|
Listen to them! The children of the night! What music they make! Summon the spook-a-doodles.  The Three Mandatory Rules  Watch a movie appropriate to the challenge* Write a review Don't be a dick. THE CHALLENGE BEGINS ON SEPTEMBER 27TH, @ 3AM EST in honor of the Witching Hour. THE CHALLENGE ENDS ON THE 1ST OF NOVEMBER, @ 1PM EST You will have to have logged your final movie at this point. Final remarks and totals can be posted after 1PM, but new movies to add to your total will not be counted.  Personal Goals & ChallengesThe most common goal among participants is 31 movies, but there is no mandatory amount of films. You can participate with as much or as little enthusiasm as you want. You can watch as many movies as possible (We've had people literally watch hundreds! It was nuts.) However, people that meet the 31 film goal are eligible for rewards. You can create any personal goals for yourself. Many use the challenge to catch up on movies that have been released through-out the year, some use it to finally watch that classic horror movie. You can use the challenge to watch all the films of a horror director, or an entire horror series you've been interested. You can concentrate on specific sub-genres like Creature Features or Giallos or Hammer produced films. You can watch films that are only new to you, or only rewatches. The possibilities are endless. The only requirement is to watch a horror movie and then write about it. You can write a review, a list of thoughts you had while watching it, an analysis, essay or interpretation. You can post GIFs and screen grabs. The whole intention of this thread is to share what we're watching and our thoughts about it. Honestly? Watching the movies is the easy part. It's finding something to say about them that gets difficult. But that's why it's a challenge! You can always ask for a wildcard or recommendation. What Movies Can I Watch? movies, for the sake of this challenge, are considered anything longer than 60 minutes Horror Movies Thrillers Horror Comedies (Tucker & Dale vs. Evil) Horror Musicals (Rocky Horror, Phantom of the Paradise) Movies Set During or Around Halloween (Hocus Pocus, The Guest) Documentaries- about Halloween (The American Scream) - about the supernatural - about the horror genre (Horror Noire) - about horror movies (Never Sleep Again) -about a subject that is justifiably horror-related (The Act of Seeing with One’s Own Eyes, Cropsey) Family Friendly movies that meet the above requirements (Alvin & The Chipmunks Meet Frankenstein)(If you have questions about whether or not a movie counts, feel free to ask me.) What DOESN'T Count TV Shows (This is CineD, not TVIV) mini-series Masters of Horror episodesThese are always a big grey area that create a lot of headaches of what's considered "fair", and it gets exhausting trying to pick and choose what is justifiable. I love Stephen King's The Storm of the Century, and Twin Peaks The Return, but the format is wildly inconsistent in length. It's a little unfair for someone to watch a 45 minute episode of Masters of Horror and it counts the same as Never Sleep Again, which is a four hour investment. It also creates the grey area of "Is ____ show a mini-series? Technically season 1 is self-contained." Let's just avoid it altogether. Please just watch something else. This is a FILM forum, so just stick with movies for the challenge. There will be the inevitable naysayer who posts "I don't care what the rules say, I'm going to count Netflix's Bly Manor." Just play nice and watch a movie instead. I probably won't call you out, but it will be ignored when it comes to tallying results for surprises, and it may just open you up to punishments. Consider this your warning.  There will be secret challenges announced through-out the month for those that want to be pushed outside of their comfort zones. If you are working from a Letterboxd list, feel free to share it. CineD has a Discord, and there is a horror-specific thread. Right now it is currently called "The Horror Director Tournament" based off Horror Director Tournament Thread (which I highly recommend reading). It will get a name change when the tournament is over to "October Challenge". Feel free to talk about this challenge thread in that channel before the name change. The Horror Thread has its own Discord where group watches of horror movies are regularly scheduled
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2020 19:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 21:01 |
|
|
Fran Challenges #1 Horror Noire #2 Short Cuts #3 Feardotcom #4 Scream, Queen! #5 Silent Scream #6 Tomb of the Blind Spots #7 Dearly Departed #8 When Animals Attack! #9 TerrorVision #10 Run This poo poo Into The Ground #11: Öskur heyrðust um allan heim #12: Ouroboros #13: It's the Time of the Season for Spook-a-Doodles  SPOOKY RESOURCES FOR CONVENIENT STREAMINGWould you rather have your movie picked randomly? Create a spinning wheel on WheelDecide and have it pick a movie for you. Criterion Channel October line-up effortpost Benito Cereno posted:Every October I make a list of horror movies on Netflix worth watching in an attempt to keep people from watching The Forest or whatever out of desperation. I used to do it on Tumblr, but now I do it as a Letterboxd list Franchescanado fucked around with this message at 22:52 on Oct 20, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2020 19:31
|
|
|
Salem’s Lot counts as one movie. IT 1990 counts as one movie. The Stand does not count. CATS does not count.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2020 01:32
|
|
|
I love Tenebre. Argento scholars, which are a real thing, consider it his cinematic reaction to his critics, and directly addressing and genuinely considering allegations that his films, and the horror genre, misogynistic.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2020 15:10
|
|
|
NUMBER 1 FULCI FAN posted:1) Don't Look Under the Bed (1999) I watched this movie when it came out. I thought it was pretty creepy at points, with the Boogeyman being a Freddy Kruger-type character. It's only when they get into the 3rd act and Larry starts turning into a Boogeyman (which starts off creepy and then becomes lame) and they show The Boogeyman's real face and stuff that it falls apart. Some of the set design from the Boogeyman world is cool. Franny is a competent character. And the whole themes about growing up, while trite, aren't the worst. Like you said, it's like a 90 minute Are You Afraid of the Dark?. Funny thing, it's basically just Insidious before Insidious. I always thought Ty Hodges (Larry) would have a bigger acting career than he did. He never really shook the Disney Channel actor thing, even though he was always prominent in the projects.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2020 18:50
|
|
|
Scream Stream Thread Is Live
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2020 18:55
|
|
|
Debbie Does Dagon posted:Oh nice, thank you! On the list it goes I love The Eyes of My Mother, and I also love Spider Baby. I see the similarities, I'll add a recommendation to the film, but Spider Baby is much more light and playful.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2020 12:48
|
|
|
1. Halloween John Carpenter | 1978 | 4k UHD rewatch After months of putting the new 4k UHD disc in my blu ray player and then taking it out, it is finally seasonally relevant to watch the 4k restoration of one of my favorites.  I've written on Halloween for every single challenge; sometimes long tangents, sometimes short blurbs. (I'll probably watch it again before Halloween, even, and write about it again.) On this viewing, the classroom dialogue about Fate stood out. Laurie's in class. The teacher is reading from her lesson. Laurie looks outside to daydream and sees Michael Myers (with his mask already) standing by the stolen station wagon. He is staring at her. quote:Teacher: … and the book ends, but what Samuels is really talking about here is fate. You see, fate caught up with several lives here. No matter what course of action Collins took, he was destined to his own fate, his own day of reckoning with himself. The idea is that destiny is a very real, concrete thing that every person has to deal with. How does Samuels' view of fate differ from that of Costaine's? Laurie? Keep in mind that these quotes were invented for the film. There are no specific authors Costaine or Samuels being referenced. The two ideas we are posited with is determinism or a faith-based fate. Samuels represents determinism, that everything is inevitable; Costain, weirdly enough, is based on religion. Determinism is a cruel philosophy for a slasher film. Annie grew up in Haddonfield, hearing the legends of the Myers house, to inevitably be chocked and stabbed by him in a car? Lynda, when she first signed up for cheerleader practice, was already marked by Fate to be strangled by a telephone line? Dating Bob was an inevitable truth? Michael was always going to escape? Does Laurie have free will? Is her surviving her encounter with The Shape an act of writing her own future? Or is it also part of Samuels idea of fate? That Laurie would inevitably survive against The Shape, that The Shape would escape, would remain a possibility, possibly hiding in any shadow? If we take Samuels idea of fate as fact for the film, then The Shape is solidified as a personification of Death. The inclusion of Costaine in the lesson intrigues me, because I don't see Halloween as a religious tale. I don't see any relation of specific religion in Laurie, Annie, Lynda, Dr. Loomis, Bob, Tommy, etc. Why use a religious-based definition of faith as a counter-point to the Samuels definition of Fate? I find determinism a really upsetting concept, and it's especially cruel (in a chaotic universe sorta way) for the slasher genre. It's one of the weird wrinkles that Halloween offers that keeps me coming back to it. The UHD is gorgeous, by the way. Highly recommended, even if it makes apparent how Haddonfield's Autumn is a little too green. x52. Deadly Blessing Wes Craven | 1981 | rental There are quite a few Wes Craven movies I haven't seen, and I hope to fill in those gaps this season.  This is mostly a Southern Gothic film (filmed in Texas), like a Carson McCullers story made pulpier with explicit paranormal events and stabbings. When the film loses confidence in its drama, it throws in some Friday the 13th/giallo-derivative POV slasher moments. At a 100 minute running time, it doesn't work as a Slasher film, it doesn't work as a Witch movie, and it doesn't work as a Southern Gothic drama. It's not that it's a bad movie, it's just boring, the cinematography is flat ("perfunctory" comes to mind), and it's weird nightmarish moments are spread out, and not very effective. Religious persecution is the main theme of the Southern Gothic drama of the film, with a Hittite family (fringe religious fanatics; Amish-adjacent, but with more whips and guilt) called the Schmidts accusing their neighbor and daughter-in-law of being an Incubus. You read that correctly. This film throws around the term "Incubus" around towards most of the women, which is very confusing, as Incubi are male and Succubi are the female-equivalent. By the end of the film, this is mostly clarified in unsatisfying ways. One of the justifying reasons is little weird , in that a character is revealed to be secretly gender-fluid, and I honestly couldn't come up with a conclusion on how that representation works in a context of 2020. It's worth noting that this film predates Sleepaway Camp by two years, so Deadly Blessing technically did it first. It's interesting seeing Wes Craven shoot for the moon and fail. He's learning his voice as a filmmaker, and I won't hold mistakes against him. There are certainly great moments. There is a scene where a (real????) water moccasin is put in a bathtub with the main character, and it was stressful as gently caress. This scene, including the same camera shots, would be revisited in a more inventive way in A Nightmare on Elm Street. The cover art is from the scene in which a young Sharon Stone has a (real!!!!) spider dropped into her mouth. There's also a great scene where a character goes to pour a glass of milk, and thick, chunky blood pours out instead. These moments, with its striking imagery, are pretty good. Most of the cast are nice. It just ultimately lacks an extra layer to make it all cohesive, and I have no idea what that missing element actually is. x2.5Total 2 New: 1 Re-Watches: 1 Halloween | Deadly Blessing
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2020 14:44
|
|
|
I like Leprechaun 3 the most. It's the most cohesive film of the series.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2020 18:13
|
|
|
I forget who asked, but The Adventures of Ichabod Crane and Mr. Toad counts as an entry. It's basically edited to be a 2 piece anthology, it's 68 minutes, and the Sleepy Hollow segment is important enough to Halloween aesthetics to qualify.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2020 15:30
|
|
|
So CriterionChannel is getting a stacked line-up for October. Of the streaming services, it is the one I'm most impressed by. Here's what will be available and when: If you'd like to read the full line-up, including non-horror, yourself, it's here: Criterion Channel October Available Oct. 2nd Peeping Tom (part of "Prying Eyes" Double Feature, with Odd Obsession (1959), which doesn't count for the challenge) Available October 4th: 70's Horror Showcase quote:In the 1970s, everything was wilder, weirder, and more far-out—and horror movies were no exception. In North America, a new generation of maverick directors like Tobe Hooper, George A. Romero, Wes Craven, Brian De Palma, and David Cronenberg responded to the decade’s heightened political anxieties and Vietnam War–era sense of disillusionment by pushing the genre’s psychological intensity and visceral violence to shocking new heights. Across the Atlantic, Britain’s legendary Hammer Films continued to serve up old-school gothic spine-tinglers, while auteurs like Nicolas Roeg wedded spellbinding terror to art-house experimentation. Bringing together some of the decade’s most iconic slashers, chillers, and killer thrillers alongside low-budget cult rarities and camp-tastic oddities, this tour through the 1970s nightmare realm is a veritable blood feast of perverse pleasures from a time when gore, grime, and sleaze found a permanent home in horror. Trog (Freddie Francis, 1970) The Vampire Lovers (Roy Ward Baker, 1970) Daughters of Darkness (Harry Kümel, 1971) Let’s Scare Jessica to Death (John D. Hancock, 1971) The Nightcomers (Michael Winner, 1971) Dracula A.D. 1972 (Alan Gibson, 1972) Images (Robert Altman, 1972) Death Line (Gary Sherman, 1972) Season of the Witch (George A. Romero, 1972) The Crazies (George A. Romero, 1973) Don’t Look Now (Nicolas Roeg, 1973) Ganja & Hess (Bill Gunn, 1973) Sisters (Brian De Palma, 1973) Theater of Blood (Douglas Hickox, 1973) The Wicker Man (Robin Hardy, 1973) Black Christmas (Bob Clark, 1974) Deathdream (Bob Clark, 1974) It’s Alive (Larry Cohen, 1974) The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (Tobe Hooper, 1974) Shivers (David Cronenberg, 1975) The Tenant (Roman Polanski, 1976) The Witch Who Came from the Sea (Matt Cimber, 1976) The Hills Have Eyes (Wes Craven, 1977) Rabid (David Cronenberg, 1977) Coma (Michael Crichton, 1978) Invasion of the Body Snatchers (Philip Kaufman, 1978) Long Weekend (Colin Eggleston, 1978) The Brood (David Cronenberg, 1979) The Driller Killer (Abel Ferrara, 1979) Available Oct. 7th We Need To Talk About Kevin Available Oct. 8th Videodrome Available Oct. 9th Cat People (Jacques Tourneur, 1942) Double Feature: Slime Time The Blob and Beware! The Blob Available October 11th Joan Crawford Showcase (25 films, only listed are qualifying films for the challenge) The Unknown (Tod Browning, 1927) What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? (Robert Aldrich, 1962) Strait-Jacket (William Castle, 1964) Trog (Freddie Francis, 1970) Available Oct. 21st Women Filmmakers of New World Pictures showcase The Velvet Vampire (Stephanie Rothman, 1971) Humanoids from the Deep (Barbara Peeters and Jimmy T. Murakami, 1980) Slumber Party Massacre (Amy Holden Jones, 1982) Available Oct. 25th New Korean Cinema showcase (11 films, list limited to what counts for the challenge) quote:As Korean pop culture continues its worldwide ascent, now is a perfect time to catch up with the wild, genre-defying pleasures of the seemingly unstoppable movement known as the New Korean Cinema. Bringing together essential works by major directors like Bong Joon Ho, Park Chan-wook, Kim Jee-woon, and Ryoo Seung-wan, this sampler of modern classics and cult favorites spotlights the innovative artists who have powered the commercial and creative renaissance that completely transformed South Korea’s film industry from the mid 1990s through the late 2000s. Characterized by an ingenious mixing and subversion of genre conventions and an effortless blending of art-house and commercial sensibilities, these visceral, audaciously constructed films deliver both high-octane thrills and biting social and political critiques of contemporary Korean life. The Quiet Family (Kim Jee-woon, 1998) Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance (Park Chan-wook, 2002) A Tale of Two Sisters (Kim Jee-woon, 2003) Lady Vengeance (Park Chan-wook, 2005) The Host (Bong Joon Ho, 2006) Mother (Bong Joon Ho, 2009) Available Oct. 30th "Twice Bitten" Double Feature Nosferatu (F. W. Murnau) and Nosferatu the Vampyre (Werner Herzog) Available Oct. 31st The Devil's Backbone (Guillermo del Toro, 2001) As of right now, here are all the qualifying films available on Criterion Channel: note: the Herschell Gordon Lewis films may be removed on Oct. 1st) Ishiro Honda kaiju series (including OG Godzillas) Alfred Hitchcock thrillers Antichrist (2009) The Blob (1958) Blood Feast (1963) The Brood (1979) Carnival of Souls (1962) The Cars That Ate Paris (1974) Color Me Blood Red (1965) The Cremator (1969) Cronos (1993) Cure (1997) Diabolique (1955) Equinox (1970) Eraserhead (1977) Eyes Without A Face (1960) The Face of Another (1966) Fiend Without A Face (1958) Funny Games (1997) Ganja & Hess (1973) Genocide (1968) Goke, Body Snatcher from Hell (1968) The Gore Gore Girls (1972) The Gruesome Twosome (1967) The Haunted Strangler (1958) Häxan (1922) Hour of the Wolf (1968) Hausu (1977) I Was A Teenage Zombie (1987) Jigoku (1960) Knife in the Water (1962) Kuroneo (1968) The Living Skeleton (1968) Long Weekend (1978) The Lure (2015) Carnival of Sinners (La main du diable) (1943) M (1931) Night of the Living Dead (1968) Sightseers (2012) Sisters (1973) Spirits of the Dead (1968) Three Cases of Murder (1955) The Ghost of Yotsuya (Tokaido Yotsuya Kaidan)(1959) Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me (1992) Under the Blossoming Cherry Trees (1975) Vampyr (1932) The Vanishing (Spoorloos (1988) The Wizard of Gore (1970) The X from Outer Space (1967) Criterion Channel currently has a 2 week free trial available. Franchescanado fucked around with this message at 21:09 on Sep 30, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2020 20:39
|
|
|
M_Sinistrari posted:
What makes Blood Freak so bizarre is that it's a Christian horror drug propaganda film. Which sorta explains why it's extreme in weird ways and then stupidly tame in others. And why pot makes the protagonist act like he's a junky.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2020 12:58
|
|
|
bitterandtwisted posted:What age do you graduate in America? I assumed it was around 18? 17-19 depending on your birthday. Had friends that didn't turn 18 until the October after graduation.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2020 15:44
|
|
|
This is from the Horror thread, but I'm adding it to the 2nd OP:Benito Cereno posted:Every October I make a list of horror movies on Netflix worth watching in an attempt to keep people from watching The Forest or whatever out of desperation. I used to do it on Tumblr, but now I do it as a Letterboxd list
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2020 16:38
|
|
|
Fran Challenge #1: Horror Noire A film must be a First Time Watch to qualify for Fran Challenge #1 Scream Stream films can count towards a Fran Challenge  Watch a horror movie directed by a black director or Watch a horror movie with a predominantly black castor Watch the documentary Horror Noire if you've never seen it beforeor Watch a film mentioned in the documentary Horror Noire as a strong representation of black culture (not one of the movies they use as an example of bad representation. Make sure you clearly mark in your write-up which Fran challenge your film is counting towards.
Franchescanado fucked around with this message at 23:06 on Oct 1, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2020 23:03
|
|
|
LionArcher posted:I know the OP says no tv shows, but what about min series like haunting on hill house? I plan on watching mostly movies, but rewatching both that series and the haunting of when it drops on the 9th. Thoughts? No, no mini-series, except for, like, a 2 part made for TV movie, like IT or 'Salem's Lot.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 1, 2020 23:20
|
|
|
M_Sinistrari posted:I'm still searching around but this might be the challenge I can't do because any of the films that meet the criteria, I've already seen. You specifically can open it up to thrillers, or maybe just pick a movie you feel fulfills the challenge the most. You’re thoughtful and challenge veterans can trust you to pick something interesting for it. Edit Gripweed brings up a good point. There’s gotta be an international film that you haven’t seen.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2020 00:12
|
|
|
dorium posted:im gunna assume Leprechaun: Back 2 Tha Hood, a movie I havent seen, will not be eligible for this one though. Actually, I would totally allow this if your write up directly addresses the black representation in it. It’s ripe for discussion. dorium your Leprechaun ranking is identical to mine so far. Franchescanado fucked around with this message at 02:59 on Oct 2, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2020 02:57
|
|
|
Friends Are Evil posted:Does Ax 'Em count towards this challenge? I'll probably watch a good film for the Fran Challenge regardless, but still. Yes, definitely.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2020 14:54
|
|
|
Re: Fran Challenge 1 https://twitter.com/verymimi/status/1179135888699400192?s=21
|
|
#
¿
Oct 2, 2020 19:40
|
|
|
3. A Nightmare on Elm Street Wes Craven | 1984 rewatch  I have not seen Swamp Thing, Invitation To Hell, or The Hills Have Eyes 2, which might elaborate on his evolution as a director. Somewhere in the three years after Deadly Blessing, Wes Craven's confidence in filmmaking, his understanding of story, and his reaction to the slasher genre solidified in a huge commercial success with the studio and the audience. It takes from Psycho, Halloween, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, and even Friday the 13th and placed it solidly in a supernatural tale that showed the fears and isolations of being a teenager. You can't trust your parents, science and medicine can't cure being tormented by the Boogeyman, police can't arrest a nightmare, your teachers just want to teach, etc. What works in Craven's favor in his major successes, is that he is compassionate towards his characters. Nancy, Glen, Tina and Rod are victims, and you can feel the fire of survival in these sleepless kids. Freddy stands out because he is a trickster god of dreams. He does not only want to kill you, he will psychologically torment you, with glee. Such a terrifying idea. x44. Psycho Alfred Hitchcock | 1960 | Rewatch  The quintessential Bait-N-Switch film, both in genre, beginning with tense noir thrills before diving into psychological horror and proto-slasher murders. Anthony Perkins was 28 when Psycho came out. I can't imagine putting in a performance like he brings to Norman Bates at that age. The weird foggy mind of an adolescent, confusion and stress when confronted with sexual tension, social awkwardness, and resourcefulness. I absolutely love the scene between Anthony Perkins's Norman being interrogated by Martin Balsam's Arbogast. All of the lies, the mind games, the mix of what the audience knows vs what the characters know; it's why we love Hitchcock. x55. Don't Breathe Fede Alvarez | 2016  Maybe I'm projecting, from watching this film immediately after Psycho, but I feel like Hitchcock is this film's greatest influence. Sam Raimi, the EP, has modeled his directing career after Hitchcock to the point of dressing in a suit every day of filming. I can imagine him salivating at Alvarez suggesting a modern-day Wait Until Dark, with Audrey Hepbern replaced by a highly-trained tactical killer (military veteran, but I don't remember which branch, if it was specified), and the home invaders are who we root for. Besides the masterful Hitchcockian scares--foreshadowing weapons, traps, mistakes; a clear awareness of the layout and space of the house; problems overlapping and snowballing--there is a lot of themes that point to how tumultuous 2016 was for America. The setting of Detroit, a once-prosperous city that is now a terrifying skeleton from destitution (great visual setting for a horror film, ie It Follows), reminds us of all the economic problems America has been facing. The main characters, while home invaders, do so out of the desperation of poverty (the main character has been forced to raise her daughter around her abusive mom, and wants the money to leave and give her daughter a good life). The victim of the robbery is no innocent man, as we will eventually learn. While the squalor he lives in is a harsh reminder of how veterans are treated once they return from war (although, in this specific situation, it seems he lives in squalor out of depression/grief), the man is only ever shown as terrifying, monstrous, boundless and energetic. The conflict of economics (he is rich from a settlement, they want to steal his money) turns to a conflict of survival (he will kill them), until it becomes a conflict of genders (the blind man tries to kidnap the main character and control her body for reproductive purposes; while that's a spoiler, that leaves a lot of room for surprises). At the end of the film, despite us knowing how hosed up the blind man is, the news channels change the narrative and make him, a veteran, the victim. For 2016? Wow. On the nose. x46. Let's Scare Jessica To Death John D. Hancock | 1971 | Criterion Channel    I've got quite a few gaps in the Criterion Channel 70's Horror Showcase. I started with Jessica, and holy poo poo. A Polanski-esque psychological horror film (think Repulsion and The Tenant) that explores the blurring of reality or true supernatural horror amidst a psychological breakdown. If you dislike ambiguity in your horror films, avoid Let's Scare Jessica To Death. So much of this film is uncanny. The interactions between the characters, and the performances, are peculiar; Jessica, who we learn has suffered mental breakdowns in the past, seems off. There is a vacancy in her face while thoughts and voices--which we hear constantly throughout the film--are whispered to her. Her husband, Duncan, and their friend, Woody, talk to her, there is a weird caution, almost condescending, towards her. When they arrive at their new home, they find a squatter named Emily, whom they find beguiling. In a move that only makes sense in the early 70's, they invite her to stay with them for the time being. Emily is at times friendly, and at other times disturbing. Jessica soon begins seeing disturbing images which confuse her. She's positive they're real, but no one believes her. Is the house haunted? Is Emily a ghost or a vampire, or a sociopathic drifter, or a normal person? Is Jessica cursed, or unwell, or does she see real visions that warn her? As the questions pile up, Jessica breaks further down, and our sense of reality, as the audience, is just as questionable as Jessica's. The film stock is gorgeous. It captures the autumnal Connecticut woods beautifully, making this an excellent film for the season. The costuming is almost distracting in it's 70's kitsch, it's wonderful. Despite those dating the look of this film, the camera, the editing and the story are all timeless. It's strange; this feels like it could be an A24 film in many ways, despite it clearly being a product of the time; which, again, adds to how disorienting this film feels. I highly recommend this one. x4Total 6 New: 3 Re-Watches: 3 Halloween | Deadly Blessing | A Nightmare on Elm Street | Psycho | Don't Breathe | Let's Scare Jessica To Death
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2020 23:51
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:For what it's worth, I genuinely found people dogpiling on me fun and in good humor despite how sincerely they feel my opinion is apparently a garbage opinion. Yeah, Demon Knight has a Spook-a-doodle favorite for years, and it's an huge crowd-pleaser from my own offline experience. But hey man, not everything works for everyone. bitterandtwisted posted:9) Raw (2016) This is one of my favorite horror movies that's come out in the past decade. Your post made me say "Why don't I own RAW on blu ray yet??" and it turns out I can't find a US blu ray release. 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2020 13:11
|
|
|
Twin Cinema posted:2. The Innocents This is an adaptation of The Turn of the Screw by Henry James, and the story explicitly has the son kissing the main character in a sexual/romantic way as a possible hint that he is indeed being possessed/influenced by the spirits in the house. It's pretty crazy seeing it in a 1961 film, even though it's a relatively standard kiss, but it's an aspect in most of the adaptations, and the underlying sexuality / fear of an adolescent child seemingly acting more adult in a sexual way is direct from the story. (There is implications that the persons who are now possibly ghosts haunting the house were inappropriately sexual around the kids, or even towards the kids; it's never directly addressed, it's just sprinkled in to gently caress with the reader.) edit: I should add that The Innocents is by far my favorite adaptation of The Turn of the Screw. Franchescanado fucked around with this message at 15:07 on Oct 5, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2020 15:02
|
|
|
Twin Cinema posted:Thanks for the explanation. My reaction was more "holy poo poo -- this is pretty crazy to see" considering the circumstances. I feel like today, you would never see anything close to that. In Pen15, thanks to camera trickery, they are never actually kissing the kids. This is all for good reason, obviously. The Innocents is intentionally disorienting, and the audience perspective is through an unreliable narrator, the main character, who may or may not be sane. Are the children actually acting more "adult" and sexual, or is the governess repressed and can't fathom early moments of puberty in the child she's watching? Were the children abused, or were they exposed to things inappropriate for their age? Or is the repressed governess imagining the worst things to her--innocent children being corrupted by sin? She has a very idealized idea of how Good Proper Children should act, and when confronted with actual children, does her mind bend over backwards to explain their actions in ways that justify things, like a perverse adult having done something to a child, or even a ghost influencing the kids? Or maybe there actually are ghosts, and they are polluting the governess's mind with ill-intent, or possibly putting the children in harm? Or maybe she's really just paranoid and crazy? There are plenty of gothic fiction that give ghosts and spirits sexually perversity, which would especially offend or titillate audiences in 1898. This trend came back in popularity in the 70's, with movies like The Legend of Hell House into the Amityville series. It is weird seeing a film in 1961 be as bold as it is with those themes with actual children, but so much of that is left to be inferred by the audience and the main character, and the actual children, both in story and I assume in the production, were completely oblivious to that side of the story. The only thing I remember is the kiss you mention, which you are right, I don't know how a current movie would handle that. There was a new adaptation of The Turn of the Screw this year, which I didn't see, so I wonder how it handles that aspect of of the story, but The Lodge kinda uses some aspects of The Turn of the Screw.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2020 15:32
|
|
|
Tarnop posted:I'm really enjoying all the discussion of The Innocents. It's been one of my favourite films of the challenge so far. I'm always on the look-out for a black and white haunted house film, and The Innocents is pretty much the best one I've discovered for myself in the past few years. If you want something kinda visually similar but in no ways a haunted house movie, check out Seconds from 1966 if you haven't seen it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2020 18:00
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:The Innocents has always been on my radar but I've never run across it anywhere for streaming. Is it available somewhere that I've missed? Here it is in 720p on YouTube The Criterion Blu is worth a blind buy, though. I keep waiting for it to go on sale, but I may just buy it. fake edit: beaten by STAC!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2020 19:05
|
|
|
Spatulater bro! posted:The Innocents is a movie that really needs to be seen on Blu-ray, in my humble opinion. I agree. I'm pretty sure I got it from the library when I watched it. For further context, the cinematography was by Freddie Francis, who has a career you might recognize.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2020 19:08
|
|
|
Hollis, are you going to stop at 31? Or are you going to keep going? You're gonna have basically a whole month left.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2020 19:22
|
|
|
Mokelumne Trekka posted:I wish Criterion's streaming service had Island of Lost Souls. I read The Island of Dr. Moreau recently and would enjoy seeing a good film adaptation instead of, well, you know... It did for a while. I'm pretty sure that's how I watched it last October for the challenge. Hollismason posted:I'm going to keep going but my first 31 films are going to be 1979 and earlier to meet my personal challenge. Then I'll probably just watch whatever. I'm really looking forward to Vampire's vs the Bronx. Very cool!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2020 20:47
|
|
|
Doesn't do much for me as a whole, but the red eyes in the window in The Amityville Horror really freaked me out as a teen.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2020 21:04
|
|
|
7. Gothic Ken Russell | 1986 This is mostly an edited write-up I did for the Horror Director Bracketology thread, in which I compared Russel's Gothic to Miike's Over Your Dead Body  I believe Ken Russell is one of the greatest embodiments of my main ideology for creators: allow your creative voice to be strong and distinctive and your stories and details specific; you may not be heard by as many, but those that hear will listen more intently. I really dig his entire style. He has a strong sense of setting in all of his films. His costuming is distinct while also fitting in with the time period he is working in. He paints wildly with emotion and tone, leaving a lot of room for his actors to stretch out the characters; there is so much room for over-the-top antics, but it always feels real and hysterical in the cinematic world we're in. This also allows for a single scene to have a dramatic line read that directly ties into the film's theme, a comedic moment that works, and then slide into the macabre. His mix of horniness and perversity feels like such gleeful anarchy to what's formal and proper, and it's never judgmental; the systems/societies the characters live in may judge their actions, but his camera does not. So many of his films involve whittling the societal pressures off the characters to see what's really human. If there is a film that is aided by context, it's Gothic. For one, this is pretty consistent with Russell's career-long interest in bizarre fictionalized biographies of historical creative figures that stretch the realities of the past. In addition to Gothic, he also has the films Elgar (English composer Sir Edward Elgar) Mahler (composer Gustav Mahler, of course), Lisztomania (Franz Liszt, of course), Savage Messiah (about the French sculptor Henri Gaudier-Brzeska), The Music Lovers (19th century Russian composer Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky), Song of Summer (poet & composer Frederick Delius, composer Eric Fenby), and Valentino (silent film actor Rudolph Valentino). In addition to these 8 films (which makes up a 1/3 of his filmography), Ken Russell also has four novels that fictionalize the sex lives of famous composers: Beethoven Confidential, Brahms Gets Laid, Elgar: The Erotic Variations, and Delius: A Moment with Venus. (Russell also has two non-fiction books about himself, filmmaking and the British film industry; Altered States: The Autobiography of Ken Russell and A British Picture: An Autobiography, neither of which I've read, but drat it do I need to.) Gothic comes near the end of his 3rd decade as a director, and after many of his other fictionalized biographical films. I emphasize this, because to me, it shows how intentional all of Gothic is. It's Ken Russell doing what he loves, but in a haunted gothic setting. Gothic is, in many ways, Ken Russell making a Hammer Horror Film; but for me, this is better than most Hammer films. It's funnier, it's weirder, it's sexier/hornier, it's more disturbing, but it never loses any of the earnestness of those films. The eccentricities of the characters are never displayed with irony. There is gravity to their weirdness. As a Literature nerd who's written papers on Frankenstein, which I would say is one of my favorite (or at least one of the most influential) novels, a druggy haunted house film about the infamous "night" Lord Byron, the Shelleys and Dr. Polidori all decided to write ghost stories, which would inspire the writing of Polidori's The Vampyre and Mary Shelley's Frankenstein is extremely My poo poo. That the resulting film is a nightmarish horror comedy just absolutely solidifies it as a favorite of mine. Gothic deals with fact and fiction bleeding the lines of reality with Historical Fiction. For me, twisting and confusing the actual past is a new dimension of distortion which fascinates me. (Pynchon is my favorite author, for example.) Ken Russell's portraits of Lord Byron and Percy Shelley may seem like grotesque caricatures, but are they? Nina Darnton, film critic, 1987 posted:"Julian Sands, who portrayed the idealistic, romantic George Emerson in James Ivory's ''Room With a View,'' plays Shelley, but his character is not one that is easily recognized by the poet's present-day admirers. Mr. Sands plays Shelley as slightly schizophrenic, tormented with fears and devils, suffering from wild drug-induced hallucinations. Lord Byron is played by the Irish actor Gabriel Byrne as close to demonic. All of these specifics details, true or not, all add to Gothic's main theme, which is wonderful to consider with this challenge: Why are we intrigued by Horror? Why do we challenge our fears?  The fears of the characters that are explored are surprisingly ordinary for a film where conjured spirits can possess, where a person you admire may have demonic ties, where vampires might try and feed from you. Mary Shelley, or most sympathetic character, isn't afraid of The Nightmare overlooking her sleeping step-sister, she is afraid that the love of her life is adulterous, that the pain of losing a child is an infinite pain tearing her relationship apart, that great men are capable of great evil, that morality can be forgotten, that defying God creates irreversible sin. Dr. Polidori only fears the attack of a vampyre because he fears eternal damnation, whether in this life or the afterlife, by a God angry at his closeted homosexuality; his repression has him performing self-mutilation and reaching for poison. Lord Byron is seemingly a shell of a man, a hedonist, a libertine, embracing complete anarchy of the human spirit to feel any charge of Life. His creativity is dwindling, his life is passing him by, his exile is driving him mad; his greatest fear is that he will unleash something from his mind that he cannot control, and it will destroy him, or that a karmic retribution is lying in wait for him. Claire Clairmont is a singer. Her life ended two years after music could be recorded. Surrounded by writers and poets, whose existence and creative works could exist in print for the rest of humanity's existence, any and all of her performances are lost once the people who hold her in their memories forget or pass away. She exists in relations to those around her. To Lord Byron and Percey Shelley, she is a lover, a muse, and possibly a mother to one of their children if they so choose; to Mary she is a sister. Everyone around her is someone. The one character who is defined by her relationships becomes possessed by a spirit; she loses her identity and is a vessel for someone else. At the end of the night, Mary Shelley sees the deaths of every character, both poetic and historically accurate. Curious about the idea of reincarnation, or defying death with resurrection, she is forced to see their mortality. In the morning, sun glowing, a picturesque picnic laid out, fresh tea brewed, each of the characters are happy, healthy, glowing (does laudanum have an afterglow like shrooms? I can't imagine it so), smiling and laughing. By facing their fears safely (as the film hilariously posits), their Life is reinvigorated, their souls are more grounded, their mortality is understood greater, and their creative spirits are inspired. Is there a more apt analogy for a fan of Horror fiction? Gothic is wonderfully optimistic about humanity. Villa Diodati dissolves from 1816 to 1985. A boatload of tourists approach the banks, with a guide over megaphone telling us that the events of the visit we watched inspired great works of Literature. The tour guide's voice is perfunctory, and the facts he shares are rather bland, something you'd hear in school. "This is where Frankenstein was inspired, folks." Russell seems to be saying with a wink, that a simple fact like "The Shelleys and Lord Byron once spent the night here and wrote ghost stories" holds within it whole worlds of humanity hidden away by time, that even creatives considered genius, were flawed, gluttons, drunk and stoned, perverted, and fragile, full of fear. (Fun fact: Mike Southon, the cinematographer, was DP on three Air Bud movies.) x4Total 7 New: 4 Re-Watches: 3 Halloween | Deadly Blessing | A Nightmare on Elm Street | Psycho | Don't Breathe | Let's Scare Jessica To Death | Gothic Franchescanado fucked around with this message at 15:36 on Oct 6, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2020 15:30
|
|
|
Class3KillStorm posted:Unrelated, but is there a schedule for when Fran Challenge's tend to get posted? I aim for Wednesdays and Fridays, but I keep it flexible. Gonna start posting more of them sooner.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2020 16:06
|
|
|
Fran Challenge #2: Short Cuts Watch 60+ minutes worth of short films. How this will work: You must include all of the short films in a single post labeled with Fran Challenge #2. For easy reference, the short films can't be spread across multiple posts until the requirement is met. Each short film must be written about just like a full-length film. Include a link to the short film, or a link to the short film's Letterboxd or imdb page. If you have written about short films in this thread already, they can't be included in this post. "What short films qualify?" If it tonally would qualify for the challenge, it's probably okay. Student Films, professional short films, YouTube films Halloween short films, scary/horror short films Thriller shorts that err on the side of horror Horror comedy Live action Animated Just make sure it's actually a short film and not, say, a Halloween special, like the Paul Lynde Halloween Special. Music videos are a weird in-between. I'm fine with something like The Monster gently caress, because while it's more of a skit, it's got enough going on in it, and it's short enough, that I would say it counts. Thriller technically counts; it even has a Letterboxd entry as a short film. However, use these sparingly. Don't just do a write-up about 70 minutes of music videos with slightly spooky imagery. I'd rather you watch and write about a 21 year old's first attempt at a horror movie about a killer doll than a write-up about Haddaway's What Is Love music video. "Are there short films that don't qualify?" Really long short films defeats the point. Don't watch Host or a Masters of Horror episode and then a 5 minute long short film to push you over the 60+ minute requirement. I'd rather you watch ten 6 minute long films than one 55 minute and one 6 minute short. However, something like Halloween Is Grinch Night, at 26 minutes long, is okay. Make sure you clearly mark in your write-up which Fran challenge your film is counting towards.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2020 16:52
|
|
|
MacheteZombie posted:ooo thanks for the suggestion! I'll have to check that out. No, since it's technically an anthology film that completes a full-length run-time. Like, you can't just watch The Raft segment of Creepshow 2 and call it a short film, as convenient as that would be.  gey muckle mowser posted:There are a couple decent ones on there, I liked one called "Catcalls". Hulu has a ton of shorts that are like 5-7 minutes each, no idea if they are worthwhile though. And there is one I liked on HBO Mac called "Hair Wolf" Hair Wolf is weird as hell and rules.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2020 18:14
|
|
|
Darthemed posted:Can you use a film you've seen before as part of the short film challenge? Yes. Just as long as you haven't already written about it in this challenge thread.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2020 18:31
|
|
|
"There ain't no trees in Botswana. Nuh-uh. I know. I am a Botswanian Lumberjack, and I ain't never had a job." That's probably my favorite verbal joke in Ernest Scared Stupid. Really happy that everyone watched it on Scream Stream, it was an incredibly influential film for me. I've said it plenty of times, but it was my introduction to horror.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2020 19:10
|
|
|
Debbie Does Dagon posted:I think I've been approaching Franco all wrong. I think I'll give another one of his films a try and this time try not to get bogged down in the plot. I don't think Erotic Rites of Frankenstein will be the Franco that wins you over. His whole dreaminess, visual palette, mood and tone approach to films was just done better by Jean Rollin. I do wish I liked Franco more. His career has way more variety to it, but only because he's just miming whatever Rollin, Borowczyk, Metzger, and Ken Russell were doing in their careers.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2020 20:15
|
|
|
MacheteZombie posted:I enjoyed Bahia Blanca if you want a Franco rec. I'll take it. I'm always willing to try some sleazy horny cinematic junkfood.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2020 20:57
|
|
|
If there is anyone else that hasn't seen the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre participating in this thread, please take the time to watch it. No one will mock you for having missed it, and it's basically The Essential Horror Film. I wouldn't say it's my favorite horror film, although it's on the list, but I have three friends that will say it's their favorite. I think it's pretty much universally terrifying, in more ways than one. It's trite that every Best Of Horror list has it in the Top 3, but it absolutely deserves to be in the Top 3 nonetheless. Especially watch the 4k restoration. It's just so good. Really happy you got around to it, Mokelumne Trekka.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2020 21:10
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 21:01 |
|
|
Alfred P. Pseudonym posted:Are rewatches allowed for the Fran Challenge? I’ve been meaning to rewatch The Procedure. They are specific to each one. There is an index of all the Fran Challenges in the 2nd OP on the first page of the thread where you can double check. As of now, Fran Challenge #1 can't be a rewatch, but Fran Challenge #2 can incorporate rewatches. Flying Zamboni posted:Halloween is fun when you remember that once Kills comes out there will be three Halloween 3's and only one of them is actually called Halloween 3 and that one has nothing to do with any of the other movies. There are also three Halloween 2's, one of which is just called Halloween. It's kinda funny that they didn't call it Halloween 2018, when everyone now calls it "Halloween (2018)". Coulda saved me time on those parentheticals, execs. Franchescanado fucked around with this message at 22:00 on Oct 6, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2020 21:58
|
|