|
Coffee And Pie posted:What Friday the 13th has dog leaping through a glass window to its death? I don't care for dog death, but that cracks me up due to how ridiculous it it. "gently caress this, I'm out!" PART 4. I don't think anyone understands that and I'm fairly certain it's not brought up in Crystal Lake Memories. I always assume it was part of the cuts made around the mom's death and someone slipped up in the editing room.
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 22:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 21:20 |
|
Basebf555 posted:Like you mentioned, I think thats the biggest thing most people point to when criticizing Zombie's Halloween. Scenes like Michael watching in fasination as a bloody nurse crawls along the floor before he stabs her 50 more times don't really have that Halloween feel because it is more mean spirited than Michael is supposed to really even be capable of. That stuff is more Freddy territory to me. Michael and Jason are more elemental, there shouldn't really be any particular "spirit" to their kills. I'd argue this kind of stuff is shown as it's the trend in horror. Movies like Saw and Hostel made it ok in mainstream horror to show torture porn. All the latest remakes seem to have this kind of "gritty" feel if you will where things have to be very realistic and brutal to convey the message or tone. I think it has a lot to do with the era of the movies wherein classic horror movies got away with a lot more due to less technology being available. Full HD and the rise of CGI can replace a lot of practical effects which seems to have lead to a focus more on going bigger and bigger with kills and the gross out factor.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 22:27
|
|
|
There's a thin thin line between gritty realism and mean-spirited rear end in a top hat horror. For evidence of someone failing miserable check out the new Silent Night Deadly Night.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 22:28
|
|
|
I can't really find fault with Rob Zombie's approach with that because he went through pains to develop the idea that Michael is not that, that he is a pathological human and not really some unknowable force. I don't like the Halloween remake but at least it's consistent to the kind of character he's trying to make.weekly font posted:There's a thin thin line between gritty realism and mean-spirited rear end in a top hat horror. For evidence of someone failing miserable check out the new Silent Night Deadly Night. I think something like The Ruins is right on the line, it is very, very mean to its characters.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 22:31
|
|
|
weekly font posted:There's a thin thin line between gritty realism and mean-spirited rear end in a top hat horror. For evidence of someone failing miserable check out the new Silent Night Deadly Night. In general I'd say its a mistake to even try to inject "gritty realism" into a genre that was built on the exact opposite. I just can't really think of a gritty, realistic movie that I thought was good but also could be considered horror/slasher. Just my personal taste though, some people love that poo poo. I know for instance Zombie does a much better job with it in Devils Rejects, but the end result is a great movie that I would not even classify as horror. But then again people always lump Silence of the Lambs in with horror so who knows.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 22:34
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:I can't really find fault with Rob Zombie's approach with that because he went through pains to develop the idea that Michael is not that, that he is a pathological human and not really some unknowable force. I don't like the Halloween remake but at least it's consistent to the kind of character he's trying to make. I agree with this. I mean it's always been a point that Michael Myers isn't some force (despite being able to do some retarded Jason / Freddy level poo poo sometimes when it's convenient for the plot) which is fairly developed in the new one IIRC. Personally the whole "BUT HE'S HUMAN UNDER THERE!" storyline never really did it for me. They use it when it's convenient and then let the guy take gunshots, beatings, large falls, etc directly before disappearing and reappearing at the right time. It was always too much a mix of the two for my tastes.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 22:35
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:In general I'd say its a mistake to even try to inject "gritty realism" into a genre that was built on the exact opposite. I just can't really think of a gritty, realistic movie that I thought was good but also could be considered horror/slasher. Just my personal taste though, some people love that poo poo. I know for instance Zombie does a much better job with it in Devils Rejects, but the end result is a great movie that I would not even classify as horror. But then again people always lump Silence of the Lambs in with horror so who knows. What would you call The Devil's Rejects, out of curiosity? JP Money posted:I agree with this. I mean it's always been a point that Michael Myers isn't some force (despite being able to do some retarded Jason / Freddy level poo poo sometimes when it's convenient for the plot) which is fairly developed in the new one IIRC. What's weird is that Halloween 2 reintroduces that particular idea, and I love it but still can't stand the first Halloween.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 22:37
|
|
|
I would say Devils Rejects is a road/chase movie. A very, very, violent one.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 22:40
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:I would say Devils Rejects is a road/chase movie. A very, very, violent one. Fair enough!
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 22:41
|
|
|
I was thinking of Devil's Rejects when we were having the mean-spirited discussion because the first 15 minutes of that movie are some of the most mean-spirited I've ever seen but it also makes sense in the film's context and is consistant throughout. Oh and of course Michael isn't a force of nature he's POSSESSED BY THE THORN you rubes 
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 22:48
|
|
weekly font posted:I was thinking of Devil's Rejects when we were having the mean-spirited discussion because the first 15 minutes of that movie are some of the most mean-spirited I've ever seen but it also makes sense in the film's context and is consistant throughout. I thought he was just a movie star that is REALLY loving good at hiding in like a 900 square foot house?
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 22:50
|
|
|
The Myers house is without a doubt the house from House of Leaves especially in Parts 4 and 5 where a gothic mansion interior suddenly appears inside of it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 22:51
|
|
|
schwenz posted:How many times did you see it? I saw it when it came out and again when it was released on DVD. I suppose I should give it another watch sometime soon. HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:Well, they are obnoxious kids. But what's wrong with that? The kids in The Gate are little jerkoffs but you don't want to see them get killed necessarily. It's funny you mention The Gate, as I really like that movie. It's probably the best non-adult horror film of the 80s. I don't think the kids in that movie (with the exception of the sister's friends) are unlikable. Young kids all do dumb stuff. I know I did. The dumb poo poo you thought and did ends up becoming silly nostalgia, even. Blindly trying to save a girl who dumped you while a giant monster stomps around your city, instead of evacuating post-haste? Hope you're good at dodging bombs!
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 23:45
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:
Speaking of; what do people think about The Ruins. I watched it in theaters and remember liking it. I haven't seen it since though and been kind of wanting too but I'm scared liking it might have just been a fluke.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 00:02
|
|
|
I liked it a lot actually. It's fun and lightweight, that's about it.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 00:30
|
|
|
hypersleep posted:It's funny you mention The Gate, as I really like that movie. It's probably the best non-adult horror film of the 80s. I don't think the kids in that movie (with the exception of the sister's friends) are unlikable. Young kids all do dumb stuff. I know I did. The dumb poo poo you thought and did ends up becoming silly nostalgia, even. Cloverfield is basically a movie about a guy who talks a bunch of his supposed "friends" into committing suicide with him. In an alternate timeline where he doesn't get killed, he goes on to form a Jonestown style cult.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 00:42
|
|
|
Thulsa Doom posted:Jason X freezing kill Yeah, this was what I was getting at. That and the way he tosses her corpse away, although they were trying to build a "Jason is pissed" kind of vibe so I think they were going there intentionally despite the overall goofiness. Basebf555 posted:Like you mentioned, I think thats the biggest thing most people point to when criticizing Zombie's Halloween. Scenes like Michael watching in fasination as a bloody nurse crawls along the floor before he stabs her 50 more times don't really have that Halloween feel because it is more mean spirited than Michael is supposed to really even be capable of. That stuff is more Freddy territory to me. Michael and Jason are more elemental, there shouldn't really be any particular "spirit" to their kills. I think he refined his approach to almost the right level in Halloween 2. It was brutal but it didn't have that deliberate cruelty like Halloween 1 had. The revisit of Jamie's friend is hard and well done but he isn't dragging it out but rather pursuing her the whole time. I feel like this was the right spot he was aiming for. If I ever really did fanediting, I'd somehow marry most of Halloween 2 with the ending of Halloween 1, which was the most successful part of that whole movie. HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:What's weird is that Halloween 2 reintroduces that particular idea, and I love it but still can't stand the first Halloween. I've been quite the fan of H20 because it seems to have this very acute awareness of the problem. Myers is, as a given, unkillable by regular trauma and Jamie knows this so she takes his body and performs the most ancient of "only way to be sure" complete beheading. It's like a more serious version of the Viggo the Carpathian problem and I really liked that the movie, and more importantly Jamie, knew this and approached it with that in mind. The Ruins is a hell of a film at times but I'd never call it lightweight. If you ever want to get someone to squirm, chances are this movie will do it. And it too gets pretty drat harsh with its characters.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 01:10
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:But then again people always lump Silence of the Lambs in with horror so who knows. The only reason The Silence of the Lambs isn't considered a horror movie, in my opinion, is because Jonathan Demme directed it and it starred Jodie Foster. Same movie directed and acted by B-listers? It'd be a horror movie. If Benicio Del Toro hadn't thrown his weight behind Mama, it wouldn't be blurbed in the ads as a "taut, elegant, thriller." It'd be a loving horror movie. If someone who wasn't Darren Aronofsky had directed Black Swan, it'd be a psychological horror movie. Because Darren Aronofsky directed it, it's a "drama." I have sort of a chip on my shoulder about this.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 01:20
|
|
|
Ape Agitator posted:Yeah, this was what I was getting at. That and the way he tosses her corpse away, although they were trying to build a "Jason is pissed" kind of vibe so I think they were going there intentionally despite the overall goofiness. Oh, definitely. There's a vibe throughout the whole thing that feels like Jason is angry that the movie about him isn't being serious enough. He gets visibly angry that he was tricked into killing holographic campers.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 01:23
|
|
|
Craig Spradlin posted:The only reason The Silence of the Lambs isn't considered a horror movie, in my opinion, is because Jonathan Demme directed it and it starred Jodie Foster. Same movie directed and acted by B-listers? It'd be a horror movie. If Benicio Del Toro hadn't thrown his weight behind Mama, it wouldn't be blurbed in the ads as a "taut, elegant, thriller." It'd be a loving horror movie. If someone who wasn't Darren Aronofsky had directed Black Swan, it'd be a psychological horror movie. Because Darren Aronofsky directed it, it's a "drama." I've seen SotL and Black Swan described as horror movies plenty of times, though? And in fact prior to Return of the King SotL was often cited as the only "genre" flick to win the Oscar for Best Picture. I even teach it specifically as a horror film to my freshmen classes. I mean, I see your point, and there are plenty of people who would argue SotL is a crime thriller or something first and foremost, but I think your chip is a little larger than it has to be.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 01:43
|
|
Craig Spradlin posted:If Benicio Del Toro hadn't thrown his weight behind Mama, it wouldn't be blurbed in the ads as a "taut, elegant, thriller." It'd be a loving horror movie. This made me laugh at least. I don't think anyone would label Mama a thriller over a horror movie though would they?
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 01:49
|
|
|
H.P. Shivcraft posted:I've seen SotL and Black Swan described as horror movies plenty of times, though? And in fact prior to Return of the King SotL was often cited as the only "genre" flick to win the Oscar for Best Picture. I even teach it specifically as a horror film to my freshmen classes. Well, "chip" is hyperbolic and it's just anecdotal experience, but it seems to me like films made by big names get a "pass" for legitimacy more often than similar films made by less established people. I mean, that bit about Mama is from a TV ad. Someone's calling it a thriller, which I think makes it seem nominally more respectable than horror. Even though freaky ghost all up in the ad.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 01:56
|
|
|
H.P. Shivcraft posted:I've seen SotL and Black Swan described as horror movies plenty of times, though? And in fact prior to Return of the King SotL was often cited as the only "genre" flick to win the Oscar for Best Picture. I even teach it specifically as a horror film to my freshmen classes. Its interesting because the post of mine that he quoted was lamenting the fact that people DO categorize Silence of the Lambs as horror. I mean theres no denying that Silence of the Lambs is one of the best movies ever made at straddling that line, maybe its hard for me to consider it horror because it just seems too real. Looking at the overview though, its a movie with no supernatural elements, where the main perspective is that of an FBI agent investigating crimes. At the very least it should be understandable why some people don't think of it as horror.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 01:59
|
|
H.P. Shivcraft posted:I mean, I see your point, and there are plenty of people who would argue SotL is a crime thriller or something first and foremost, but I think your chip is a little larger than it has to be. Yeah, honestly I don't see why SotL is considered a horror film; there's frankly not much actual horror in it. It's more of a crime drama/procedural that deals with darker subject matter than usual.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 02:23
|
|
|
Skunkrocker posted:Going with animal horror, as all the good monster films have already been mentioned: Arachnaphobia. Holy poo poo is that a good film. It has some monster movie elements to it as well, at least at the end. If you've never seen it, please do. I'm not a massive fan of Arachnophobia, but it does have it's moments. John Goodman being in it, for example. There's way more monster movies out there for recommending... noone even mentioned The Creature From the Black Lagoon yet. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 02:27
|
|
|
SubG posted:The director's cut and theatrical cut of a film are different texts. They're usually pretty drat similar texts, but they're different. Sometimes they're substantially different, too. The ending of the director's cut of Blade Runner (1982) carries a different connotation than the ending of the theatrical cut. And that's nothing compared to Gilliam's cut of Brazil (1985) versus the `love conquers all' version. That isn't to say I disagree with you. Some director's cuts do promote substantial reinterpretations or reevaluations of what a movie makes you think and feel. I don't personally think the additions in the Psycho remake reach that level just like similar choices in The Exorcist rerelease don't (in my opinion of course). quote:I could go into this in greater detail, but I don't think my interpretation of what he's `saying' is the important thing for the purposes of this discussion. I'm certainly willing to entertain alternate interpretations. What I'm insisting upon, so to speak, is that there is something to interpret. Which our discussion suggests is inevitable---even if we choose to believe there's no difference to talk about, this is a conclusion we have to come to. That is, there is obviously a thing we have to have an opinion about---there's a there there. If that makes sense. It does make sense and I appreciate you going into it a bit more. The thing of it is that it doesn't mesh with the rest of the film in terms of dramatizing the discussion. If he has commentary on remakes, why wouldn't it be contextualized via the killers or in some other way addressed? There's a lot of things people can say about remakes, whether they're good or bad or pointless or opportunities. But I don't see any point of view from Haneke on this point where the rest of the film seems deliberate in engaging a dialogue with the audience. I have to appreciate that different cultures have different backgrounds to draw on, which can make for thrilling viewing if you're adventurous and willing to work to understand what they're indicating with their often unspoken choices but in others it can be completely lost. Most of the jhorror remakes go through no small effort to help establish a new language for their ghosts, like my personal favorite The Ring while others just go "it's a Japanese ghost, deal with it  " like The Grudge. But then the killers already use American cultural references so it could be a discussion on how no matter the closeness in culture it still gets remade (like all the british remakes I suppose or remaking older American films).But on that same coin, and just like you reference, we modify things in our remakes all the time. The Vanishing was remade by the exact same director and he still have to change fundamental elements of it. But if Haneke was discussing this, and it's a topic worthy of discussion, there's so much fertile ground to draw on. Like providing the survivors opportunities to survive this time and get their American happy ending. And it would have been quite the meta engagement to directly engage the viewers of the foreign version by letting them see you're going to give them a new ending and then just give it the same ending. That would be directly in line with how the rest of the movie works but it's not done there. I think that leaves the most basic reason for doing it: access. We won't watch movies with subtitles and this audience is squarely in the wheelhouse for this discussion considering the volume of film material we generate and consume. And if he felt he did the movie right the first time, why not do it the same way? If it ain't broke and all that. Which is to say I agree with you that not doing something can certainly be a message. But it could also be that not doing something was just the most prudent thing to do. The film didn't need anything different outside of being in the English language so he did exactly that. quote:I mean I do think that there are legitimate problems with genre analysis because genre isn't (necessarily) normative, and the way we (generic `we') use these labels we generally do it in reference to superficial similarities (science fiction is anything with a robot or a spaceship in it, regardless of anything else) rather than as an exercise in serious taxonomy. So there's that. Yeah, but come on, we're all friends here and if someone does that you can call bullshit on them. I think we're having a rather focused discussion aren't we? If a general problem with comparisons hitches things I'm sure we can be more focused but I think I've been pretty clear with what my argument is. Yes, I think replacing a knife with a hammer might be an example of an inessential element unless the film has infused the penetrative act of the knife to the core of the film. And if it does that, I'd say that you can't replace a knife with a hammer. But if we're talking about Friday the 13th where Jason may use a wood chipper, a belt, a knife, and an orbital death laser to kill horny teens, I would say the weapon choice is a disposable element and the readings of those particular weapons aren't at the core of the film. quote:Hostel 2 quote:As I've gone to some lengths to explain, it isn't just the narrow specifics of the argument (as I understand it, and in the many permutations it appears to have gone through in this discussion) that I object to, I reject the basic structure of the argument. And stretching way back, I don't think Night of the Living Dead, Rosemary's Baby, Dawn of the Dead, or Cache are in the same category as Funny Games. Some of those I like much more than Funny Games and love to delve into the intellectual and emotional commentary, but that doesn't put them in the same category.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 02:27
|
|
|
BisonDollah posted:I'm not a massive fan of Arachnophobia, but it does have it's moments. John Goodman being in it, for example. There's way more monster movies out there for recommending... noone even mentioned The Creature From the Black Lagoon yet. Someone posted a blog a few pages back where a dude would occasionally do month long marathons on one-subject. I can't find it now (on a different computer) but the guy is in the middle of an animal month. Someone's gotta have it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 02:29
|
|
|
Has anyone seen the ABC's of Death? It's supposed to be on VOD starting tomorrow.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 03:03
|
|
|
I'm just jumping into this thread for the first time so sorry if this has already come and gone but what's everyones opinion on the new Evil Dead remake? With Raimi and Campbell both producing it and being heavily involved, I feel we could have another really good horror film out of it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 03:13
|
|
|
InFlames235 posted:I'm just jumping into this thread for the first time so sorry if this has already come and gone but what's everyones opinion on the new Evil Dead remake? With Raimi and Campbell both producing it and being heavily involved, I feel we could have another really good horror film out of it. When I first heard about it I didn't really care one way or the other but the trailers have been really loving awesome, so it's one of my most looked forward to movies right now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 03:33
|
|
|
LtKenFrankenstein posted:When I first heard about it I didn't really care one way or the other but the trailers have been really loving awesome, so it's one of my most looked forward to movies right now. Yea, it was the 2 minute red band trailer that really got me on board. I'm with you, it's one of my most looked forward to movies currently. The only bad part is that it got rated NC 17 and they had to cut some stuff to get it an R rating. I don't know if this will affect how scary the movie is over all, but I hope not. Isn't NC 17 usually given for excessive nudity rather than for excessive gore or something?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 03:44
|
|
|
InFlames235 posted:Yea, it was the 2 minute red band trailer that really got me on board. I'm with you, it's one of my most looked forward to movies currently. The only bad part is that it got rated NC 17 and they had to cut some stuff to get it an R rating. I don't know if this will affect how scary the movie is over all, but I hope not. Isn't NC 17 usually given for excessive nudity rather than for excessive gore or something? Nah, they still rate gore or intense stuff and force a few cuts all the time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 03:47
|
|
|
Ape Agitator posted:Nah, they still rate gore or intense stuff and force a few cuts all the time. drat. Well I hope the cuts don't make much of a difference to the quality of the film and were just scenes with a bunch of gore just for the hell of it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 03:55
|
|
|
Does it even really matter anyway? Every goddamn horror movie that comes out these days receives some sort of "unrated" DVD/BR release anyway. So, if any gore has to be cut to achieve an R rating, it'll be on the unrated version. The funniest thing is the amount of "unrated" releases I've seen that don't even include extra gore, just scenes that were trimmed for time. Movie studios have no scruples, they loving hate horror fans, haha.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 04:17
|
|
|
I guess it's not a big deal. I doubt a few extra gore or extra nudity scenes would really make a movie better or worse. If it's a good NC 17 movie, it should also be a good R movie.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 04:27
|
|
|
InFlames235 posted:I guess it's not a big deal. I doubt a few extra gore or extra nudity scenes would really make a movie better or worse. If it's a good NC 17 movie, it should also be a good R movie. Generally yes, but there are examples where I feel an R edit can significantly harm a movie (See the Sea and Killer Joe are two that come to mind, and in the former it's literally a matter of a few seconds). Uncle Boogeyman fucked around with this message at 04:31 on Jan 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 04:29
|
|
|
LtKenFrankenstein posted:Generally yes, but there are examples where I feel an R edit can significantly harm a movie (See the Sea and Killer Joe are two that come to mind, and in the former it's literally a matter of a few seconds). Ahh. I mean I guess I could see if a movie was unknown why a studio wouldn't want an NC 17 rating but for something as well known in horror as Evil Dead, would that rating really destroy their profits? I doubt many parents would bring their kid to something so crazy even with an R rating.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 04:34
|
|
|
InFlames235 posted:Ahh. I mean I guess I could see if a movie was unknown why a studio wouldn't want an NC 17 rating but for something as well known in horror as Evil Dead, would that rating really destroy their profits? I doubt many parents would bring their kid to something so crazy even with an R rating. Most people conflate "Evil Dead" with its sequels, and are probably expecting a campy horror-comedy. I wouldn't be so sure.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 04:35
|
|
|
Ape Agitator posted:Yeah, but those are two examples which are pretty much the hallmark of "it's like a totally different movie". Meanwhile most people never realize they're watching the extended cuts of Mr. and Mrs. Smith or Dumb and Dumber or Iron Man or countless uncut horrors which have mere frames of additional material. Ape Agitator posted:It does make sense and I appreciate you going into it a bit more. The thing of it is that it doesn't mesh with the rest of the film in terms of dramatizing the discussion. If he has commentary on remakes, why wouldn't it be contextualized via the killers or in some other way addressed? Ape Agitator posted:I think that leaves the most basic reason for doing it: access. We won't watch movies with subtitles and this audience is squarely in the wheelhouse for this discussion considering the volume of film material we generate and consume. And if he felt he did the movie right the first time, why not do it the same way? If it ain't broke and all that. Ape Agitator posted:If the willingness to kill was the primary method of entry, the survivor from the first one should have been included. Doesn't he kill someone outside of his direct need to escape? I mean you're welcome to interpret the film any way you want, but all of this poo poo is pretty overt just to be waved away as being just plot, and it's sure as hell difficult to hammer it into a reading that says it's just standard horror film revenge. Ape Agitator posted:Yeah, I think a movie which directly engages the audience in what they expect from a horror film is unique and worth considering vegetables. I don't see anything wrong with that and I don't think I'm reaching when I suggest it is unique.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 05:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 21:20 |
|
|
User-Friendly posted:Most people conflate "Evil Dead" with its sequels, and are probably expecting a campy horror-comedy. I wouldn't be so sure. 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.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2013 05:08
|
|