought, this has to be kind of fun. But it just isn’t. At all. Cage does that thing where if you didn’t know better you’d swear he was a bad actor, but he’s really not trying. William Fichtner tries to have a little fun as a smarmy demon but is clearly half asking it. Heard is there to be the unexpectedly bad rear end hot girl who isn’t actually there for sexual objectification but its totally forced and flat. I don’t blame any of the actors since its a perfectly talented cast even down to the secondary characters but the film is directed by the guy who brought us Dracula 2000 and its sequels and was written by the guy who did Jason X. And its got all the style and artistic quality you’d expect from that collaboration. The two also teamed up for the My Bloody Valentine remake and now I’m curious to see how bad that one is for a laugh. The director is apparently Wes Craven’s long time editor but he clearly learned nothing from him. All in all I feel confident saying this is the worst of Cage’s demonic revenge road trip films but since I can think of at least four of those off the top of my head it might only be fair to watch the rest to judge for sure. The film did end with a totally hilarious Meatloaf song over bad CGI and direction choices which kind of made everything worth it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pIOXHgz7WcY  2 (4). The Twilight Zone (2019) A CBS All Access original. Jordan Peele reimagines Rod Sterling’s iconic sci fi/horror anthology series that explores the social, political, personal, and psychological problems spinning around people’s minds through the prism of nightmares and terror. Or something smart and clever like that. Its just September. You know what the Twilight Zone is. I liked it. That seems like an unpopular opinion but I did. That isn’t to say it was hitting home runs much or that there weren’t some bad episodes. But that’s the appeal of anthologies to me. Each episode is a fresh start and new story. Sometimes things work, sometimes they don’t. One episode could be one viewer’s favorite and another’s most hated. The finale “Blurryman” was probably the stand out episode for me. It ended on a high note. I’m not sure it made a ton of sense but I don’t really care. I don’t need things to make sense in The Twilight Zone. It’s the Twilight Zone. Its madness and confusion and crazy. Yeah, sometimes it has something to say but sometimes its just fears and nightmares and I thought the finale did that in a fun way that felt right. Besides that its funny that all my standout episodes were written by Glen Morgan (“A Traveler”; “The Blue Scorpion”), Heather Ann Campbell (“Not All Men”), or both (“Six Degrees of Freedom”). None of it was high art or anything but they all worked for me, kept me engaged, and really gave me that thing that I want to feel from The Twilight Zone. Traveler was also directed by Ana Lily Amirpour and Blue Scorpion by Craig William Macneill and I thought it showed the jump from tv directors to quality film directors. “Replay” was another good episode that might have been a bit on the nose but still mostly worked for me. I didn’t really dislike “The Comedian” or “Nightmare” either. They weren’t great but perfectly fine watches. I guess the only episodes I really didn’t like were “The Wunderkind” and “Point of Origin”. And that seems like a pretty good percentage. I’m glad I watched it in a binge rather than week to week as it seems like opinions really soured with each new episode waiting for something to blow people away, but I was good just going to each episode and taking what it gave me. I’d recommend if it interests you.  - (5). Event Horizon (1997) Available on Starz Whatever. In the not nearly distant enough future the Event Horizon was designed to open a gateway in time and space to make faster than light travel possible, but it disappeared for 7 years and a rescue crew sets out to Neptune to respond to a sudden distress call from in the orbit of Neptune. What they find is a horrific mystery of where the ship has been, what happened to its crew, and what the ship wants to do to them. Love this film. That doesn’t seem like a minority opinion around these parts so there’s probably not a lot that I can add. Sam Neil is great. The cast in general is a great 90s cast that reminds me of my huge crush on Joely Richardson and that Jack Noseworthy once existed. I love how grimy and beat up the Lewis and Clarke looks. I swear one of the chairs is held together with duct tape. Its obviously they took the aesthetic from Alien a bit there. I imagine sci-fi is the appeal for a lot of people but its just a haunted house story in a space ship. It does a great job with ambiance and atmosphere. Bad CGI has a minimal impact. I never felt like they fully nailed the ending but its still a really good ride. I once wore out a VHS copy made off of cable but its been awhile since I’ve seen it. Still holds up great and was a fun watch to move me into the horror mood fully.  - (6). BrainDead (2016) Available on Amazon Prime. Mary Elizabeth Winstead is stuck working for her brother the Senator in 2016 as everyone on Capital Hill appears to be losing their minds and jumping to political extremes, extreme partisanship, and just full on bonkers ideas only to discover that it may all be the result of bugs from outer space eating their brains and controlling them in a plot for world domination. In hindsight that sounds kind of comforting. I really liked this when it first came out and I still did. Just a fun little tongue in cheek story. Winstead is a very charming lead and the whole supporting cast is good. I love the musical recaps and the sense of humor. Seeing the end with the setup for a 2nd season on Wall Street is interesting now that I know they wanted to do more seasons there, in Silicon Valley, and Hollywood. I don’t take the politics of it too seriously but if you do you might take offense to the general “extremism on both sides, compromise is the answer” theme of it. I don’t think it was really trying to push a political message and I just enjoyed it outside that even though I have pretty strong political views that aren’t “centrist”. But if you don’t separate art from stuff like that then it might really bother you. I had fun.  3 (7). The Dark Tower (2017) Available on Showtime Whatever. A young boy with “The Shine” dreams of other worlds where the Man in Black attempts to destroy the Dark Tower at the center of everything and bring about the Apocalypse and a Gunslinger who hunts him down. Dreams that eventually become a nightmares and amazing adventure for the young man. Idris Elba and Matthew McCoughney star in this loose Stephen King adaption. Ok, its not horror but that’s kind of why I’m watching it now and not October. Its still Stephen King… sorta. To be honest I haven’t read past the first book and a half so for all I know this is a faithful adaption of the next 5 1/2, but it doesn’t feel right or like King. It feels mostly like a lifeless Hollywood action film, more like one of those YA movies that tend to always bore me. Elba and McCoughney really aren’t given a lot to do. They’re fine but it feels like a paycheck. I don’t know that it was bad or boring but it definitely wasn’t good or exciting. I just kind of sat through it and then was glad when I could see it was almost over. Even the climax just kind of happens and barely registered. One minute everyone was shooting and fighting and then it was over. I should really give the books another go. Even 1 and 1/2 way through I know King had a lot more interesting and crazy ideas than this did.  4 (8). The Collector (2009) Available on Amazon Prime, Shudder, Hoopla, Vudu, and TubiTV. A thief picks the same night to rob a house that a serial killer picked to plant preposterously elaborate death traps for the family that lives there and ends up being the one person who can save them. Oh my God. I’ve actually started this movie once or twice before and just not felt it and turned it off. Maybe “originally conceived as a Saw prequel” just sends me running. But it seems to get a some love in the main thread and I’m kind of trying to do bubble movies in September so I figured I’d give this one a look. I really should have followed my instincts because this was just one of the most unpleasant viewing experiences I’ve had in awhile. I just hated that and spent most of the movie in a cringed position audibly gasping at the constant barrage of poo poo. If people ask “what is torture porn?” I think this would probably now be my first case to present. I hated this film. But at least its off my list and I can take its sequel off too. Ugh. I need a shower. And some uppers or something. I feel viscerally ill.  5 (9). The Bad Batch (2016) Available on Netflix. Ana Lily Amirpour (A Girl Walks Alone At Night) tells the story of a young woman sent to the Bad Batch, a desert wasteland considered outside the US where “undesirables” are sent, and is forced to learn how to survive in a land where people do unspeakable things to survive and predators come in different forms. This is another film that really isn’t horror at all but was on my list because of the horror connection of its source, but that's kind of working out well to knock stuff off my list that wouldn't really fit in October anyway. I liked Amirpour’s first film for the most part and liked her episode of Twilight Zone (“A Traveler”) I just watched so I was curious to see this one. I can say that I really see an auteur style and tone to Amirpour’s work. She has a feel and voice that I really dig and is very immersive. But at the same time she kind of… meanders. Even the Twilight Zone episode was kind of a very engaging episode that just kind of went… somewhere at the end. Bad Batch went places… and then went other places… and then cut back around… and then got at a place that sorta made sense. I don’t hate it but I don’t really love it either. As a director she sets a very good world, brings out some strong performances in actors, and makes some really beautiful shots and art. But as a writer she could probably stand to reach a point in a little more focused and quicker way. I dunno. I’m comfortable calling her a young auteur so I don’t want to crap her voice too much. Her style is her style. I enjoy it, although maybe in smaller doses more. I'm curious to see how she grows.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2019 08:43
|
|
|
I liked All Cheerleaders Die. Its flawed but fun. I'm sad the sequel never happened.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2019 23:27
|
|
|
Definitely check out Creep 2.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2019 04:10
|
|
|
feedmyleg posted:
Based on what you described you liked from The Fog and what you didn't like from Changeling, maybe try Prince of Darkness? I don't know, but its got some of the same "other worldly" Carpenter quality you seem to enjoy from The Fog. The Fog is, incidentally, my absolute favorite horror of all time. I always get excited when someone else loves it.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2019 21:19
|
|
|
Since Fran has committed the atrocities of banning tv mini-series my plan to pad out my days with Stephen King rewatches in the background have been dashed. The travesty and injustice. But I’m itching to get started so I figured I’d keep my pregame going with some of those salaciously banned King minis I grew up watching. 6 (10). Rose Red (2002) Watched on DVD. Looks like its up on Youtube and DailyMotion. Stephen King’s take on The Haunting of Hill House sees an college psychology professor obsessed with finding proof of the paranormal bringing a team of psychics, including an autistic child with dangerous power, into Rose Red, a gothic home with a reputation for ever changing dimensions and a considerable body count. Rare to a King movie this isn’t actually an adaption of a novel or short story, but rather King’s own idea to give his spin as a “loose remake” of Shirley Jackson’s The Haunting as far back as 1996 and was in talks with Steven Spielberg and Mick Garris at different times to make it happen. The project seems to have gotten stuck in production hell, King’s ’99 accident, and the ’99 Liam Neeson remake. While recovering from his accident King converted his feature film idea into the trade and true tv miniseries and it kind of sounds like his dreams of making a great haunted house movie just kind of became his own personal rehab exercise and just another King miniseries. Stephen King posted:I was using the work as dope, basically, because it worked better than anything they were giving me to kill the pain. I was using the work as dope, basically, because it worked better than anything they were giving me to kill the pain. It’s not very good at all. Its very derivative and takes most of what does well from Jackson’s original story. “Women in Rose Red had a tendency to turn up missing and men had a tendency to turn up dead” is an interesting hook and play on the worn tread territory but nothing’s really done with it. In a haunted house the house itself is a main character and King certain tries to make Rose Red an equal to Hill House but it doesn’t work. We spend the first third of the film not even entering the house but just hearing backstory in exposition dumps. Once they get into the house its another 3rd of the film spent on more exposition dumps and a few perfectly adequate but not spooky CGI splashes. Once everything picks up in the 3rd act all the energy is spent on CGI ghosts and the house becomes a setting, which is a real mistake. And that whole women/men thing just kind of gets abandoned entirely. Nancy Travis does a solid job as the obsessed leader being driven insane by the house, but the script doesn’t really give her enough to do with it. That’s a sad constant of the piece as there’s a great cast of character actors in Julian Sands and Kevin Tighe and young surprises in Melanie Lynskey, Jimmi Simpson, and Emily Deschanel. But none of them are given anything to do except Matt Ross who plays one of King’s favorite villains in the cruel and contemptuous “incel” loser. Its a very un-King like element since he usually has such strength in fleshing out characters but I guess writing them for movie/TV is different than writing for a novel/short story. Every character here is pretty one dimensional, and some of them are lucky to have that much. They probably could have cut the cast in half and improved the piece. The film is LONG. Even for a King miniseries this clocks in at over 4 hours. And that’s not really that rare for series’ these days but it basically takes 2 hours of that to even get into the house and get things rolling. King obviously knew the house should be the star but he didn’t do a good job writing and introducing that character, or it didn’t get adapted well at all from script. Probably both. And an over reliance on very bad CGI ghosts really ends up making the final act feel very non threatening and silly. On the bright side I did spot my first cell phone model as a feature prop in the series. That was fun. Its not the worst King work, haunted house piece, or even Hill House version I’ve seen. But its not good and I probably would have been better served spending the time rewatching Netflix’s/Flanagan’s The Haunting of Hill House. It obviously did a lot of what King was trying to do and the side by side comparisons really convince me more that Flanagan and King should be a good mix. Of trivia note King was clearly inspired by the recent Blair Witch Project success because he attempted the same kind of viral campaign trying to see Rose Red as a real thing with a fake diary from the house’s owner being sold and a fake documentary selling King as bringing the “real” story to film. This apparently worked and a lot of people bought in. It was a strange time for internet fact checking. There’s even a prequel tv movie about the house being built but its not included on my DVD so I won’t just impulsively watch it next. It is however on Hoopla…  - (11). Salem’s Lot (1979) Watching on DVD, looks like its up on the Internet Archive. A writer returns to his hometown at the same time a mysterious stranger comes to town and finds himself as the only one who can seem to do something as the town’s citizens are being systematically murdered and turned into vampires. Oh, and its directed by Tobe Hooper. This has always been one of my favorite King adaptions and one of my favorite vampire tales. Well before I ever saw Nosferatu I saw Barlow and said “now this is a monster worth being terrified of” and I love that King takes the dreaded vampire out of the castles and into a classic creepy “haunted” house. I feel like I can see influences on Fright Night, The Strain, Lost Boys, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and probably a ton more vampire features that followed. The scene with the boy floating to a window was one of my first big nightmare inducing scares when I was a kid. Given all this and Hooper’s involvement I’m honestly surprised this doesn’t generally get more love and standing. It might well by a Top 5 vampire movie for me. Is it just that King mini series stigma? And I really didn’t know this was a Hooper film. I never would have expected him from it with its spooky elements. That’s not to knock him in any way. Poltergeist is a classic, Texas Chainsaw Massacre lived up to the hype for me, and Lifeforce was a trip. But looking at all those films together shows how versatile and talented Hooper is. He didn’t just tell one kind of story he seemed capable of telling any kind of horror. Makes me want to check out more of his work. I’m sure it won’t be as good as the previously mentioned films but a year ago I hadn’t seen Lifeforce or TCM so who knows what’s out there in his catalogue I haven’t seen? Hello, young dreamy Fred Willard! Well younger. Man, he was 40 in ’79. Now I want to go find a movie with a 20 something Willard. Also hello Bonnie Bedello. This being before my time its weird to think that a lot of these folks were stars of the 70s that were just kind of faded by the time my awareness kicked in. I had no idea this starred Hutch of Starsky and Hutch. I also kind of love the seeming mindless parasitic nature of Barlow. They move to town, buy a house, set up a business, make all this effort to establish a front and you assume that means there’s going to be some kind of slow play here or plan. Why go through all that effort to just eat and turn everyone right away and cause a stir? For a moment I questioned that and wondered if there was some plan from the novel that didn’t make the cut. But Barlow just seems like an animal out of control. His nature is just to feed and spread his evil and whatever Straker is he has no control. He seems genuinely scared when he sees Barlow’s chains in the dirt. The monster is loose and it has no concern about pacing itself, hiding itself, or playing games. And Straker can do nothing but serve his master. The only real knock is that the effects don’t hold up at all. But its 40 years old so that’s to be expected. The vampire makeup largely holds up its just some of the magical flying and dying stuff that looks bad. But it’s a small thing. The movie more than carries itself on atmosphere and tone. And grown as I am and knowing what he looks like, I still jumped outta my skin when Barlow jump scares in for the first time 2 hours in. Was gonna watch more King today but got real busy and lots of hassles. So I think I'm just gonna hold out for midnight and October, so that's probably the end of pregaming. September Pre-Game Tally - New (Total) 1. NOS4A2 (2019); - (2). Splice (2009); - (3). Drive Angry (2011); 2 (4). The Twilight Zone (2019); - (5). Event Horizon (1997); - (6). BrainDead (2016); 3 (7). The Dark Tower (2017); 4 (8). The Collector (2009); 5 (9). The Bad Batch (2016); - (10). Rose Red (2002); - (11). Salem’s Lot (1979) October Tally - New (Total)
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2019 23:58
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:Fine, I'll sign up for Shudder for October so I can watch Viy. I'm really trying to resist doing this. I have more than enough on my list without adding my Shudder playlist.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2019 02:14
|
|
|
I'm debating burning a Kanopy borrow on Vanishing. Autopsy of Jane Doe would be the easiest thing to watch but its also probably the lamest thing to watch. Otherwise maybe Vampyr but it feels a tad redundant with my years (I already have 3 other must watches from 1932). Decisions, decisions. edit: Check it. Vanishing is one of those "Criterion not actually available in your country Kanopy ones." Ok, decision made easier. STAC Goat fucked around with this message at 02:50 on Oct 1, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2019 02:43
|
|
|
Origami Dali posted:
I feel like the tonal problems you have with it kind of benefit it in the end. I don't disagree with the meat of what you're saying at all but I think the fact that the film seems to be struggling to decide if its a black comedy about teenage troubles or a disturbed look at madness speaks directly to the heart of it. We spend the entire film kind of not taking it all that seriously or expecting our troubled teen's problems to express themselves in kind of "normal" ways like violence or sex. That it ends up taking such an unexpected, depraved, and horrifying turn ended up leaving me completely stunned and shaken. I felt like part of the problem and that I had failed to take warning signs seriously enough. I felt like there was something I should have done. For better or worse I think the tonal conflict was intentional. I mean, they cast John Waters as the priest/guidance counselor not to mention Traci Lord as the uptight mom. Someone knew what they were doing. STAC Goat fucked around with this message at 07:00 on Oct 1, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2019 06:58
|
|
|
ITS OCTOBER! Ok, seems like there’s only one logical place to start this whole “100 Years” thing, with basically the film that made me stretch “31 Years” out to the 100 number. To paraphrase another film, lets start at the beginning since that’s a very good place to start.  1. The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1920) Available on Prime, TubiTV, Kanopy, Youtube, and like drat near anywhere else. Its 100 years old, I’m pretty sure its public domain. A twisted fairy tale of a deranged doctor who controls a somnambulist (a sleepwalker) to commit acts of violence to serve his whims and desires. I always feel weird “reviewing” a film like this. Its nearly 100 years old and has been reviewed and written about to death so what could I possibly have to say that wouldn’t be at best trite and at worst completely counter to what everyone else thinks? I mean… what if I don’t even like it? I did like it. I’m iffy on silent films in general but as someone who sometimes has trouble focusing and staying out of my own thoughts a silent film does demand your full attention and focus. At least until you’re done reading a dialogue card and it stays up for another 10 seconds. But Cabinet especially did a good job pulling me in with an often confusing and bizarre world and story that ultimately comes to make complete sense in a way I didn’t at all see coming. I take it from some reading that there’s a lot of dispute on if the framework ending was intended by the writers or if it completely distorts their original intentions. Without going all Death of the Author on it I’m not sure it really mattered to me which is the case. Besides the fact that I’m obviously not gonna fully grasp the political messaging of 1920s Germany (although I can certainly imagine) I think the film is dreamlike enough that the message comes across even if you take the framework as total truth. Which I didn’t, because by the time it came around I had become so accustomed to the bizarre storytelling that I had become cynical about everything I was being told. Which I gather was at least somewhat the filmmakers’ intended message. So however it ended it I think the journey stayed intact. Having already admitted I’m iffy on silent films I’m inclined to agree with Five Eyes that it probably didn’t need as much dialogue as it had. Most of the story is pretty self explanatory and the actors do a fine job getting things across, and what isn’t expressly told to us only adds to the nightmarish dreamlike quality of the film. And besides, I couldn’t make out half the handwriting on those exposition dump notes. I mean, I got the general gist but I think that’s the point. It was really largely storytelling without the need for many words. I’m not going to say I loved this or its one of the greatest of all time or anything. But I enjoyed the film and can see some of what makes it so special. I was gonna watch another connected silent film next but I want to let this one breath a little. Maybe give myself a little more time to think it out and read up on it. So I’m gonna go with something I hope to be a nice “cool down” selection.  2. Nightmare Cinema (2018) Available on Hoopla. But it had a Shudder title card so maybe its there too? Mick Garris (creator of Masters of Horror and Fear Itself) once again pulls together a group of horror directors (Joe Dante, Ryūhei Kitamura, David Slade, and Alejandro Brugués) to tell different tales of strangers drawn into a dilapidated movie theater and forced to watch horrific tales starring themselves. This is basically another horror anthology created by Mick Garris with much of the same crew he used for Masters and Fear Itself. I guess ultimately Garris is less of a “master of horror” himself - with a resume that includes such blockbusters as Critters 2, The Stand and a bunch of other questionable Stephen King adaptions like Sleepwalkers, Desperation and that other Shining adaption - but rather just a huge rear end fan with all the right connections. It turns out he’s been part of genre anthologies since the 80s as a writer for Amazing Stories and has done documentaries for films like The Fog, Howling, Goonies, and The Thing. I always call myself a fan of his but can never really give the films to explain why, but I guess he's just always been around my horror. So the first entry is from Alejandro Brugués who… doesn’t have a Wikipedia page. IMDB tells me he’s responsible for Juan of the Dead, the E entry in ABCs of Death, and a couple of episodes of From Dusk Till Dawn: The Series. Yay? Despite this his piece is a fun start called “The Thing in the Woods” about been sexy young people being hunted by a masked killer at a cabin. It makes every joke you expect it to make but I laughed a whole bunch of times for completely intended reasons. Its completely stupid but I had fun and I’m even gonna go out on a limb and guess that like 75% of the worthwhile gags in this “1984” season of American Horror Story were contained in here in a tight, fun 20 minute package. Joe Dante (Gremlins; Howling; The ‘Burbs)’s piece is “Mirare”, a kind of body horror piece that feels kind of like a million other anthology short stories I’ve seen. It wasn’t bad, but it was deridingly mediocre and didn’t really go anywhere or say anything. Which is kind of a disappointment from the guy I’d call the “headliner” but its been like 20 years since Dante made any kind of good movie and his last film Burying the Ex was real not good. Everyone gets old, I guess. Ryuhei Kitamura is a director I have absolutely no first hand familiarity with but he has a few movies I recognize. Midnight Meat Train, No One Lives, Versus. His piece “Mashit” is a trashy, over the top, and irreverent story of a priest who deals with a demon of lust (“and incest”) who has possessed his orphanage. I know vaguely what this piece was spoofing but its not stuff I actually watch or connect with. One review I read called it “vintage celluloid Euro-trash” so if that means anything to you there you go. If nothing else he definitely went for it, it just really kind of left me cold and started to lose me after the weak Dante piece. David Slade started to bring me back. I didn’t know his name but he’s done 30 Days of Night, Hard Candy, (tragically The Twilight Saga: Eclipse) and directed episodes of interesting shows like American Gods, Hannibal, and Black Mirror. His piece “This Way to Egress” is about a mother who seems to be suffering hallucinations after her husband leaves her and feels like the world and everyone around her are getting twisted, dirty, and deformed. Its a very Twilight Zoney piece that plays between whether she’s just having a mental break or if this Silent Hill-esque (Slade apparently directed some stuff for those games too) reality is real. Its probably the one piece in this anthology that suffers for time as it never really feels fully fleshed out and I would have liked to see the idea and world explored more fully. But its got a fun twist and a solid ending and hooked me back in. Garris leaves his piece “Dead” for the end and I think it appropriate as it felt like the most complete piece of the film. It tells the story of a young boy who watches his parents killed in a car jacking and gets shot himself and finds himself recovering from a near death experience but being pulled at from both sides. Its dark, its tragic, and its well acted from Faly Rakotohavan. Its not a blow away piece but it had me hooked and engaged and felt like the most complete story of the bunch. And the ending where he leaves the hospital able to see his departed friend and parents in bittersweet peace only to then also see the killer and realize this is a curse was very good. There’s also a wrap around thing with the movie theater and The Projectionist played by Mickey Rourke. My guess is Garris made these since his piece is the only one that actually connects, and that he filmed the wrap around completely independent of the other director’s pieces and then they just got plugged in. So he just wrote some generic, nonsensical horror host stuff. It ultimately doesn’t add much and Mickey Rourke is just being Mickey Rourke. Still a pretty fun, if unspectacular watch. Kind of exactly the “soft” watch I wanted as buffer between older classics I have to think about. edit: Upon further reading this was apparently created as a backdoor pilot for another TV anthology. That makes sense. We're under way! Now time for playoff baseball to derail me. September Pre-Game Tally - New (Total) 1. NOS4A2 (2019); - (2). Splice (2009); - (3). Drive Angry (2011); 2 (4). The Twilight Zone (2019); - (5). Event Horizon (1997); - (6). BrainDead (2016); 3 (7). The Dark Tower (2017); 4 (8). The Collector (2009); 5 (9). The Bad Batch (2016); - (10). Rose Red (2002); - (11). Salem’s Lot (1979) October Tally - New (Total) 1. The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1920); 2. Nightmare Cinema (2018); STAC Goat fucked around with this message at 10:29 on Oct 1, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2019 10:24
|
|
|
Franchescanado posted:6. The Ruins I LOVE the Ruins. Not much I could add that you haven't. Its not a classic or anything but its one of those movies I can turn on whenever and end up watching 90% of it. Its a simple premise done well. Its an exceptional cast doing great work. The characters are kind of dumb and arrogant enough to get themselves into the mess, but not so much so that you can't just relate and sympathize. Its super hosed and gorey for people who want that. I'm not at all bothered that the monster is a plant. I actually think a kind of natural, isolated danger like that works for me as well as any hidden monster and sets up the locals in their "not really the bad guys" antagonist role well. Plus its a day time horror, and in a hot setting. I hate watching night time horrors during the day, especially a day like today when I'm sweating like crazy. But its the perfect movie for a day like this. Basically the reverse Storm of the Century. Also, I was totally planning to watch Dead at Night tonight. Snuck on a September borrow on Kanopy last night and everything. Did I accidently let you see my whole list? gey muckle mowser posted:Juan of the Dead is pretty decent if you like horror/comedy, plus it's neat to see a Cuban horror film.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2019 20:13
|
|
|
So most of the films I’m gonna do for the 100 years are just like absolute essentials that I could name off the top of my head and am embarrassed I haven’t seen. But doing this for a 3rd year I’ve become accustomed to the reality that there’s always a few years where there’s just no big movie and I’m basically choosing what’s available to me. Put there’s picking a random movie and there’s picking a film that while lesser know is still very well regarded and listed as IMDB’s #1 horror of 1945. Of course Fran had to beat me to it so I don’t even get to wow anyone with a deep cut or make any new observations without being beat by smarter film critics than I.  3. Dead of Night (1945) Available on Kanopy. An architect is called to a home for a new job but becomes terrified when he realizes he remembers everyone there and everything that’s happening from a terrible nightmare, prompting the various people present to tell personal stories of their own encounters with the unexplained and supernatural while a present psychiatrist attempts to assure them that there’s a rational explanation to all of it. I liked this a lot. While its technically an anthology I don’t think it plays like that at all or should be judged as one. As opposed to the ones we commonly see where there’s a vague wrap around story connecting a series of unique stories often from different creative minds, in this case the story really is the “wrap around.” This isn’t a bunch of stories, its one story about a man paralyzed with fear that he’s experiencing something impossible and a room full of people trying very hard to sooth his fears in different ways. To that end while the first couple of stories are a little weak I actually think that works perfectly. Its the steady progression of the type of stories people are telling and how seriously they’re taking this or how freaked out the room is getting. It starts very quaint with some mildly spooky stories that the skeptic can easily explain away as your mind playing tricks on you or your fears getting the best of you. Then it moves to a genuinely disturbing personal experience that has no logical explanation except a very ugly, harsh one. Another houseguest tries to lighten the mood and even dissuade some of the superstitious thoughts taking the room over with a silly story he works up. And ultimately even the skeptic has to admit he has his own disturbing story that makes one second guess reality. And I think that’s the hook. The stories are all tools to advance the real story which is Mr. Craig’s growing anxiety and fear as his nightmare keeps unfolding towards an end he desperately wants to avoid. Everyone in that room is trying to help him out in their own way and it just keeps inching closer and closer to the nightmare. Its a fun, slow drip that built up the anxiety as you went with the help of gradually improving ghost stories. And the end isn’t just some twist or lark for a shock, but is something that can really get you going down an existential hole if you start thinking too much about it. What’s funny is the pieces WERE directed by different people. But the “wrap around” works so effectively to link them to together that I genuinely assumed the whole thing was just done by one source. I give a lot of credit to Basil Dearden for directing that linking story that I think is the heart of the film, and John Baines who wrote the three standout stories in The Haunted Mirror, The Golfer’s Story, and The Venquilist’s Dummy. The film seems largely the work of Baines, Benson, and Andy MacPhail, who is best known for doing a great deal of writing for Alfred Hitchcock. Also of interesting trivia note the lightest of the bunch The Golfer’s Story was directed by a young Charles Crichton who would go on over 40 years later to win an Oscar for A Fish Called Wanda. So there was a fair bit of talent involved, to no real surprise. So yeah, its an anthology but I’m not gonna treat it like the last one and judge the individual stories because its not really an anthology. Its a full story and I’m judging it as such. And I really enjoyed it. Also I have a new favorite gif.  Ok, onto IMDB’s #1 horror for 1949.  4. The Queen of Spades (1949) Available on Kanopy. An arrogant army captain striving for fortune learns of an elderly countess who allegedly sold her soul to learn the secrets of always winning cards and sets out to seduce her ward and learn her secrets by any means necessary. This feels like my first dud of October. It wasn’t terrible or anything. It picks up quite a bit in the second half and gets interesting. I think my problem is that the first half of the film spends a lot of time and energy on random soldiers, live inside the countess’ home, and love triangles that didn’t feel like they were really going anywhere and had very little horror element to them. The film has less to do with deals with the devil or satanic countesses than it has to do with one amoral man’s ambition making him willing to do anything. Which could definitely be interesting but I don’t feel like he actually gets the necessary focus as we get sidetracked with love triangles and extra characters there for exposition or comic relief. The countess also doesn’t come off as much more than a mean old lady so there’s just nothing that compelling, or even terribly sympathetic about her suffering ward who lives in a really pampered way but is kind of bullied by an old lady afraid of death. It just really lost me. As I said, it picks up in the second half as our amoral protagonist starts to actually do amoral stuff but it never really ends up being enough to suck me back in. It finishes at its best but that’s not a super high peak. Whenever I encounter this thing where I don’t like a film that is well regarded I wonder what I’m missing. Its beautifully shot and directed and the lead puts across a strong performance (that sort of reminded me of Russell Edgington with me recently rewatching True Blood). But it just never hooked me and I just don’t really see what someone like Martin Scorsese sees when it calls it “one of the few true classics of supernatural cinema.” Then again maybe that quote says more about Scorsese’s view of “supernatural cinema” then it does about “one of the few” examples he thinks is worth it. I should have watched Mighty Joe Young or Abbott and Costello Meet the Killer, Boris Karloff. First miss of the challenge. Ok, lets finish up away from the challenge with a movie that really caught my attention.  5. Tragedy Girls (2017) Available on Hoopla and Hulu. Sadie and McKayla want what all teenage girls want - likes, followers, and to get a good serial killer rep going before college. What’s two bestie psychopaths to do when boys come between them, the cops and media keep downplaying their killing spree, and the serial killer tied up in the basement refuses to mentor you? “I could be killed!” “Maybe stop checking in your location online and he won’t find you.” That was twisted fun. Not quite the “Scream meets Heathers” thing I had kind of imagined in my head but not that far off either. Alexandra Shipp and Brianna Hildebrand are the Tragedy Girls and they’re probably best known as X-Men (Storm and Negasonic Teenage Warhead respectively) but I recognize Hildebrand more from the criminally under appreciated Exorcist tv series where I think she was great. That’s definitely part of what drew me in, and both ladies do a really good job with their really warped characters. There’s an interesting kind of “psychopath vs sociopath” vibe between the two characters that I don’t understand those terms well enough to properly describe. But there’s an interesting journey and question as you wonder if either of them are remotely… salvageable? No… that’s the wrong word. The movie this kept reminding me of wasn’t Heathers, but Ryan Reynold’s Voices. I watched that last year and I remember that my lasting impression was that for how warped and depraved Reynold’s character was part of me just kept idly hoping that somehow something resembling a happy ending could occur or he could somehow get right. Which was basically impossible and illogical but I still kept hoping for it while watching. The same thing happens here. There’s no real hope for the Tragedy Girls. This isn’t a Heathers story where a bad influence is manipulating a seemingly ok person. These girls are hosed. But you kinda want things to somehow work out for the cold blooded murder. It’s twisted. It’s fun. There’s some fun small roles played by Craig Robinson and Kevin Durand. Who doesn’t want to watch a good Kevin Durand role? I won’t call this great or a must watch or anything. It lacks the real bite it would need to live up to the premise. Or maybe a more experienced director. But if you’re looking for some dark humor you can probably do a lot worse than this. September Pre-Game Tally - New (Total) 1. NOS4A2 (2019); - (2). Splice (2009); - (3). Drive Angry (2011); 2 (4). The Twilight Zone (2019); - (5). Event Horizon (1997); - (6). BrainDead (2016); 3 (7). The Dark Tower (2017); 4 (8). The Collector (2009); 5 (9). The Bad Batch (2016); - (10). Rose Red (2002); - (11). Salem’s Lot (1979) October Tally - New (Total) 1. The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1920); 2. Nightmare Cinema (2018); 3. Dead of Night (1945); The Queen of Spades (1949); 5. Tragedy Girls (2017)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2019 09:39
|
|
|
I watched FW Morneau's The Haunted Castle last night. But it turns out despite being listed in Kanopy's horror section and Morneau's reputation and... you know... being called The Haunted Castle... this isn't a horror movie. I had realized Kanopy lists a much of thrillers and dramas in their "horror" section but I never even thought about double checking this one. The film even had a fakeout... one of my favorite parts of the movie... but I definitely don't think it was a horror film. So oh well. I have another 1921 film. I mostly liked the film. Slow start but pretty solid once it gets going. But not a horror film, just a murder mystery with some vague horror trappings.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2019 21:39
|
|
|
TheBizzness posted:I apologize if I missed it but is The Ruins streaming somewhere? I really want to watch it now. Prime, Showtime, Vudu, Tubi. No excuses! I love that October '19 is randomly becoming the year one of my personal favorites starts getting mad love. Thanks, Fran!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2019 01:27
|
|
|
Anonymous Robot posted:Is the good Oujia movie people are talking about Oujia: The Insidious Evil? Oujia: Origin of Evil. Its a Mike Flanagan film so like, it depends on if you dig his style or not. But I hated the first one and avoided the second one for a long time but its a pretty decent ghost story.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2019 02:06
|
|
|
Anonymous Robot posted:Too bad, doesn’t look like this one is streaming anywhere. Looks like its on FX Now... if you have a cable sub or know an old person. I don't remember it well enough to know if a tv edit would ruin it, but I don't think so. But like, its not great or a must watch or anything. Just a pretty decently good horror story which is a surprise given what a piece of garbage the original was. STAC Goat fucked around with this message at 02:28 on Oct 4, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2019 02:26
|
|
|
Its sitting on my DVR so I hope to get to that crazy later in the month once I get my years under control.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2019 02:48
|
|
|
T3hRen3gade posted:Billy Zane is basically the best on-screen version of Randall Flagg from "The Stand" that has yet to be seen on screen (until Alexander Skarsgarde takes a crack at it next year, for which I'm pumped)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2019 07:18
|
|
|
Its weird. Its only October 3rd/4th and yet for some reason I feel anxious that I’m falling behind. I think its because I’m not doing 31 years, I’m doing 36 so I instinctively know that “as long as I have 1 every day” isn’t actually good enough. Or it could just be that I haven’t been sleeping well and have been kind of stressed and anxious anyway. My internal clock is all hosed up amongst other things and it feels like way more than 4 days that I’ve been doing this. That’s not burnout or anything, I just really need a long sleep crash and reset. Ah well, enough of my problems, lets get to the movies…  6. House of Wax (1953) Watched on DVD Vincent Price is a pleasant if eccentric wax sculpture until his business partner burns down his workshop for the insurance money, with him in it. Though he survives the fire he comes out changed, unable to use his scarred and burnt hands, and with the aide of assistants attempting to build a new House of Horror Wax museum in more ways than one. I wish the poster looked better. This was apparently the first color 3D film (or something like that), which surprised me since I didn’t know 3D was around that long. Obviously I didn’t watch it in 3D but its always funny catching the scenes and shots that are in there just to show off the tech. Like a really extended scene with a dude with paddle balls all so he can keep paddling at the screen and break the 4th wall. 3D was just an odd thing. I had a lot of expectations built up for this one and they fell flat a bit. Its not a bad film or anything, actually I enjoyed it. But like its a cult classic, its credited for revitalizing Price’s career, its in the Library of Congress. I suppose that last part may have some to do with the 3D stuff but still, I was expecting a bit more. It’s perfectly fine. Its always fun watching Price play a mad man and skulk around, even if he spends a bit too much of this film as the nicer alter ego. But that was different to see. But its not one of his more memorable characters or performances. I imagine this is one of those things that was maybe a bit more horrifying or shocking in a time with softer sensibilities or fewer comparisons. I feel like I’ve seen most of the big scenes and plays done plenty of times, although most certainly in films that came later. House of Wax feels a bit derivative but considering it was made nearly 70 years ago that’s gotta be mostly a backwards effect. Then again some of the reviews I see call it derivative too, so I guess it wasn’t exactly a trailblazer. Although, check out this pre-internet snark. quote:John McCarten of The New Yorker also hated the film, writing that he thought it had "set the movies back about forty-nine years. It could have set them back further if there had been anything earlier to set them back to," concluding that "when Mr. Price started clumping around and choking ladies with knots that wouldn't pass muster at a Cub Scout meeting, I took off my glasses once and for all, put on my hat, and left.” Its good to know there’s always been people watching movies and complains about real dumb things like “those knots looked bad” and making big huffs. Needless to say, I don’t think it set film back to the stone age or anything. Its a solid little movie with Price doing his thing and some moody, creepy wax statue scenes. I only started to get antsy right towards the end right before the final sequence kicked off. So no regrets. Just less than I was hoping for. Franchescanado posted:SUPER SAMHAIN CHALLENGE #1: The Best Month A weird case. Half the horror films to choose from I’ve seen, half of them are on my 100 Years of Horror list. Normally I’d defer to one of the older, more classic films but since I’ll be doing that all month I’m tempted to instead go for one of the more modern films I probably wouldn’t have got around to this month. On the other hand some of those old movies are on my list with other films of the year and I’ve been debating whether to do 2 or 3 films in a year if they all seemed worth it even though that would make the month harder. This would be an excuse to get another one in. Oh, screw it. It’s the first challenge. Lets make this easy. Besides, I don’t really feel like doing old right now. Oh wait, “from the writer/director of Trollhunter”? Well that makes this decision easy.  7. The Autopsy of Jane Doe (2016) Available on Netflix. Father and son coroners are left alone overnight performing an autopsy on an unidentified woman found under mysterious circumstances. But the more they “dig in” the less anything about her or how she died makes sense and things get spooky. As if cutting into bodies in a mortuary is ever NOT spooky. Ok. Now we’re talking. That’s officially my first “I’m turning on all the lights and writing this review because… I know there’s nothing in the dark… I know there’s nothing in the dark…” movie of the countdown. Incredibly tense, deeply unnerving. It loses a little bit of that in the final action when everything kicks off just because all hell breaking loose is in some ways more comforting than the dread and tension of all hell breaking loose. Every closeup on Jane Doe had me on edge just waiting for the smallest sign or twitch or anything. So once poo poo kicks off its kind of a release of pressure. Sure, you might have a bigger problem and mess than before, but at least you got some relief and all that waiting is over. I JUST HEARD A STRANGE NOISE!!!! Pro-Tip: Potato chip crunching is louder than random house creaking noises in the middle of the night. I enjoyed both actors who really had to carry much of the film. Well that’s not fair at all. Its incredibly well directed and so much of the tension was in that. But Emile Hirsch and Brian Cox are two fine actors who do a great job. And I like their characters. There’s just a regular father and son. They have some stuff to work through but dad’s not some abusive authoritarian and son’s not feeling trapped and desperate to get free. I think it was cute the way they teased that a little with the girlfriend and “I don’t want to be a mortuary worker” scene but made it clear to us that he actually likes this. And I briefly thought the girlfriend was Katherine Isabelle and was like “man, when will she catch a break in one of these?” Also father and son completely passed my big haunted house (which is basically what this was) test.  Seriously, what is that creaking? I mean its raining and we went from 90s to 50s so there could be pressure changes or something… but… Has that been happening all night? The explanation was a little unnecessary but I give it a pass on the ground that they don’t really know, they were just trying to work it out. I mean, I buy the witch thing but I don’t buy the ”everything they did turned her into what they feared” thing. That’s lame. I’m going with ”Salem caught one actual witch. They were still dicks..” Also how can a song most recognizable from the Flintstones be that unsettling? I loved Trollhunter. I loved this. I’m now officially hyped for Scary Stories To Tell in the Dark. I’m glad I chose that instead of an old one. I needed that recharge. A more punchy modern film to buffer the simpler older ones. Tomorrow maybe I can do 2 old ones and get ahead of the pace. September Pre-Game Tally - New (Total) 1. NOS4A2 (2019); - (2). Splice (2009); - (3). Drive Angry (2011); 2 (4). The Twilight Zone (2019); - (5). Event Horizon (1997); - (6). BrainDead (2016); 3 (7). The Dark Tower (2017); 4 (8). The Collector (2009); 5 (9). The Bad Batch (2016); - (10). Rose Red (2002); - (11). Salem’s Lot (1979) October Tally - New (Total) 1. The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1920); 2. Nightmare Cinema (2018); 3. Dead of Night (1945); The Queen of Spades (1949); 5. Tragedy Girls (2017); 6. House of Wax (1953); SUPER SAMHAIN CHALLENGE #1: 7. The Autopsy of Jane Doe (2016) STAC Goat fucked around with this message at 09:48 on Oct 4, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2019 09:43
|
|
|
I'd say Alien is totally horror, Aliens is tangentially close enough and basically a monster action flick, 3 is iffy but I guess is kind body horrorish, Prometheus is probably horror although I've only seen it once, and I haven't seen Covenant or AVP 2. AVP is the only one I don't feel is horror at all. But again, only saw it once. But like, I'd say the majority of the series has footing in horror so its all fair game. I've been debating doing the series for the marathon to give the modern ones another look (or first in the case of Covenant) for awhile but I also want to do the Predator films with it since I've only seen Predators and AvP. So it just becomes a big thing and more iffy "horror."
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2019 18:04
|
|
|
CopywrightMMXI posted:I honestly had no clue there even was a Scanners franchise until these posts. Seriously, the gently caress? There's FOUR Scanners sequels? I was real tired, kind of in a lovely mood, and a little drunk last night so I didn't watch one of my classic films. Instead I just popped on Netflix and watched the first thing that came up. Technically I need a 2019 anyway to complete 100 years.  8. In the Tall Grass (2019) A Netflix original. A brother and sister on a cross country trip are sidetracked when during a pit stop they hear a boy calling for help in a field of overgrown grass. They wade in to help but quickly become lost themselves despite it making no sense. As time goes on they meet more people who have been lost in the grass and realize it doesn’t really obey the rules of reality. Then things get really weird. Based on a short story from Stephen King and son Joe Hill. Like I said, this was basically a “i’m tired so I’m gonna just turn on whatever I find” pick but I was kind of interested by the King/Hill thing. The premise is weird but they often are. This is very much a King story. Characters with a lot of stuff. loving around with metaphysical poo poo with no real explanation. Some weird sex stuff. Like usual you can kind of see bits of other King works in there like Children of the Corn or Tommy Knockers. There was probably a reference to something in there somewhere I missed. And its probably a little longer than it needs to be and gets a little lost in itself. So you know… a King adaption. There’s definitely a lot of good weird poo poo and abject horror going in this. All in all I enjoyed the experience. But it leaves a lot of stuff on the table unexplored like the “Church of the Black Rock of Redemption” and the seeming natural question of whether Russ established it in part of his time altering God knows how long journey or if it was past people trapped in lured in by the Rock in the same way or The Rock itself and where it came from or what it was doing. I’m perfectly fine with stuff like that going unexplained to the purpose of a more sinister story but I’m not sure the one we got was more interesting than that stuff. And like Did Travis die at the end? Did he starve? Do you just loop around getting reborn until you starve? Do you not come back in if you die that way? Why wouldn’t Russ come back? Did anything actually break? Did they never enter the grass at all now that the circle got broken? And when did Tobin touch the rock? Did Cal? Was the escape just another circular turn? And who the gently caress were those grass cultist people? There’s just a ton of questions the film leaves you with and I’m not sure it leaves you satisfied enough to just say “Eh, its more fun not knowing.” This isn’t to say it was a bad film. As I said, things are genuinely unnerving and uncertain and confusing in a good way. It probably went on a bit too long and I started to doze off, but that might have just been on me more than the film. Run time is only like 100 min. Patrick Wilson chews the hell out of scenery and as soon as you know him you know he’s trouble. There’s a lot of stuff I liked in this and kept me mostly engaged. But somewhere around the half way point you kind of realize you’re not gonna get an actual explanation for anything and I think the finish that’s written is a little unsatisfying with the whole ”doomed to go around in circles and every turn leads back here” theme. A quick skimming of the novella’s plot shows King and Hill went in a different direction originally that I think feels more appropriate. This is credited as “written and directed” by Vincenzo Natali (Cube; Splice; Haunter). It sounds like he got about 75% of the story from King/Hill but then a lot of the stuff I have issue with came from him and that some of my questions get quasi-answered by them (or just don’t get raised as things take a more “natural” path). It reads to me like Natali adds a whole new character to create a 2nd Act and then writes a new ending to get to a different place. I think I would have preferred he try and stay true to the story. Again, it’s not a bad film. You can do a lot worse for King adaptions or horror in general. It does a fair bit well and there’s talent between King, Hill, and Natali even if maybe that’s too many cooks in the kitchen. But you can also probably find a lot better if you’re not just half drunk, dozing off, and picking the first thing you see that catches your attention. September Pre-Game Tally - New (Total) 1. NOS4A2 (2019); - (2). Splice (2009); - (3). Drive Angry (2011); 2 (4). The Twilight Zone (2019); - (5). Event Horizon (1997); - (6). BrainDead (2016); 3 (7). The Dark Tower (2017); 4 (8). The Collector (2009); 5 (9). The Bad Batch (2016); - (10). Rose Red (2002); - (11). Salem’s Lot (1979) October Tally - New (Total) 1. The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1920); 2. Nightmare Cinema (2018); 3. Dead of Night (1945); The Queen of Spades (1949); 5. Tragedy Girls (2017); 6. House of Wax (1953); SUPER SAMHAIN CHALLENGE #1: 7. The Autopsy of Jane Doe (2016); 8. In the Tall Grass (2019)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2019 20:10
|
|
|
Honestly, M_S seems to be pacing herself this year. But yeah, I'm really feeling intimidated with my lame 8 in 5 days. I need to pick up the pace after the divisional series' end.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2019 21:25
|
|
|
I think everyone concluded it was horror enough. Its a huge rear end monster and a bunch of body horror.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2019 22:15
|
|
|
I think Scream 2 is a really good sequel with the original cast and ideas, and a really bad sequel with the new cast and elements. They had a decent sequel with no ending and a generic knockoff with no purpose and just mashed them together or something.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2019 20:25
|
|
|
Darthemed posted:#44) Hocus Pocus (1993), a.k.a., Abracadabra Disney did a big push last year for the 25th anniversary complete with like a takeover of Salem.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2019 05:10
|
|
|
FYI, anyone looking for some older films and who still has cable I discovered this channel that is airing a ton of old stuff. Tuesday they have a Vincent Price marathon, last week they did a William Castle marathon, there's lots of other stuff I've been seeing or recording. http://moviestvnetwork.com/
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2019 07:05
|
|
|
I’m super behind in my years so I skipped a game last night to try and get a jump on things. I had this one saved on my DVR since April just for this. 9. The Night of the Hunter (1955) Recorded off TMC, seems to be on Youtube. Robert Mitchum plays a charming traveling preacher who also happens to be a serial killer who believes he’s doing God’s will to punish promiscuous women. He takes up with a widow and her two children and menaces them as he looks for the small fortune their father left behind. Based on the true story of serial killer Harry Powell. This one definitely lived up to the hype. This is the only film directed by Academy Award winning actor Charles Loughton and that’s an absolute tragedy because this is an absolutely gorgeous film. Some of the shots like the river, the lake, and Mitchum standing over Shelley Winters are just awe inspiring and kind of hard to imagine how they were shot so well not only by an inexperienced director but in 1955. There’s films done today that don’t look this good. And the score of the film is really unique and excellent, relying almost exclusively on simple musical pieces and hymns sung by the cast to haunting effectiveness. Mitchum’s angel voiced preacher is chilling and in many ways the blueprint for so many characters like him on the 60+ years that followed. In fact I was shocked to finally learn the origin of that “LOVE/HATE” knuckle tattoo thing that has become such a cliche today. Talk about a film having a legacy. For some reason this recording from TMC was introduced by Rose McGowan who called him the “quintessential boogeyman” and I can’t put up much of a fight. I don’t know if I’ve ever seen Mitchum before, but if I have its never really made an impression on me. This did. I’ve now added at the very least the original Cape Fear to my list. I had a hard time thinking someone could play that role better than DeNiro but I know believe in Mitchum. Another interesting element of the film is how just as I felt like it was reaching its climax it shifted into a whole new story. From Powell preying on the family to him hunting them. And then the very effective foil to his evil character being introduced in an almost dueling “Christian” battle of guardian vs predator, false prophet vs servant of God, kind of thing. Really an unexpected turn for the story but one that really worked. All in all a really great film that has once again opened my eyes about threads of film history I’ve never gone down. Worth the wait.  10. The Thing from Another World (1951) aka The Thing Recorded off Cable but seems to be available on Internet Archive. Soldiers in Alaska are called to aid a research team who have discovered a ufo and an alien specimen. But the alien is still alive and becomes a danger to not just all those at the outpost but for the entire world if its allowed to escape in any form. I’ve seen Carpenter’s version many times but never the original. To be honest I’m not sure I knew there was an original. Going in with the familiarity to one version I knew it wouldn’t be able to do the kind of effects and body horror that Carpenter’s did, but I don’t think I expected a film that was part romantic comedy and featured a vampire carrot. I really enjoyed it though. It was a completely different take on Carpenter’s but one that absolutely worked for me. While Carpenter’s is nihilistic tale this one manages to keep a kind of fun and upbeat atmosphere in ways as the charming ensemble cast just keeps busting each other’s balls even as everything’s going to hell. While Carpenter’s is very big and loud and really showcases the absolute isolation of the arctic wasteland the original keeps it tight (almost certainly out of necessity) and has a somewhat claustrophobic feel with people constantly squeezing into rooms and spaces and rooms they can go seeming to be getting systematically cancelled out. Its a much lighter, B piece but it works with the same kind of constantly moving pace and sense that there’s nowhere to go and no time to waste. “An intellectual carrot. It boggles the mind.” Yet another horror film where the monster is a plant. Who knew they were so popular? That who angle was weird (mainly because of the carrot thing) but really worked for me and still gets across the same basic threat of a threat that could spread to the world through the smallest seed. It takes a bit of a quasi mad scientist to get there but it got there. And I like that they didn’t treat him badly. They were all nice enough to make excuses and give passes to the guy risking the end of civilization. It was really a nice group of folks. And I really loved Scott. Another really good watch that opened me up to some film history I didn’t know. Also “watch the skies.” Is that two films in a row where I discovered the origin of a trope I’m so familiar with now? That’s both the challenge and fun of doing this backwards trek through film history. On one hand sometimes something feels “derivative” that was really kind of there first. But I also sometimes get the thrill of seeing things that just completely shaped a century of film and culture and I never realized how or where it came from. History is cool.  I was I was further along than this, but early October is usually the slowest pace I have with this since there’s so much postseason baseball. The entire first round could end Monday, which means I probably won’t watch much that day but then things open up after. We shall see. But I’m gonna have to double up on the years a little and get ahead of pace, especially since there’s a bunch of other stuff I want to watch including the entire Halloween franchise. So I need to really get a good pace going, and get on those Halloweens so I don’t save them all to the end of the month. STAC Goat fucked around with this message at 12:18 on Oct 7, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2019 12:15
|
|
|
As much as I should be doing the years, watching the original The Thing just made me very curious how it compares directly with Carpenter’s classic. And since its been awhile since I’ve watched it I ended up being really motivated to go fire it up when I finished the original. - (11). The Thing (1982) Available on Starz streaming. The same basic tale of an Alaskan research center who stumble on an alien specimen only to discover its still alive and poses an eminent threat to them and the world as a whole. But instead of a vampire carrot this Thing is a parasitic shape shifter meaning it could be anyone and no one can be trusted. I’ve seen this film many times, but was there always a really goofy looking spaceship crash at the start of it? I’ve never noticed that before. Have I just never paid attention to the first few seconds of the film? My first big takeaway is I still love this for the nth time I watched it, but I’m not sure which I’d say is the better film. Both work in very different ways, but with the same basic cores of a good ensemble cast, strong lead, and fast pace. I think they might be very comparable quality films, although Carpenter’s feels like it has more watchability. I mean, I can see myself firing up the original with a lady or someone who might be curious to see how the two compare and enjoying the charm and fun of the film again. But I know I’ll watch Carpenter’s twisted, Lovecraftian, nihlistic horror show again. There’s just much to see. Its also interesting saying “Lovecraftian” now as I haven’t watched the film since I started this journey a few years ago. Now I can really see how much Carpenter was influence by Lovecraft with his “Apocalypse Trilogy” and how this film actually reminds me quite a bit of movies like From Beyond and the work of Stuart Gordon or Brian Yuzna. I wasn’t familiar with them all those years I was watching these Carpenter films but now i can see the common threads and inspirations. I did wonder how the effects and look of the Thing would hold up but they do so GREAT. I think the big key is just how utterly inhuman and freakish it is. Nothing you see really makes much sense, its just this horrific thing from another world that is hard to really comprehend. And that carries over and still works nearly 40 years later. Another fun takeaway that I’ve never noticed before is Carpenter paying homage to the original film and trying his best to fit that original film into the Norwegian base that first discovers the Thing in this version. I obviously never realized that having never seen the original before now, but its a fun little easter egg and a cool nod from Carpenter showing his respect for a classic. Reading up on these I was shocked to learn that the movie was kind of a bomb back in ’82 and everyone hated it. It even derailed Carpenter’s career and cost him the job directing Firestarter. How nuts is that? Like, the reviews for it are TERRIBLE. Just the most dismissive and insulting stuff. They really, really, REALLY hated this movie back in 1982. Something about ET being in the theaters and people not wanting such a dark and cynical contrast to the uplifting family alien film? I dunno. Its hard to be mad in hindsight considering Carpenter’s career. Even he seems to take that view and that he wouldn’t have made the films he made if people hadn’t ripped him apart as badly as they did. But its really a trip to find that out about a film you’ve thought as a classic your entire life. Ok, I’m a nerd and if I don’t close this circle its gonna bother me. Plus I’ve still got a bit of a crush on Mary Elizabeth Winstead from my BrainDead rewatch.  11 (12). The Thing (2011) Available on SyFy streaming. Following in the tradition of “not quite sequels” this one takes us back to the Norwegian research team who discovered the space ship and alien and shows us how everything went to hell and got us to where Carpenter’s film picks up. So I really wanted to like this but its just not very good. Its not the worst thing or anything, but its incredibly redundant and uncompelling. While Carpenter paid respect to the original and then did something completely different this version nods at Carpenter and then… just basically remakes his film. Just bigger, slower, and with inferior changes. I mean, checking for teeth fillings? That’s how you replace one of the most memorable and tense scenes in horror and sci-fi history? Seriously? It does that thing so many sequels and remakes do of just trying to make everything bigger. Carpenters has these gorgeous shots of the snow and wasteland, so this film does bigger shots. The others had a space ship in the snow, so this one has one the size of a football field. Carpenter’s has a grotesque monster the lurches and thrashes and horrifies everyone who sees it, so this one has one bigger that leaps through buildings and eats people whole. And as is often the case, the CGI just looks worse than the physical effects of 30 years earlier. There’s definitely some horrifying visuals of body horror but it just feels much more artificial and fake. And the little “bugs” just kind of felt silly to me. The pace also was so much slower than the other two versions. The original doesn’t have the wall to wall horror that Carpenter’s had, but it keeps the story moving and bridges the gap with charming characters and banter. This one felt like it was lurching along at times and waiting for something to happen (in a bad way). Winstead is totally capable of playing a lead in this kind of story, but she’s given nothing to work with or room to go with it. Its borderline insulting when she pieces together what’s happening and everyone dismisses her as hysterical. And what was the point of that when everyone just finds out its true like 2 scenes later? That being said, I watched this with commercials and the terrible SyFy/NBC app crashed the stream twice while I was watching it. So I don’t know how much of the pacing problems were there and how much were created by the circumstances of the viewing. I try to avoid commercial versions for this reason, but you work with what you have. I also don’t know what might have been cut from the film. The runtime is actually 4 minutes shorter than the Wikipedia listed runtime. There were some noticeable Norwegian curses censored. But I don’t know if anything more significant went. Maybe that would explain why I didn’t even notice characters disappearing or dying. Or maybe that’s because they were poorly defined and used as canon fodder in a sloppy story. I don’t know. I want to be nicer to this for some reason. I just can’t. Maybe if I hadn’t watched it right after Carpenter’s I’d feel different. Maybe if you’ve never seen Carpenter’s a lot of this would feel new and different and if you hadn’t seen it in awhile it would feel like a respectful homage or cover with some twists. I don’t know. The way I watched it it just felt like a competent copy that didn’t need to exist because it offered nothing better or truly different. Unless you wanted to see a spaceship, I guess. I still sort of want a 4th Thing movie with Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Kurt Russell, Keith Davids, and that guy who played Scott (he’s probably dead). I checked. He’s been dead a really, really long time. That’s sad. But he would have been 119 so he probably wouldn’t have fit my action cast anyway. September Pre-Game Tally - New (Total) 1. NOS4A2 (2019); - (2). Splice (2009); - (3). Drive Angry (2011); 2 (4). The Twilight Zone (2019); - (5). Event Horizon (1997); - (6). BrainDead (2016); 3 (7). The Dark Tower (2017); 4 (8). The Collector (2009); 5 (9). The Bad Batch (2016); - (10). Rose Red (2002); - (11). Salem’s Lot (1979) October Tally - New (Total) 1. The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1920); 2. Nightmare Cinema (2018); 3. Dead of Night (1945); The Queen of Spades (1949); 5. Tragedy Girls (2017); 6. House of Wax (1953); SUPER SAMHAIN CHALLENGE #1: 7. The Autopsy of Jane Doe (2016); 8. In the Tall Grass (2019); 9. The Night of the Hunter (1955); 10. The Thing (1951); - (11). The Thing (1982); 11 (12). The Thing (2011)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2019 21:09
|
|
|
Random Stranger posted:I consider Blair Witch 2 to be an interesting failure. They took a very smart approach to making a sequel to a film that really shouldn't have one and then screwed it up by piling bad late 90's horror conventions onto it. I'd kind of like to see the director's cut of it; I doubt it would fix all the problems but it likely would play up the interesting aspects.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2019 00:29
|
|
|
feedmyleg posted:
Critters 2 is the one you're looking for.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2019 00:41
|
|
|
feedmyleg posted:I was planning on doing a double-feature of Critters/Critters 2, but the first film turned me off immediately revisiting the franchise for the night. Maybe I'll give that a go tomorrow, but instead tonight I went with... But in this case everyone really agrees with you on Critters. Its a bad film that takes itself too seriously. But Critters 2 totally gets that, is written/directed by Mick Garris, and really is everything everyone expects and hopes Critters to be. The goofy, schlocky, Gremlins knockoff that puts those bounty hunters front and center. Its just everyone watches Critters expecting that and then gets demoralized because they really should have just watched Critters 2.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2019 02:22
|
|
|
Yeah. It makes sense that like anyone in this would would have "WHAT IS THEIR WEAKNESS?!" as a fundamental question that keeps them up at night. But it also doesn't actually have anything to do with the story except as a really lazy Chekov's Gun.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2019 02:37
|
|
|
BioTech posted:#12. Tragedy Girls
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2019 19:58
|
|
|
Jedit posted:8) Joker (2019)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2019 01:35
|
|
|
BioTech posted:#13. I Trapped the Devil
|
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2019 09:46
|
|
|
The problem with this whole years thing is when I’m not in the mood, I’m not in the mood. I’m way behind and getting farther behind but I keep going to turn on a silent film or b&w and I’m just not there. And I don’t want to force it because then I won’t receive it right. So I gotta watch what I want to watch. So I don’t burn myself out. - (13). Halloween (1978) Watched on DVD, available on Shudder. John Carpenter’s (and Debra Hill’s) seminal classic slasher about about 6-year-old Michael Myers who murders his sister and is sent to a mental asylum for 15 years until he escapes and returns to his hometown of Haddenfield to stalk and kill the friends of Laurie Strode and be hunted by Dr. Loomis. I started this month knowing I was gonna watch the 2018 Halloween on October 31st, and I planned to watch the original with it. Then of course I thought about it and decided it would be good to revisit Zombie’s since I had only really seen it in passing once. And then I should see the sequel because I never have. And then of course I decide I want to rewatch all the sequels. That’s 13 films. Plus some random Danielle Harris movies in there to tribute her. Well, I need to get started, don’t I? It goes without saying that Carpenter’s classic remains as effective as I’ve always found it. So much of it and Carpenter’s style is just what I grew up on and think of as the ideal horror. I can understand slasher fans who don’t love it. Its very muted compared to so many of the others. The body count is low and the first half of the film is spent slowly setting the mode with Michael lurking in the shadows, Loomis warning us of the monster waiting to be unleashed, and Laurie just living her life unaware of the horror that awaits her. For me that’s what I love. I don’t go for those Jason movies that stack the bodies. I’m all about that mood and setting. And I’ve made the case before but what sets Michael apart for me from Jason and others is Laurie and Loomis. Strong protagonists that make me care. And that final act where Michael, Laurie, and Loomis finally come together is what you’re building to and delivers from that amazing tombstone shot to the final tease. And what I like is that neither is a hero. Laurie is THE final girl but she doesn’t fight Michael or beat him. She’s not weak or stupid, but she's not some bad rear end either. She’s a girl thrown into this horror who has the strength and intelligence (and luck) to survive. And Loomis? There’s been popular theories that he’s a monster in his own right, a bad doctor who identifies mental illness as “evil”. And maybe he is. I don’t think Loomis is ever really intended here as someone we should like or root for. He’s just the guy cursed with the burden of Michael. Maybe he was a good doctor 15 years ago when he met Michael. Maybe as he says he tried for 7 years and Michael just wore him down. But whatever it is by the time we meet Loomis he’s a desperate man. The only time we ever see him get any joy is when he takes the time to just scare some kids. And ultimately he’s forced to do what is basically the antithesis of what he presumably once stood for as a doctor and swore to do, and kill Michael in a scene that has no big fanfare or celebratory mood. I don’t go for all the analysis’ of “sexual impropriety and innocence” or any of that (and neither does Carpenter as far as I know). The story is simple as far as I'm concerned. “It was the Boogeyman.” “Matter of fact, it was.” And man, Laurie’s friends were dicks. And gently caress that rear end in a top hat neighbor who didn’t open their door. Sometimes I kind of think Carpenter has a low opinion of humanity. Then again sometimes I do too. I had been saving this because I wanted to watch the previous Universal films before it, but I know they don’t really matter and I’ve been having a hard time getting up for silent films the last few days. So screw it, lets get the Universal Monsters underway finally. Its freaking October 8th. I had meant to watch this as my first movie of the month. This is worse than me not even having decorations up yet.  12 (14). Dracula (1931) Watched on DVD The Universal classic tale of Bram Stoker’s tale of the Transylvanian Count Dracula who comes to England and unleashes the horror of vampirism on Mina Seward and John Harker and combatted by Doctor Van Helsing. What I keep saying is that going back through time and watching these classics presents the challenge of not dismissing original ideas as tropes, but this is something completely different. This is like listening to a song for the first time that you’ve heard dozens of covers for your entire life and know 90% of the story, scenes, and lines already even though you’ve never heard it. Its bizarre but also kind of delightful to hear all those lines like “The children of the night, what sounds they make” or scenes like Renfield cutting himself and Dracula being drawn to it only to turn away from his crucifix. Knowing I know these because they were classics and were copied so many times and now I was seeing the inspiration for them. Its maybe not the ideal way to receive the film but its a very interesting and fun way. How do I judge Bela Lugosi’s performance. He IS Dracula. Every idea and cliche I know about Dracula is him and this performance. Is it good? Great? Bad? I have no idea. It’s Dracula. The two performances that DID stand out were Dwight Frye as Renfield and Edward Van Sloan as Van Helsing. Van Sloan was apparently very experienced in the role and it shows as he just embodied the grizzled old professor with the courage to fight evil I associate Van Hellsing with. I enjoyed Peter Cushing’s action hero version but I prefer the Van Helloing who doesn’t actually seem like he stands a chance in a fight with Dracula except that he’s mentally prepared. And Frye’s Renfield is just an absolute joy. Probably the fullest character in the movie and maybe one of the strongest driving forces. Lugosi isn’t kept away as much as Christopher Lee’s Dracula was but he’s still actually absent much of the film, and Mina’s kind of just a victim. But Renfeld and Van Helloing really carry much of the film to great joy from me. And its nice to know Harker’s always kind of a useless tool. The DVD has a bunch of bonuses including a half hour “Road to Dracula” vignette which you can find on Youtube. This seems like the same basic production as a similar feature on the Frankenstein DVD (including commentary from Clive Barker) and I really found it enjoyable and informative. It gave me a little interesting insight on the spanish version that I hope I remember when I watch (which I fully intend to do this month, just with a little distance). It also gave me a little insight into the director Tom Browning, who i thought showed a great deal more fluidity and technical skill than James Whale does the same year with Frankenstein (its good, but I find a bit clumsy). But I now know that’s because Browning was an accomplished silent film director while Whale was a stage director brought in for talkies. The feature also points out that Browning had his own adjustment issues and left long silences in the film where they’d normally be in silent films or waiting for dialogue cards. I found that very effective though as it really allowed us to take in Lugosi’s performance and some of the really amazing sets and shots. And really, I was blown away by the early stuff in Castle Dracula. It set a mood so early and the introduction of Dracula in his crypt with the brides, rats, bugs, etc was just so perfect. That right away was the moment I knew I was going to enjoy the film. And I really did. Although the ending was a little awkward. I get that the film avoided any of the violent “penetration” scenes but it was weird that Dracula just gets killed off camera and doesn’t even get a death scene or anything. And I actually had to check Wikipedia to be sure the ending wasn’t a vampiric Mina leading Harker to his death. I guess I just assumed that Harker was a tool again. That was odd but not enough to put a damper on the film. All that said, while this is certainly the Dracula I still believe I prefer Coppola’s version as the best one I’ve seen. Another movie I’m adding to my list this month. Watching this really made me want to revisit it because its interesting how I found myself keep filling in the elements of the story absent from this version that were in others and I kept going back to Coppola’s in my head. And I’d definitely check out that Youtube doc if you’re new to the film like I am. If you’re more informed its probably mostly old information to you. September Pre-Game Tally - New (Total) 1. NOS4A2 (2019); - (2). Splice (2009); - (3). Drive Angry (2011); 2 (4). The Twilight Zone (2019); - (5). Event Horizon (1997); - (6). BrainDead (2016); 3 (7). The Dark Tower (2017); 4 (8). The Collector (2009); 5 (9). The Bad Batch (2016); - (10). Rose Red (2002); - (11). Salem’s Lot (1979) October Tally - New (Total) 1. The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1920); 2. Nightmare Cinema (2018); 3. Dead of Night (1945); The Queen of Spades (1949); 5. Tragedy Girls (2017); 6. House of Wax (1953); SUPER SAMHAIN CHALLENGE #1: 7. The Autopsy of Jane Doe (2016); 8. In the Tall Grass (2019); 9. The Night of the Hunter (1955); 10. The Thing (1951); - (11). The Thing (1982); 11 (12). The Thing (2011); - (13). Halloween (1978); 12 (14). Dracula (1931)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2019 09:56
|
|
|
Bruteman posted:I think Carpenter has made technically better films (Halloween and The Thing to name two), but Prince of Darkness is easily my all-time favorite of his and one of my top-five horror films. It suffers because the characters aren't as strong as in his other films, it's a super slow burn, and the "bonkers concept" is a little too much for some (all the quantum science stuff is in there because Carpenter just thought it was cool), but as mentioned above, if you can get into it, the dread the film creates is second to none - it really nails the feeling of a "waking nightmare." I absolutely love it but yeah, its just a little weird and there's no stand out performance like there are in the rest of the Apocalypse Trilogy with Russell and Sam Neill. If you can get someone to sit down and watch it and really feel the mood I think its as good as either of them, but there's definitely a slightly harder hook there.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2019 03:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 16:39 |
|
|
duz posted:
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2019 04:43
|
|