|
Aw man, you should definitely at least watch The Hills Have Eyes. Last House on the Left isn't for everyone (although it's hugely important for the genre), but The Hills Have Eyes is just all around great. If you want movies where the ostensible villains suddenly find themselves in the third act being pursued by their supposed victims who they've discovered to be even more monstrous than themselves, those two wrote the book on that. In You're Next it just felt like the filmmakers came up with a punch line but then they couldn't think of a way to set it up so instead they just dropped it in there. And in the end, it wasn't even that good of a punch line. A movie certainly doesn't have to be new and fresh and turn genre conventions on their head to be good (although, yeah, i do like it when a movie shows me something new), it just seems like for a lot of people that was the draw for You're Next, and all I can think is that those people don't watch many horror movies. Certainly nothing else about it particularly stands out, apart from the score and Vinson and Swanburg's performances. Uncle Boogeyman fucked around with this message at 05:37 on Aug 25, 2014 |
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 05:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 14:27 |
|
|
If Your Next had its ending twist as the concept for the movie rather then the ending surprise it would have actually been interesting. Otherwise kudos for having crackpot survivalists shown in good light I guess.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 05:34
|
|
|
It's not like I'm intentionally avoiding those movies. I've just never got to them. I did annoyingly enough see the Hill remake and didn't like it at all though I don't hold that against the original and that's not why I haven't seen it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 05:36
|
|
|
The examples given were films made long ago (and one of them sucked). Maybe You're Next wasn't 100 per cent original but I haven't seen a film similar to it in awhile.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 05:42
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:A movie certainly doesn't have to be new and fresh and turn genre conventions on their head to be good (although, yeah, i do like it when a movie shows me something new), it just seems like for a lot of people that was the draw for You're Next, and all I can think is that those people don't watch many horror movies. Certainly nothing else about it particularly stands out, apart from the score and Vinson and Swanburg's performances. Even besides the slight subversive nature I found in it, I did just enjoy it. I liked it's awkward and oddly real feeling family drama and tension (the dinner scene is great and I love when they start petty bickering about which of them can run fastest to the police. I liked how thoroughly boring and unerotic it made the gratuitous nudity (the opening cuts in right at the awkward male orgasm, there's the scene where the brother's wife is just bored and not into it and then of course there's the "gently caress me next to you're dead mother". I liked the odd little moments where the killers were shown to not be ethereal movie killers (when one of them just sort of takes a breather on the couch or when one of them just starts comically screaming when he steps on a nail. I liked the wacky Home Alone style traps that were set up, that often even had comically shot payoffs (I sweat said nail scene is shot really similar to a similar scene in Home Alone). I like the lameness of the song that's on repeat in that one house and how it sort of undercuts the creepiness of that conceit. I even really liked the self aware cameos by Ti West and Calvin Lee Reeder (the director of The Oregonian and The Rambler). I just liked that movie alot 
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 05:52
|
|
|
I've been waiting for Coherence to turn up on netflix (or anywhere, really; it's still fighting for a non-festival release in the US) because it starts with pretty much the exact same set up as You're Next but is much more well written and acted and takes it in directions I find far more interesting.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 05:55
|
|
|
Y Kant Ozma Diet posted:The examples given were films made long ago (and one of them sucked). Maybe You're Next wasn't 100 per cent original but I haven't seen a film similar to it in awhile. This is why NF needs to get Hitchcock movies back online. Similar to it as in thrillers? A siege movie? If you liked it for its themes there has to be something that will knock your socks off on NF.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 05:56
|
|
|
axleblaze posted:Even besides the slight subversive nature I found in it, I did just enjoy it. I liked it's awkward and oddly real feeling family drama and tension (the dinner scene is great and I love when they start petty bickering about which of them can run fastest to the police. I liked how thoroughly boring and unerotic it made the gratuitous nudity (the opening cuts in right at the awkward male orgasm, there's the scene where the brother's wife is just bored and not into it and then of course there's the "gently caress me next to you're dead mother". I liked the odd little moments where the killers were shown to not be ethereal movie killers (when one of them just sort of takes a breather on the couch or when one of them just starts comically screaming when he steps on a nail. I liked the wacky Home Alone style traps that were set up, that often even had comically shot payoffs (I sweat said nail scene is shot really similar to a similar scene in Home Alone). I like the lameness of the song that's on repeat in that one house and how it sort of undercuts the creepiness of that conceit. I even really liked the self aware cameos by Ti West and Calvin Lee Reeder (the director of The Oregonian and The Rambler). I just liked that movie alot I was digging the movie right until the villains and mercs and hero are reveled as deep as dishwater
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 05:59
|
|
|
I can understand not liking You're Next, but if those who don't like it could stop acting like those that like it just need to see some "good movies" that would be great. It's just sort of patronizing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 06:03
|
|
|
Junkie Disease posted:This is why NF needs to get Hitchcock movies back online. Similar to it as in thrillers? A siege movie? If you liked it for its themes there has to be something that will knock your socks off on NF. I've seen plenty of Hitchcock films. I was talking about stuff released recently. I've heard good things about Coherence but Uncle Boogyman enjoying it doesn't fill me with much hope.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 06:04
|
|
|
All my life I've been looking for the magic
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 06:07
|
|
|
Y Kant Ozma Diet posted:I've seen plenty of Hitchcock films. I was talking about stuff released recently. I've heard good things about Coherence but Uncle Boogyman enjoying it doesn't fill me with much hope. I would love for NF to get "The trouble with Harry" back on streaming, its a unappreciated Hitchcock murder mystery where a small town's jerk dies and no one cares. Its got a slick upbeat Bernard Herrmann score that fits the menacing threat of punishment for a crime that everyone can't be bothered with. Oh and I could have sworn this thread was to help people find more good stuff on NF I didn't think anyone was stupid for liking that movie. Sheesh.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 06:14
|
|
|
Put me in the pro-You're Next camp. It may not be that original, and the 1st half is pretty generic and drags (intentionally, but still), but the 2nd half is just a ton of fun to watch. I don't give a drat how subversive it is, it's extremely well executed, high-energy, full of great kills and sight gags.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 09:00
|
|
|
Horror films are rarely actually scary, let alone any good. The torture porn films of the last decade are indicative, but not the only example, of a worn out, tired, sad genre.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 13:27
|
|
|
Junkie Disease posted:I would love for NF to get "The trouble with Harry" back on streaming, its a unappreciated Hitchcock murder mystery where a small town's jerk dies and no one cares. Yeah, it's a Romantic Comedy about fuckin' hiding a corpse.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 13:38
|
|
|
Nihonniboku posted:Horror films are rarely actually scary, let alone any good. The torture porn films of the last decade are indicative, but not the only example, of a worn out, tired, sad genre. Oh please.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 13:49
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:Oh please. The ultimate expression of the shitposting urge: dump on an entire genre that you either don't watch and therefore don't know anything about, or watch a lot of and are therefore an enormous hypocrite about. Do it in one sentence, smugly cross your arms.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 13:53
|
|
|
Y Kant Ozma Diet posted:I've seen plenty of Hitchcock films. I was talking about stuff released recently. I've heard good things about Coherence but Uncle Boogyman enjoying it doesn't fill me with much hope. Man, you are really upset that I didn't like You're Next, huh?
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 14:11
|
|
|
DeimosRising posted:The ultimate expression of the shitposting urge: dump on an entire genre that you either don't watch and therefore don't know anything about, or watch a lot of and are therefore an enormous hypocrite about. Do it in one sentence, smugly cross your arms. I've seen plenty. For every horror film that my friends or this thread recommend, I almost always end up eagerly waiting for it to just end. It probably doesn't help that I don't scare easily. I'm not into camp, so there goes another one. Other types have been done so many times, that you have who series of films that are commentary on that type of horror film, that end up tired themselves. It seems to me that other people also think the genre is tired, so they've tried to up the ante with movies like Saw and Funny Games, which aren't scary or entertaining, just very uncomfortable, and to me therefore not worth watching. Sure, there are good ones. Like many things, there are exceptions. But for the most part, the genre just doesn't interest me. I guess I also shouldn't state my opinion as fact. Of course there are people who are diehard fans of the genre, and they'll watch any horror film because it's a horror film.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 15:05
|
|
|
Nihonniboku posted:I guess I also shouldn't state my opinion as fact. Of course there are people who are diehard fans of the genre, and they'll watch any horror film because it's a horror film. Ahahaha holy poo poo you're so obnoxious.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 15:16
|
|
|
Mechafunkzilla posted:Ahahaha holy poo poo you're so obnoxious. How many sequels to Saw were there?
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 15:23
|
|
|
Nihonniboku posted:How many sequels to Saw were there? Boom! Roasted.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 15:27
|
|
|
Nihonniboku posted:How many sequels to Saw were there? That you think this is a relevant question is adorable 
Mechafunkzilla fucked around with this message at 15:46 on Aug 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 15:40
|
|
|
Nihonniboku posted:I'm not into camp, so there goes another one. Well you sound like a fun person!
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 15:59
|
|
|
Nihonniboku posted:How many sequels to Saw were there? How many sequels to Die Hard were there?
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 16:01
|
|
|
Nihonniboku posted:Sure, there are good ones. Like many things, there are exceptions. You do have a point here, that point being an accurate description of Sturgeon's Law (90% of everything is crap). Your main fault is in applying it to horror films as though it were exclusive to that genre, when the entire point of Sturgeon's Law is that it is universal, so pointing it out in a single genre is 'ultimately uninformative', to quote Theodore Sturgeon.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 16:28
|
|
|
Paper Kaiju posted:You do have a point here, that point being an accurate description of Sturgeon's Law (90% of everything is crap). Your main fault is in applying it to horror films as though it were exclusive to that genre, when the entire point of Sturgeon's Law is that it is universal, so pointing it out in a single genre is 'ultimately uninformative', to quote Theodore Sturgeon. Rad author. I really dug More Than Human, what's some other top-shelf Sturgeon? I heard Godbody is solid, anyone read it?
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 16:36
|
|
|
Paper Kaiju posted:90% of everything is crap That seems hopelessly optimistic.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 17:04
|
|
|
Mechafunkzilla posted:Rad author. I really dug More Than Human, what's some other top-shelf Sturgeon? I heard Godbody is solid, anyone read it? Confession: I am a poser who's never actually read any of his work. It's just a really good analysis of how genre fiction works. Sarchasm posted:That seems hopelessly optimistic. Maybe because the quote was from over 50 years ago? I'm sure the internet and current state of mass media has contributed a lot toward diluting those numbers. Paper Kaiju fucked around with this message at 17:10 on Aug 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 17:07
|
|
|
Mechafunkzilla posted:Rad author. I really dug More Than Human, what's some other top-shelf Sturgeon? I heard Godbody is solid, anyone read it? I love his short fiction. There was a four volume omnibus of his short stories published about fifteen years ago iirc, it's well worth picking up (though of course his very earliest stuff, in volume one, is noticeably rougher than his mature work).
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 17:15
|
|
|
I watched the trailer for Coherence because of the mention here and now it is super hard to not spoiler myself on it, my interest is piqued bigtime. Hope it comes to Netflix soon! Also The Signal. I heard it wasn't great but I like indie low budget big concept sci fi a lot.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 17:33
|
|
|
Horror is a lot like comedy: it's a polarizing genre. People are scared by different things. A lot of people are afraid of ghosts, or vampires, or clowns. To others, those are all trite, silly, or are just desensitized by the over-saturation of these icons in pop culture. Just like some people like slapstick comedy, or hate it. Horror movies are easily dated, though. They are a product of their times, and show the current fears of the people (if they're done right). Right now, home invasion movies and ghost/demon movies are really big. These movies concentrate on families being destroyed by a foreign (sometimes unseen) force. To some people, this is absolutely terrifying. To others, these aren't fears that are present to them. Just like giant monster movies were really big during the cold war, and slasher movies were really big because parents have been telling their kids to fear strangers (this was also popular with holidays: Halloween, April Fool's Day, My Bloody Valentine, etc.) or the fear of leaving the safety of your home and thrown into the "wilderness", which is why camping horror movies were so popular (Friday the 13th, Sleepaway Camp, countless rip-offs) Horror is kind of a blanket category. There are plenty of bad horror movies, but there are different types of horror. To some people, gorey torture porn (like the Saw series, or Human Centipede) is cathartic fun: take a person that is considered bad and torture them, get grossed out by gore. Others like slasher films: it's scary to think that someone is following you with the intent to kill you. Monster movies are big with people that are afraid of nature (Jaws, Piranha, Deep Blue Sea), or a bastardization of nature (The Thing, The Blob, etc.), killing people. Some like simple ghost movies, because people are more afraid of what they can't see or control. Some like goofy horror movies that don't take themselves seriously, because they want that sick part of the funny bone tickled (Shaun of the Dead, Tremors, Night of the Creeps, etc.) Horror is also a genre that sells. It's a genre based on extremes, like theme parks. The extremes in this are adrenaline, suspense, fear, nudity, gross-out-gore, and some nightmare fuel. Most horror movies are victims to small budgets: get the blood, get the tits, make the monster iconic so we can sell merchandise, and do it as cheap as possible for easy cash. It's also an extreme victim to reboots right now (more than action movies, sci-fi movies, or comedies) and unnecessary sequels. I liked You're Next. Is it subversive and makes you look at the genre in a new light? No. It takes a premise we're familiar with, does the parts we like well, and throws in a small, but fun twist in the mix. Action movies are the same way. I really liked Guardians of the Galaxy, as did a lot of people. It didn't change anything about action movies, comedies, or sci-fi. It just did all of those things very well. Cabin in the Woods did the subversive thing, and there were four pages in this thread of people that loved it and hated it and everyone saying the other was wrong. I liked Cabin in the Woods for what it did, but if every horror movie were that self-aware and subversive and whatever, it'd be exhausting. Same with Tucker and Dale Vs. Evil or Shaun of the Dead. They are really good at turning things on their heads, but I'd hate it if every horror movie did that. I like horror. It's cathartic, it's exciting. If someone does a good horror movie, it's the best thing ever. If someone does it terribly, it's fun to see how out-of-hand or terrible it gets. There are countless gems in horror movies, Netflix has a lot to offer. Sometimes it's nice to stick to the roots. tl;dr: Horror can be fun in the right mindset. Watch these movies (some are on Netflix) and maybe you'll appreciate it more: Nightmares in Red, White and Blue A History of Horror with Mark Gatiss (3 part BBC series). edit: spelling Franchescanado fucked around with this message at 18:10 on Aug 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 18:01
|
|
|
Franchescanado posted:Horror is a lot like comedy: it's a polarizing genre. People are scared by different things. A lot of people are afraid of ghosts, or vampires, or clowns. To others, those are all trite, silly, or are just desensitized by the over-saturation of these icons in pop culture. Just like some people like slapstick comedy, or hate it. *You're
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 18:08
|
|
|
^Thank you, you're a god among men.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 18:10
|
|
|
Yes, everyone watch that Mark Gatiss history of horror documentary. I watched it when it was on tv and it is excellent.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 18:14
|
|
|
a worthy uhh posted:*You're IMO the title works better as YOUR NEXT.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 18:16
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:IMO the title works better as YOUR NEXT. Whoa. Your cool.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 18:23
|
|
|
I always thought it worked better with an exclamation point. You're Next!
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 18:27
|
|
|
Your Next (2014) - A killer is on the loose, brutally murdering internet pedants. (PG-13)
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 18:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 14:27 |
|
|
If they're supposed to be like backwoods hunters, YOUR NEXT makes more sense scrawled in blood.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 18:36
|
|