|
Shrecknet posted:I found as many as I could using legal/available means, but I think we're gonna have to stream Lost Highway in the discord because it just does not exist online. If anyone is looking for a legal copy and has a Comcast subscription and X1 box, Lost Highway is available for free on Peacock.
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2020 19:05
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 20, 2024 01:36 |
|
|
Shrecknet posted:The Birds is absolutely nowhere for free. Sick Girl straight-up is not available to stream anywhere at all. So, uh, good luck? The Birds is available for free on Peacock, if you have access to it via your Comcast subscription. Sick Girl, and the other "Masters of Horror" episodes, are available on Tubi.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2020 16:03
|
|
|
Burkion posted:Until you watch Deadly Friend and acknowledge it as the greatest of Craven's works, you will forever be stuck atop the Pretension Towers Is it better to be labeled a Poser than be stuck atop Pretension Towers? Or worse? 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2020 22:30
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:I have no idea what happened between Arnold’s original which I love and thinks holds up entirely and this terrible, terrible, terrible sequel... It's two old saws in genre filmmaking being used at the same time - one being the common idea of transposing something crazy and fantastical (read: expensive) into our "normal, everyday reality" (read: cheap) and seeing what happens, and also trying to utilize a real-world location as both promotional material and free or cheap shooting environment. The first has been used in dozens of movies set around fantastic worlds or children's properties, with entries as varied as the Dolph Lundgren Masters of the Universe to this year's Sonic the Hedgehog, the last movie to ever play in a theater. The second isn't exactly underseen in horror movies, either; Revenge of the Creature is a much a precursor to Universal's own later Jaws 3 (also in 3D!) than it is anything else. So yeah, RotC is very much what it seems - a cheapy cash-grab sequel churned out as quickly as possible to cash-in on consumer interest, about a crazy fish-man monster in a real world location this time (Marineland in Florida, though I forgot they called it something else in the film until just now when I looked it up to confirm that was how you spelled "Marineland"). They tried a little bit more than most, by trying to hold onto a lot of the same creative talent behind the scenes, but you can tell that Arnold's interest wasn't really there for this one.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2020 00:18
|
|
|
Deep Red never connected with me the way Tenebre did, and I don't find that I "respect" it as opposed to really liking it, like I do with Suspiria. Of the Argento films that are generally regarded as the "top tier," that's always the one that left me coldest. (Personally I prefer The Bird with the Crystal Plumage and Opera to it.) I'll always have a soft spot for Dead Alive, since I first saw it at the local art house theater as a cult movie night showing on one of the worst work days of my life. Nothing worked, stayed way too late, drove a coworker home and ended up knocking my passenger side mirror off, it was mess. Then Dead Alive ended up being hilarious and fantastic and totally turned my mood around. I owe both a rewatch and I'll try to be impartial, but I don't know that I see myself voting against Jackson here.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2020 18:35
|
|
|
TrixRabbi posted:Has anyone recapped Burton vs. Del Toro yet? I have a feeling Del Toro's got the edge here, but Best Picture fatigue could hurt Shape of Water and I know there's people who really liked Frankenweenie (which is the one film this round I have left to see). I think Frankenweenie 2K12 is only okay. It's not badly made, but there isn't a lot of meat to it, or heart in it. I never got a sense of a pressing need by Victor to bring Sparky back to life, nor a great sense of relief when he succeeded. I mean, he ends up hiding poor Sparky in the attic for almost the majority of the second act, so there was never any great development to "a boy and his zombie dog" that would make it feel like the story had any momentum. Instead, we end up spinning a lot of wheels lining up for the big finale featuring Not Gamera for some reason. Between that, the decision to go black-and-white, and all of the nods to 1930s to 1950s horror movies in a Disney movie made for children in the early 2010s, and I just have to wonder who this movie was made for, and why. On the other hand, Shape of Water is much better put together, but ironically has a similar heart-shaped hole in the middle of the movie. I get that Sally Hawkins is drawn to the Gill Man because he's the one character that doesn't treat her with some mix of condescension or self-interest or both, or worse. That said, a lot of their relationship is built on what things she can provide to the Gill Man - willingly, mind you, but that's still not a great look - but not a lot about what he provides for her in return. I mean, communication between these two beings is limited to a handful of signed words he picks up, again on the things that she is providing him, so it seems more like he is constantly seeking something from her. Everything else he does seems to be staring wistfully out at things she is not properly providing within her limited means (ie., rain or the ocean), or staring in amazement at things that he cannot comprehend (like movies in a theater). Oh, and they gently caress a couple of times, but it's all so very tasteful. Oh, and also, he totally eats a cat at one point - an actual cat, get your mind out of the gutter! - and I don't know where the filmmakers land on this. Is he an animal that can't be trusted? Should we be treating him with a lot more ambivalence than we have been to this point? Are we supposed to shrug and say "oh, that Gill Man! What a scamp!" when he went and pulled an ALF on this poor animal? I can't tell if this is supposed to be the key to how del Toro wants us to approach this relationship or a dumb goof that landed badly, and that makes me step back and start reappraising the whole relationship, and even the film itself, to that point. Going down that thought line, I don't know if you get anywhere good or not. I dunno, I expect del Toro will skate here because Burton got a bad draw, but I could totally see this having been reversed if Burton had pulled Beetlejuice or something.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2020 20:48
|
|
|
Shrecknet posted:Burtons Dark Shadows is essentially like watching someone with no talent be given $160m and told "go make a Tim Burton movie" and yet it's actually shot by Burton. I mean, that's an evergreen statement that can be applied to a lot of Burton's latter-day work. The real debate is when you can begin making that statement against every film Burton makes from that point forward and have it stick. For my money, it's everything post Sweeney Todd, but I can understand an argument that it's pretty much everything post Sleepy Hollow.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2020 21:45
|
|
|
Shrecknet posted:Universal is the dumbest loving company on the planet and Frankenstein isn't streaming anywhere. Frankenstein is up on Peacock; I don't remember if it was a free option or not, though. Shrecknet posted:...Body Double is on Crackle (which I think is an anime service so it might be an Anime of the same name. If it is, you are free to vote for the anime if it's better than Dawn of the Dead.) Crackle is Sony's free streaming service, a dumping ground for Sony + Columbia TriStar movies and Sony Pictures television shows (which they're still weird about... like they had a rotating selection of "Seinfeld" for a long time instead of trying to use that whole catalogue to make their service seem more attractive on the whole). Is that the raggedy-rear end Toho King Kong costume getting trotted out again? Sort of a "we invested in it, we're gonna use it" kind of thing, even if it looks like a carpet sample book that came to life and became aware of its horrible, horrible existence?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2020 15:50
|
|
|
TrixRabbi posted:Christine is a really good film. I'm kind of bummed though that if Scott drew Alien that Carpenter didn't get the chance to compete on Halloween or The Thing. It would have been a true clash of the titans. To be honest, I think The Thing was Carpenter's only chance to surpass Alien. I'd even vote against Halloween, but the others are like numbers 2 and 3 on my personal favorite horror movies list. Jaws is my personal number 1 spot, FWIW. It would have been a real interesting internal debate, in a way nothing else would have been - and I'm one of the ones who pegged Carpenter as taking this whole thing in a cake walk. What does Scott have to pull from after this, though? Is he going to just go back and start repeats, or does he have anything else new to pull from? Because I can't imagine Prometheus or Alien: Covenant getting him to advance much further, unless the next round is really weird.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2020 16:14
|
|
|
Debbie Does Dagon posted:And then you have Harry Dean Stanton... To be fair, so does Christine, and in probably a slightly meatier role than he has in Alien, to boot. I'm actually a touch surprised he only worked with Carpenter twice - on Escape from New York and a couple years later on Christine - since he seems like the kind of journeyman actor who would end up in Carpenter's stable of talent and then not be let go. That's not an indictment, either; Carpenter knew talent when he saw it, even if it can be sometimes debatable if he was using it to the fullest.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2020 05:01
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:The thing with Craven that you can never take away from him is that he captured lighting in a bottle twice. Carpenter was able to maintain and amazingly consistent high level of quality but after Halloween he never really had that huge pop-culture dominating phenomenon again. Craven did it once in 1984 and came back and did it again over a decade later, which is very impressive. I mean, Spielberg did start with Jaws and you could argue that parts of Jurassic Park would fit horror criteria. And that's to say nothing of everything else he's done over time. As for Carpenter, it's funny that time is catching up to The Thing, since that has definitely become more of a pop cultural touchpoint in the past few years - board game adaptations, art shows, not one but two video games this year that essentially have you play as the Thing itself, stuff like that. Some popular horror stuff is tied to its moment, some of it remains a waxing and waning relevance throughout the years... I think that Carpenter is the only one here managing to be "rediscovered" and, essentially, impact the pop-culture landscape decades after his movie gets released.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2020 20:57
|
|
|
Irony.or.Death posted:A third of this is easy at least - The Babadook is the most actively unpleasant viewing experience I've had in ages, and not in the good way. There's a little bit of good in it, but not nearly enough good to make me put up with this many non-eaten children on screen for this much time. Then it has the gall to go for a completely saccharine ending. This must be how Kvlt! feels when people start talking about Flanagan. I don't read the ending of The Babadook as saccharine, but as more pure metaphor for an attitude shift - hopefulness in the face of chronic depression, if you will. The problem is that the movie didn't really want to be seen as purely metaphorical for long stretches, so the ending feels unearned and, in the moment when I saw it, not worthy of the hype for "the scariest film ever made" (that month). But yeah, that kid character is at least a step or so beyond the pale. Dialing him down a bit may have weakened the message but made for a more tolerable, less distracting viewing experience.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2020 23:34
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:It will be nice to watch a Cronenberg film that doesn't have someone being raped and liking it. I think this will end the 4 movie streak. I don't believe that there is any rape in The Fly, but there is some weird boundary pushing with the Stathis character, who is both Geena Davis' editor/boss and also her ex. And he does some creepy poo poo like letting himself into her apartment when she's away to take a shower, and just acting like a possessive rear end in a top hat, even though she has moved on. And then the film treats him like a hero by the end! It's definitely the bum note from the whole rest of the film.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 3, 2020 20:36
|
|
|
Franchescanado posted:Eh, I don't think the film treats him as a hero. I think he attempts to thwart the film's villain, but he's shown to be pretty much a slime and a loser throughout. It's a hero-less film. In fact, his fate is one of the most satisfying moments. I felt that the film's approach to Stathis does a bit of a 180 around the time that Davis comes back in and announces that she's pregnant. At that point, Stathis becomes the sympathetic character, at least towards Veronica, in a way that Seth does not. Heck, the baby plays into the ending heavily, since Seth reveals that he wants to genetically merge himself, Veronica and their unborn child together as a way to purge himself of the fly genes - that being the moment that he becomes the most monstrous and finally completes his full-on fly metamorphosis. It is interesting the timing of it though, since that first scene I mentioned follows on from Stathis watching the "how does Brundlefly eat?" video taping, which is itself following closely on from when Seth basically publicly announces that he is sick and wasting away. Since most people tend to view The Fly as an AIDS panic parable, it's funny that shortly after the main character announces that he is ill that the film starts to re-center the hero lens away from him, essentially saying that the disease itself corrupts Seth morally as well as physically. I don't know if Cronenberg intended this, but I think it does end up meaning the film is a bit less sympathetic towards him than most people realize, so I wonder how that morality shift ends up playing to audiences now 30+ years later.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 3, 2020 22:32
|
|
|
The Berzerker posted:Similarly while I think Drag Me to Hell is a ton of fun, FWWM scares me every time I watch it and has some truly incredible performances, it's hard to even consider voting against FWWM. I'm interested to see what others have to say especially STAC since they pushed through Twin Peaks and didn't like it and now is at least rewarded by having the movie come up in the draw So, I watched FWwM last night for the first time, and I want to note that I'm not exactly a "Twin Peaks" fan here. I have tried several times over the past... Jesus, 12 years?... to get into the show and I don't think I've ever made it past the halfway mark of the first season. Not for a lack of interest, either; I just always managed to get pulled away from the show by something else, and then the next thing you know it's three years down the line and I go, "oh yeah. 'Twin Peaks.' That was a show I should finish, but I don't remember all that much about it. Guess I have to start over at this point." I know exactly enough to get me in trouble here, is what I'm alluding to. But watching the movie, I don't get what you all are seeing in it. Outside of two very good performances from Sheryl Lee and Ray Wise, I don't think there's much there, and the movie's rudderless beginning doesn't add anything to the overall story that isn't re-established once Laura Palmer enters the picture properly at the drat 25% mark. I think that the quirkiness factor of the show is totally front loaded and misspent in the movie, and that missing a lot of the secondary and tertiary characters from the show ends up losing a lot of the heart from the setup. I also think that the movie doesn't explain or justify itself well at all, and I'm wondering if that's something that I'm over expecting (Lynch will rarely explain himself, after all), or if that's something that only gains appreciable meaning if I had gotten further in the show than I did. I was hoping for some thing to be established in this movie, some lore or imagery or thematic relevance that would make me interested to go back in and revisit the show properly or with a new lens, but that's not what's on the movie's mind. As it is, that element just boils down to a bunch of stuff about a ring that's flitting about town and that it's bad to put it on but not why it's bad to put it on, and it almost feels like it's from a different movie entirely when the back half is largely just about watching a teenage girl self destruct. I dunno, I'm definitely not the biggest Lynch fan here, and on the whole I'd still probably rate this second highest of all of the Lynch movies that I've seen. But I still didn't care much for it, and I wasn't scared by it - I landed somewhere between confused and bored for a good chunk of it, honestly. I owe Drag Me to Hell a rewatch, but I can't at this point imagine giving my vote to FWwM. Can someone help me understand what exactly I'm missing here?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2020 16:08
|
|
|
Fran, thank you for your response. I may return to Twin Peaks someday, and I will try to keep this all in mind. That said, that is far too much homework to make sense of this movie, and I don't feel, at least right now, that it's worth my time to do so. So I can't give my vote to this movie.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2020 19:10
|
|
|
One of the Red Letter Media guys has an interpretation that I think makes sense - that the town in the opening 30 minutes is what Twin Peaks is doomed to become IF Bob was successful in possessing Laura Palmer. Thus, going off of Fran's interpretation that Laura is doomed from the outset by inevitability, then that makes her last act more of a sacrifice to protect everyone else in town. I don't know that I agree, or that it changes my feelings towards the film as a whole, OR that it justifies the intro being that long and awkward, but I think that makes it a more appropriate inclusion if that was the intention than just a straight "real world" counterpart.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2020 01:32
|
|
|
I fully expect that Lynch is going to take this round, but rewatching Drag Me to Hell again, I was struck by a couple of things: I think people expected this to be tonally similar to Evil Dead or Evil Dead 2 or something, but it's not. It's more akin to an extra-long episode of "Tales from the Crypt," which could also do tonally goofy bits or go for the grotesque without being reliant on an actor being rubber faced (a la Bruce Campbell) or constant camera tricks and snap pans and the like. I'd say it's the best "Tales from the Crypt" movie ever produced, but we all know that's not possible in a world where Demon Knight exists, so DMtH will have to settle for second best. I kind of forgot that they kept that unnecessary shot of the outside of the house with a cat howl when Christine kills her pet kitten[/b]. For some reason, I remembered it jumping straight from [spoiler]her shadow falling over the cat straight to her burying something in the back yard, which would have been way more darkly funny and less direct[/b]. I was ready to give it the silver medal for "Best Match Cut in a Horror Film" (gold medal goes to Final Destination 3 and you know why), but that 3 second insert ruins it for me. (Note: The theatrical cut is way less direct and funnier as a result; the director's cut [spoiler]basically goes for a shot of her stabbing something repeatedly offscreen while someone sprays ketchup or something up at her face. It feels like they were trying to get a laugh out of the absurd overabundance of gore, a la Dead Alive or something, but the moment doesn't land right. It was funnier with a lighter touch here, and I'm glad they reworked it for the theatrical release. I still think this has one of the best "follow the character's thought process in real time" sequences put to film, and what it leads to: Eyes dart over. "Rope." Eyes dart up. "Pulley. Anvil? Head!" Arm comes up. "ICE SKATE!" You can see exactly where this is gonna go just seconds before it happens, and knowing how much of a fan of "Looney Tunes" Sam Raimi obviously is, you get that moment of sick, giddy anticipation that they're gonna actually do it, before of course they do it. You can criticize the payoff all you want, but they put in a hell of a lot of work for the setup. You can watch it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fxllegd9Vyo&t=17s
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2020 05:07
|
|
|
Irony.or.Death posted:Subgenres sounds like the best idea so far in terms of being both tractable and engaging, plus we'd get to have some knife fights about which subgenre gets to claim the edge cases. I like it. Would the idea be that any film could only be in one category, and then leave it open for what might be, on the face of it, weird groupings? Like, if the Sci-Fi category gets all filled up it can't claim Alien, but then the Haunted House one totally could snap it up, but you'd have to make your case for Alien as a Haunted House movie (and through no other lens)?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2020 22:21
|
|
|
The Berzerker posted:Well maybe Special Effects should have had more horny snakes in it then. I mean you could say that about pretty much ANY movie, though, and still be correct.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2020 04:45
|
|
|
Shrecknet posted:
Jeez, man. Jeez. At first glance, I'd drop The Host from contention, but a toss up between Day of the Dead and Godzilla 1954 is killing me prior to rewatch. Of course, this may be how Bong squeaks through; everyone's too busy fighting for zombies or Godzilla to notice his smaller fish monster movie getting a stable voting base.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2020 16:44
|
|
|
Debbie Does Dagon posted:LOL you all know Romero is the real kaiju in this matchup. Don't play yourselves. I mean, Day of the Dead is my personal favorite of Romero's films and a super strong contender, but the original Godzilla isn't exactly gonna be a pushover here either. I could see this going either way between those two and be fine with it. I would be annoyed if The Host squeaks by due to split voting between the other two, just because it's not in the league of either of the other two movies in this match up.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2020 18:02
|
|
|
Burkion posted:Ya'll best not blink when it comes to my boy Miike. I haven't seen much Miike, if anything at all (to my knowledge), prior to this tourney, but Ichi the Killer is his most (in)famous movie, yes? If so, is it a good jumping on point for his stuff, or is there something else people should be seeking out instead? Basically, if I do watch Ichi but don't have a good time, is it worth seeking out his other stuff, or should I be prepared to write him off as a "not for me" kind of director?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2020 19:13
|
|
|
So I watched Dolls last night and it was... fine? Like there was nothing wrong with it, but there was nothing terribly good about it either. It just felt cheap and a bit hollow, like this was more about Stuart Gordon cashing in a paycheck to put Charles Band's weird obsession with "small things moving around and sometimes killing things" on screen, instead of a film that Gordon himself was terribly interested in making. If you want a good version of "Stuart Gordon takes the Full Moon resources and churns out gold with it," Castle Freak is where it's at. I think this is going to be as far as Gordon goes in this tournament, and I think that's okay. I am mildly surprised at the idea that Brian Yuzna will end up going further than Gordon could, though. Even if that seems to be one of the most likely outcomes here.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2020 15:42
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:"And no Steve in sight." See, I rewatched the Japanese cut of Gojira again for the first time in, like, a decade this week, and having grown up with the Godzilla: King of the Monsters! cut for American audiences, I wonder if there isn't at least some merit to the American cut over the Japanese one. Like, the pacing is good in the Japanese one, but it all starts with the one boat crew being destroyed and follows a linear point-A to point-B story of Godzilla eventually showing up and making his way to Tokyo. (Now, I know that this is a play on the "Lucky Dragon 5" incident, but that is also something that hits my American sensibilities differently in 2020 than it would a Japanese audience in the same year that this film was released. It's also not something that the film really follows up on, besides establishing that Godzilla is radioactive and planting the seeds of that fear in for the audience; a fact which is re-established by that scene where the professor examines Godzilla's footprints on the beach, so at least one of these scenes ends up feeling a bit superfluous.) The American cut, however, starts off with the aftermath of Godzilla's rampage, essentially bumping up the hospital sequence to the front of the film. It ends up casting a different pall over the film - more somber, a bit more reflective; the end is already known, and it doesn't end well. It would have been a slap to the face of an American audience in the 1950s, so self assured of their technological and moral superiority in deploying the A-bombs against the Japanese to win the war a mere decade before hand. Look at what that vaunted moral superiority produced: ruined cities, irradiated citizens, crying children. Don't you feel mighty now? The side effect of having Steve Martin around as a character, I noticed in his absence, is that it does kind of give the story a little bit more focus. In the original Japanese version, characters sort of flit in and around the film; all of the human characters exist in orbit around Godzilla, who doesn't appear for the first 30 minutes and in full for almost a full hour. It makes the Japanese cut feel a bit more scattershot and full of superfluous side stories that never really go anywhere (why does that reporter go to visit Serizawa with Emiko in tow, when Serizawa and Emiko are engaged already? If you need them to get together to plant the seeds of the Oxygen Destroyer be a thing, just have Emiko go visit him, especially when she already has a character-based reason to do so.). I dunno. Gojira is a good film, bordering on greatness, but rewatching it again in the version that Honda intended, it feels a little bit more muddled and back-loaded than I remember it being. Maybe that's a function of any Godzilla movie; you are always just marking time until the big guy shows up, after all. But it also makes the stuff everyone remembers this version for - the melancholy, the devastation, the outright horror of it all - seem a little bit out of place, too. More clarity on the characters might have made that more impactful; if a character disappears from the story, I guess I should assume they were killed in a Godzilla attack, but it feels more like the film discarding unnecessary plot mechanisms than anything.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 15, 2020 16:07
|
|
|
Shrecknet posted:
I have to wonder what the results would be if it was a straight head-to-head between Romero and Honda. I imagine it would still be close, but I'm curious if The Host was pulling votes more from Gojira, as another giant monster movie, than it would be from Day of the Dead.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2020 18:02
|
|
|
Shrecknet posted:Honda won a majority, not a plurality, so it changes nothing. I'm just curious what the numbers end up shaking out to being - does Gojira stay at 52% or would it actually go up? Also, lol at the asset availability this round. I think that this is the round with the fewest number of titles available on the standard streaming options (Netflix, Hulu, Prime, etc.), and the highest number of titles not available to stream at all. According to Justwatch this is also available on something called Flixfling. Does anyone have any info or knowledge about this service?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2020 18:15
|
|
|
Burkion posted:FAUST I don't particularly care for NoES 3 all that much, in general; I think it's weak, meandering and it straddles a weird line between where the series had started and where it ended up going. It's got a couple of cool dream scenes that show a lot of creativity (the puppeting scene, the hallway of mirrors scene), which makes the less interesting bits stand out as even more awkward and poorly put together (the flaming wheelchair down a backlit hallway looks so out of place compared to anything else). I know my opinion stands way the ways apart from the rest of the NoES fandom, and this forum in particular, but I consider The Dream Master to be the series' platonic ideal way, way more than The Dream Warriors would be. That said, I don't agree with this take at all. Faust is just cheap looking, badly acted (Divoff and Combs aside, obviously, even if Divoff is just doing a cheap knockoff of the "Wishmaster out of the costume" persona), nonsensical and kind of boring. I've been continuously surprised by how good Brian Yuzna's films have been doing in this tourney, but I think we finally hit a wall here, in terms of how his imagination can't overcome the budget limitations, or where the cast can't elevate the material. I know it's become thread consensus to pull for Yuzna to get into the Final Four; this was not the film to do so.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2020 16:44
|
|
|
Origami Dali posted:Wheelchair ain't even on fire tho It is when the Wizard Master blows it up with green magic. 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2020 18:02
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:I was thinking that too. Videodrome is a really interesting film because Cronenberg was clearly ahead of his time in a bunch of ways with it. I'm not sure any of those ideas were fully formed or the film feels completed, but there's a lot of interesting ideas in there. I feel like Videodrome could be a really interesting choice for a remake these days - keep the themes about human/technological synthesis, but shift the perspective from televisions and VHS/Beta tapes to portable screens and ever-present connectivity. Not a pirate signal but a dark web site; not a dead guy on a tape library but a dead guy on a mass of short snippets in the cloud, Max Headroom style. Oh and you have to keep the fleshy mutations and chest vaginas, obviously.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2020 05:08
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 20, 2024 01:36 |
|
|
Franchescanado posted:How would this work, since half of the contenders would be stealing votes from the other half? I think the idea would have to be the losers of the Final Four square off against each other, at the same time as the finals, with the winner of that match-up being declared the bronze medal winner. I personally think that might be a bit much, since we're already committing to a 6-movie final event, but others could have a different viewpoint.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2020 16:42
|
|