|
LtKenFrankenstein posted:I'm really glad the remake appears not to be going in that direction, by the way. Evil Dead II is great, but it's been ripped off and copied and homaged a lot more than Evil Dead I has. I'm also glad that the director said there is literally no CGI in the entire film, just great special effects instead. That's exactly how you make things look better. CGI looks so fake that it really turns something scary into something funny sometimes. http://www.totalfilm.com/news/evil-dead-director-says-remake-contains-no-cgi Total Film posted:“We didn't do any CGI in the movie,” says Alvarez. “There's no CGI in the movie. Everything you will see is real, which was really demanding. This was a very long shoot, 70 days of shooting at night.”
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 05:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 02:22 |
|
|
I like the talk about magic tricks and illusions too, because if I'm remembering right from interviews and the Evil Dead DVD commentary tracks, Sam Raimi was a former magician and that's where he got a lot of his ideas in the first place.
Uncle Boogeyman fucked around with this message at 05:51 on Jan 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 05:48
|
|
|
InFlames235 posted:I'm also glad that the director said there is literally no CGI in the entire film, just great special effects instead. That's exactly how you make things look better. CGI looks so fake that it really turns something scary into something funny sometimes. I don't think that's totally fair. You can have bad practical effects just as much as you can have bad CGI. Being cheap is being cheap, though this movie looks like it'll be pretty solid in that regard.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 05:57
|
|
|
JP Money posted:This made me laugh at least. I would, kinda. I mean, The Tall Man is a horror thriller and so is Mama. It has a blue filter on it and sweeping shots of pine forests and it's not The Ring. Love Mama. It's one of the only horror movies I can think of that has not just one but two scenes that made the entire audience spontaneously go "aww!".
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 06:07
|
|
|
User-Friendly posted:I don't think that's totally fair. You can have bad practical effects just as much as you can have bad CGI. Being cheap is being cheap, though this movie looks like it'll be pretty solid in that regard. I don't think CGI is all bad when done correctly. For instance, it was really great for things like Planet of the Apes or Gollum from LOTR. I just think in the context of a horror movie, the point is that it could be a somewhat plausible situation (even though it's really not plausible for most horror movies) so when something looks fake that's supposed to be really scary, it takes you out of the experience. InFlames235 fucked around with this message at 06:56 on Jan 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 06:52
|
|
|
It's not really a horror movie by any stretch, but I saw Legend for the first time since childhood the other day and man, bad practical effects are far worse than bad CGI. A janky CGI monster doesn't mentally "resolve" into anything, and sometimes even benefits from looking weird and unnatural, but a bad prop is really obviously a bad prop. On the other hand good effects just converge to the point where most people can't reliably identify them as one or the other, setting aside obviously impossible imagery like, say, Avatar. Tuxedo Catfish fucked around with this message at 07:32 on Jan 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 07:27
|
|
|
There's some scenes in the Evil Dead trailer that I'm shocked aren't CGI honestly. I would say I agree with you that bad effects are worse than bad CGI but good effects definitely can make things pretty real looking. On the plus side, CGI is only going to get better and better so there will probably come a time where we won't be able to tell it's CGI.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 07:41
|
|
|
LtKenFrankenstein posted:The kid in the wheelchair getting macheted in the face and then pushed down the stairs in part two is the first that comes to mind. Also the two kids killed after having sex in the shower + Crispin Glover's death in part four. Also just that it's known as being the most mercenary and "sex/fun = death" enforcing of all the slasher franchises. And that the origin of the series is the drowning death of a retarded child. As people have mentioned, Friday the 13th is basically "Black Humor: The Series." What's so interesting about it is that outside of Jason X and some of Jason Lives, it's often 100% serious while maintaining an offbeat/counter-culture sort of tone (the first movie is literally Porky's with a serial killer...check out the "wacky" motorcyle cop, the horny teens, etc.; meanwhile, Jason Takes Manhattan's poster originally featured Jason slicing through an "I Love New York" sheet...or the boxing scene in the movie.) For instance, I love that your example of the wheelchair kid dying is portrayed as an audience joke (a really nasty one, hence black humor; the film seems to be saying "Bet you didn't expect us to off a disabled kid, did you?" and I think they even have his character use his crippled nature to try and get sympathy sex, right?) Re: Halloween 2 (1981), not only is Ben Tramer's death to an exploding van hosed up, but there's the kid who gets booked into the hospital with a grotesquely bleeding mouth (complete with lingering shots on it.) John Carpenter has explained that he was very angry at being forced to write the sequel, and possibly drunk most of the time. He was ordered by the studio to come up with a twist, so he spent much of the time writing downing six packs while hoping to get ideas.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 07:44
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:It's not really a horror movie by any stretch, but I saw Legend for the first time since childhood the other day and man, bad practical effects are far worse than bad CGI. A janky CGI monster doesn't mentally "resolve" into anything, and sometimes even benefits from looking weird and unnatural, but a bad prop is really obviously a bad prop. Bad compositing is the absolute worst to me. It looks like one flat image over another flat image and it yanks me out of a movie hard. Alien 3 is a loving nightmare. timeandtide posted:Re: Halloween 2 (1981), not only is Ben Tramer's death to an exploding van hosed up, but there's the kid who gets booked into the hospital with a grotesquely bleeding mouth (complete with lingering shots on it.) John Carpenter has explained that he was very angry at being forced to write the sequel, and possibly drunk most of the time. He was ordered by the studio to come up with a twist, so he spent much of the time writing downing six packs while hoping to get ideas. sethsez fucked around with this message at 08:54 on Jan 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 08:51
|
|
|
Them! is straight up great, it's so much fun & has that loving terrifying bit where a giant ant uses a human ribcage for a toothpick.   "I think we've found your missing persons".
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 13:29
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:It's not really a horror movie by any stretch, but I saw Legend for the first time since childhood the other day and man, bad practical effects are far worse than bad CGI. A janky CGI monster doesn't mentally "resolve" into anything, and sometimes even benefits from looking weird and unnatural, but a bad prop is really obviously a bad prop. I loving love Legend. It was the height of Ridley Scott's "dust and sparkly poo poo floating around everywhere" phase. And he used real dust and poo poo, not After Effects. After Effects dust and sparkly poo poo takes me out of the movie.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 14:14
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:It's not really a horror movie by any stretch, but I saw Legend for the first time since childhood the other day and man, bad practical effects are far worse than bad CGI. A janky CGI monster doesn't mentally "resolve" into anything, and sometimes even benefits from looking weird and unnatural, but a bad prop is really obviously a bad prop. The last movie I really had a problem with in that regard was YellowBrickRoad. When things started really going south and one of the characters ripped another character's arm (or leg, I can't remember which) off, it looked so fake that I got annoyed. And the hell of it is they didn't need it for the scene to work, which makes it doubly jarring.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 15:33
|
|
|
I can't believe anyone in this thread was recommending Sinister. It's barely even a movie. Just a complete non-mystery with the occasional ridiculous jump scare thrown in to keep you from falling asleep. Vincent D'Onofrio looked pretty scary playing Basil Exposition though. Spermanent Record fucked around with this message at 15:45 on Jan 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 15:34
|
|
|
frozenpeas posted:I can't believe anyone in this thread was recommending Sinister. It's barely even a movie. Just a complete non-mystery with the occasional ridiculous jump scare thrown in to keep you from falling asleep. People actually gave reasons for recommending it, though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 15:37
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:People actually gave reasons for recommending it, though. I just gave you a reason. Here have some more. It feels like a rejected script for Supernatural/The X-Files. Every single character ouside the family exist purely to give exposition, to the point that the "twist" is shoehorned in via one of these said, expository characters. They are literally beamed into the scene at the push of a button to explain things to the protagonist. Nothing dramatic actually happens. There is no narrative, no meaningful interaction between any of the characters. Just of Ethan Hawke being directed to his next mark by an off screen sound. Pointless "scares" that don't contribute anything to the overall theme. Oh look a dog. Also kids looking down their noses at you isn't particularly terrifying. All the jump scares are one step away from being YouTube screamer clips. When your biggest scares are just someone jumping in front of the camera essentially doing this  then you have a big problem with your movie. The pacing is all off. Just when it seems to be ramping up for a big finale it just drops dead. The film seems to be trying to channel the dreamlike quality of a Dario Argento film at times but it just ends up looking sad. Empty. There seems to be some half message about the dangers of exposing children to violent media, or rather the adult hysteria related to that, but it does nothing with it. Ridiculous. Did those houses just lie empty for 10 years between each incident? Predictable. I sent 2 text messages during the movie. 22:19 "Probably turns out to be Ethan Hawkes daughter or something"" 23:30 "Welp" I had to apologize to my wife for making her sit through this. Spermanent Record fucked around with this message at 16:17 on Jan 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 15:59
|
|
|
LtKenFrankenstein posted:I like the talk about magic tricks and illusions too, because if I'm remembering right from interviews and the Evil Dead DVD commentary tracks, Sam Raimi was a former magician and that's where he got a lot of his ideas in the first place. Is Evil Dead the only movie to use stop-motion and playdough for special effects?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 16:04
|
|
|
timeandtide posted:Re: Halloween 2 (1981), not only is Ben Tramer's death to an exploding van hosed up, but there's the kid who gets booked into the hospital with a grotesquely bleeding mouth (complete with lingering shots on it.) John Carpenter has explained that he was very angry at being forced to write the sequel, and possibly drunk most of the time. He was ordered by the studio to come up with a twist, so he spent much of the time writing downing six packs while hoping to get ideas. Haha, I hadn't heard this but it makes a lot of sense.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 16:16
|
|
|
...and here I am, thinking "Halloween II is just as good as the first."
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 16:19
|
|
|
Halloween II always felt like a movie that didn't need to be made. The whole film just feels totally off. The script is full of bizarre stuff. Laurie being Michael's sister, and her apparently psychic link with him, is handled poorly. Oh, and Michael is somehow related to Druids and their celebration of Samhain? What the gently caress? Is he an unkillable demon, or just an insanely resilient psycho? Halloween II set the stage for a series of increasingly incoherent and unnecessary sequels, some of which directly retconned other films in the franchise. Honestly, even Rob Zombie's Halloween II was much more coherent, even with all of that white horse and ghost mom bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 20:15
|
|
|
BisonDollah posted:Them! is straight up great, it's so much fun & has that loving terrifying bit where a giant ant uses a human ribcage for a toothpick. gently caress yeah! I loving LOVE this movie. I have ever since my dad showed it to me on TNT's Monstervision when I was little.  frozenpeas posted:I can't believe anyone in this thread was recommending Sinister. It's barely even a movie. Just a complete non-mystery with the occasional ridiculous jump scare thrown in to keep you from falling asleep. Agreed. I went on Halloween day with two of my horror-movie buff friends to see it and good god was it bad. The scene with all the ghost children dancing around him in slow-mo in his house had me rolling my eyes and we were giggling the entire time about what an over-the-top shithead father/husband Ethan Hawke's character is. The twist ending of the movie was so abrupt and dumb too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 20:28
|
|
|
Despite its flaws, Sinister has a fantastic jump scare that rivals the one in Exoricst III.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 20:33
|
|
|
Parachute posted:Despite its flaws, Sinister has a fantastic jump scare that rivals the one in Exoricst III. I stopped watching it when the dad was walking down a dark hallway and ghost kids were doing ballet behind him.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 20:35
|
|
|
Volume posted:I stopped watching it when the dad was walking down a dark hallway and ghost kids were doing ballet behind him. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuIQDxHJj-M
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 20:38
|
|
|
Parachute posted:Despite its flaws, Sinister has a fantastic jump scare that rivals the one in Exoricst III. Still the best jump scene ever. I still get goosebumps after repeated viewings. e. the Exorcist III one, I haven't seen sinister yet. schwenz fucked around with this message at 20:42 on Jan 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 20:39
|
|
|
That scene doesn't even come close to redeeming the rest of the movie to me, but you did remind me of what I did think the best part of the movie was: The music.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 20:45
|
|
|
Halloween II has that weird romantic subplot where Laurie is flirting with the ambulance driver and then he slips on blood and it clearly doesn't kill him but we never see him again.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 20:51
|
|
|
weekly font posted:Halloween II has that weird romantic subplot where Laurie is flirting with the ambulance driver and then he slips on blood and it clearly doesn't kill him but we never see him again.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 20:53
|
|
|
I just find it weird he completely disappears. Adds to the oddly written element of the whole thing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 20:58
|
|
|
Volume posted:I stopped watching it when the dad was walking down a dark hallway and ghost kids were doing ballet behind him. Yeah, that was when it took a nosedive. And the swimming lesson one was more disturbing. What's Ben Wheatleys bit in the ABC's like?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 21:49
|
|
|
weekly font posted:I just find it weird he completely disappears. Adds to the oddly written element of the whole thing. He does show up once after that, stumbling into a car with Laurie and passing out on the horn, but they do leave it weirdly ambiguous as to whether he's dead or not. And not in a "the audience isn't supposed to know!" way as much as a "we couldn't really decide ourselves" way.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 21:52
|
|
|
LtKenFrankenstein posted:He does show up once after that, stumbling into a car with Laurie and passing out on the horn, but they do leave it weirdly ambiguous as to whether he's dead or not. And not in a "the audience isn't supposed to know!" way as much as a "we couldn't really decide ourselves" way. I barely even remember this but it sounds so familiar. Also, I used to get the Samhain stuff confused with 2 and 3, was Kneale brought on to massage the franchise or something? What's with all the druids?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 22:12
|
|
|
LtKenFrankenstein posted:He does show up once after that, stumbling into a car with Laurie and passing out on the horn, but they do leave it weirdly ambiguous as to whether he's dead or not. And not in a "the audience isn't supposed to know!" way as much as a "we couldn't really decide ourselves" way. Oh poo poo that's right. Yeah, just a weird scene - runs similarly in my mind to the dog in F13: Part 4 who leaps out the window. A big bowl of "Huh?"
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 22:17
|
|
|
schwenz posted:Still the best jump scene ever. I still get goosebumps after repeated viewings. You guys mean the scene in the hospital with the nurse all shot looking down the hallway, right? Because that scene rules. Made the movie for me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 22:20
|
|
|
I just think Exorcist II is awesome in general. George C. Scott's presence really makes some of the scenes intense as hell. I really bought that he was losing it over the course of the movie. And Brad Dourif doing what he does, which is be creepy as poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 22:30
|
|
|
priznat posted:You guys mean the scene in the hospital with the nurse all shot looking down the hallway, right? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zH8ynu0jRvY Jump scares get way to much negativity these days. It's one thing if your movie relies on them as the sole source of fright, but I think every horror movie should have one or two. If done right they get you on the defensive, which is good. One of my favorite ones is the spiderwalk scene from Exorcist. I understand why it was cut, it didn't fit the timeline of the movie. But man did that have impact. I really prefer the directors cut of that movie to the theatrical release.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 22:30
|
|
|
The spiderwalk scene is one of the very few cut scenes I feel is actually pretty good and doesn't throw the movie off.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 22:32
|
|
|
I really liked Exorcist III a lot. I felt it had a good tone in the movie and some legit scares. Also George C Scott is loving awesome. The scene with the old lady crawling around on the ceiling was the best kind of a "what the fuuuuuu" moment too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 22:33
|
|
|
schwenz posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zH8ynu0jRvY Probably because most horrors these days completely rely on them. I like a good mixture of both jump scares and a brooding atmosphere that gets under your skin. The Ring did a fine job of this and is one of the only films to actually terrify me. I can't explain it, but when I saw it in theaters, it was a rare experience for myself and I've seen 100's of horror movies and it's one of the only ones to ever really bother me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 23:25
|
|
xzoto1 posted:Probably because most horrors these days completely rely on them. I like a good mixture of both jump scares and a brooding atmosphere that gets under your skin. The Ring did a fine job of this and is one of the only films to actually terrify me. I can't explain it, but when I saw it in theaters, it was a rare experience for myself and I've seen 100's of horror movies and it's one of the only ones to ever really bother me. The mood of the ring is just pure dread though. I know it gets made fun of a bit for blackhair girl but it really does have a great atmosphere. I haven't watched it in years but I think I'll find it and give it another watch soon.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 23:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 02:22 |
|
|
I watched The Ring again a week ago. I watch it maybe twice a year. It's a good movie, and by far the best of the Asian horror remakes from that decade. The cinematography is fantastic and really sells the thick-as-molasses atmosphere of dread in the film. Sure, the more you examine the premise of the film, the more absurd it is. It's a movie about a dead little girl with psychic/telekinetic powers who kills people through her chain letter videotape. Can you imagine if the movie came out now? Would Samara post her video to YouTube? Would people who watch it have to copy it to a thumb drive and leave it at a table at Starbucks for the next unlucky sucker to find? Or would reposting it to Twitter, Tumblr and Facebook be enough to appease the girl in the well? Really, the premise is ridiculous. But, regardless, what we got in the 2002 movie was pulled off effectively, that's unquestionable. I've seen many horror movies in theaters, and I've never seen a crowd react more to a movie as the crowd that was in the theater I saw The Ring in. Lots of teenagers and early 20s people, all getting increasingly freaked out as the movie progressed, until we got to the iconic scene where Samara comes out of the guy's TV screen, and people in the audience just loving flipped out. Gore Verbinksi loving nailed it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 23:56
|
|