|
Somewhere a few pages back, someone posted a trailer for an indie horror about a guy hiking into the woods alone, and now I can't find it. Any help?
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 02:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 08:26 |
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:i still haven't seen it. i saw Szamanka by the same director, which is definitely very weird but not that great. i'll have to tackle it eventually. You should definitely watch it then immediately post your thoughts in the thread.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 06:49
|
|
|
Which of these Possessed are you goons talking about? Possessed (1931 film), a drama starring Clark Gable and Joan Crawford Possessed (1947 film), a film noir starring Joan Crawford The Possessed (1977 film), a 1977 American horror film directed by Jerry Thorpe Junoon (1978 film), aka Possessed, 1978 Indian epic Possessed (1983 film), Hong Kong horror film Possessed II, a 1984 Hong Kong horror film The Possessed (1988 film), a 1988 French film The Possessed (1992 film), a 1992 Russian film based on the Dostoyevsky novel Possessed (1994 film) featuring Peter Yang Possessed (2000 film), a TV-movie starring Timothy Dalton Possessed (2006 film), Malaysian, horror film The Possessed (2009 film) a 2009 American horror film based on a true story
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 13:15
|
|
|
We're talking about Possession, so none of those.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 13:17
|
|
|
Yeah, we're talking Possession (1981) starring Sam Neill, who puts in a hell of a performance, and Isabelle Adjani, who somehow outdoes Sam Neill. It's real good.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 13:24
|
|
|
Yeah it's a silly question because we're clearly talking about
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 13:25
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:We're talking about Possession, so none of those. Oh, that narrows it down: Possession (1919 film), a 1919 British silent romance film Possession (1981 film), a horror film starring Sam Neill, Isabelle Adjani and directed by Andrzej Zulawski Possession (2002 film), adaptation of the A. S. Byatt novel of the same name starring Aaron Eckhart and Gwyneth Paltrow Possession (2009 film), starring Sarah Michelle Gellar and Lee Pace Possession (TV series), 1985 Australian series The Possession (2012 film), a 2012 horror film starring Natasha Calis, Jeffrey Dean Morgan, Matisyahu and Kyra Sedgwick  I'll check out the Sam Neil one though, thanks.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 13:58
|
|
|
Watched Don't Go In The House over the weekend, thought it was a lot of fun. Can anyone recommend some similar sleaze/exploitation horror movies like that one?
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 14:11
|
|
|
Random Stranger posted:I'm going with "a bad and unnecessary piece of production design". I know what they were going for with the production design in the film, but it wasn't needed thematically and that part in particular didn't work. The clamshell ereader is a cheap, simple way to make it very difficult to pin the movie down to a specific time period, which was an important aspect of what the director was going for. If it were a Kindle or some other known type of ereader, it instantly dates the film. It needed to be an ereader instead of a regular book though because the design of the rest of the film is very 80's, so the presence of an ereader makes it impossible to peg it as having taken place in the 80s.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 15:53
|
|
|
sticklefifer posted:Somewhere a few pages back, someone posted a trailer for an indie horror about a guy hiking into the woods alone, and now I can't find it. Any help? The Interior? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRHs0p4eL2c Guys Prince of Darkness was so good, and a nice double-bill with Halloween 3.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 15:58
|
|
|
Hat Thoughts posted:Source??? Racist motherfuckers, 1830-
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 16:03
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:The clamshell ereader is a cheap, simple way to make it very difficult to pin the movie down to a specific time period, which was an important aspect of what the director was going for. If it were a Kindle or some other known type of ereader, it instantly dates the film. It needed to be an ereader instead of a regular book though because the design of the rest of the film is very 80's, so the presence of an ereader makes it impossible to peg it as having taken place in the 80s. I thought clam shells had some kindof oracle connotation too. Not sure, tho.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 17:29
|
|
|
Didn't the cellphone convey that though? Stuff like that always comes across more like a production error than deliberate ambiguity.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 17:33
|
|
|
I'm curious how that could be a production error
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 17:33
|
|
|
David Robert Mitchell definitely said at the screening that he designed a cellphone so deliberately unlike anything we have or probably would ever have to give the film a timeless quality instead of having a years-old Nokia in there or something. He didn't mention anything about subtext but I find the birth control pill idea kind of intriguing, whether or not it was intentional.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 17:38
|
|
|
Dostoevsky is definitely affective as birth control.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 19:46
|
|
|
morestuff posted:I'm curious how that could be a production error "Haha those idiots thought we had cellphones back then." Whoops. Almost any period piece involving technology risks loving up what existed when. Or go ask TFR about any movie with a gun about how it was depicted incorrectly. It's almost always a mistake, rather than a deliberate attempt to blur the film's context.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 20:37
|
|
|
moths posted:Almost any period piece involving technology risks loving up what existed when. Or go ask TFR about any movie with a gun about how it was depicted incorrectly. It's almost always a mistake, rather than a deliberate attempt to blur the film's context. It Follows isn't a period piece, that's the whole point. There's stuff in the movie that is contradictory for that specific reason, so that the movie can't definitively be said to take place during a specific time. The scenery in and around Detroit plays into this, and the themes of the movie play into it as well. I'm sure we're reading too much into the movie though, its not like the director has specifically stated any of this on the blu ray commentary...
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 21:00
|
|
|
Yeah but A) there's no specific "back then" in the film to screw up, and B) those are usually errors attributable to it being the distant past and it's easier to lose track of when certain things were invented/in common use. (Also C) it was often "oh crap you can see one of the Roman soldiers has a wristwatch" "eh, he's in the background, we can't afford to shoot this again.")
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 21:01
|
|
|
It's a pretty obvious deliberate mish-mash of anachronism. Watching It Follows and complaining it doesn't make perfect logical sense is like doing the same thing to Eraserhead. It's not meant to be realistic.
FreudianSlippers fucked around with this message at 21:24 on Nov 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 21:20
|
|
|
Whenever a movie like Inception or It Follows is clearly trying really hard to not date itself u just know...it's gonna come off as really dated.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 21:25
|
|
|
I have not found that to be the case...
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 21:31
|
|
Hat Thoughts posted:Whenever a movie like Inception or It Follows is clearly trying really hard to not date itself u just know...it's gonna come off as really dated. I totally disagree. It Follows achieves the timeless quality it aims for, in my opinion. Nothing in it is so "old fashioned" that you start thinking it could be the 1930s, but it could be set at any time between the 80s and now, and I'd wager unless floating cars get invented any time soon, it'll keep feeling that way for a good while.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 21:32
|
|
|
The only funny part of Napoleon Dynamite was when someone asked the director what time period the movie was set in and he replied "Idaho". The same can be said of It Follows and Detroit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 02:26
|
|
|
Anyone seen Circle? My friend was talking it up but a lot of bottle movies like that have been a whole lot of scenes of people screaming at each other forever.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 03:52
|
|
|
moths posted:Almost any period piece involving technology risks loving up what existed when. Or go ask TFR about any movie with a gun about how it was depicted incorrectly. It's almost always a mistake, rather than a deliberate attempt to blur the film's context.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 05:19
|
|
|
Are we still talking about this? The e-reader is a "fictional" device that was created with special effects. It's not like they accidentally put it in the movie. It's also worth mentioning that a huge number of westerns actually do take place in the generic wild west rather than a specific historical setting.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 05:32
|
|
|
It's like Mad Max. When does it take place? Sometime in the past or in the future. It's suppose to be "timeless".
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 05:38
|
|
|
What are everyone's thoughts on Taxidermia? It thought it was an interesting watch. After reading up on it I missed a lot of metaphor, which is understandable as I know nothing about Hungary.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 05:38
|
|
|
I just read the wikipedia summary of Possession and now I'm extremely mad at myself because holy moly I'll still try to watch it though
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 05:44
|
|
|
Reading wikipedia summaries before watching films is for losers.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 06:20
|
|
|
That's the one, thanks. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 09:26
|
|
|
weekly font posted:Anyone seen Circle? My friend was talking it up but a lot of bottle movies like that have been a whole lot of scenes of people screaming at each other forever. The 2015 movie? It's not bad, although it can be a little mentally draining because you have to keep track of everything being said and the dynamics of the cast throughout the whole movie. Ultimately I thought it was alright, not particularly great but a decent budget film.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 09:34
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:Reading wikipedia summaries before watching films is for losers. Agreed. I know nothing about Possession except what has been posted in this thread so I'm gonna watch it blind next week.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 11:30
|
|
|
sticklefifer posted:That's the one, thanks. It's real good! I hope it gets some kind of release down your way. It does the Willow Creek tent gag way better than Willow Creek did.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 15:46
|
|
|
SubG posted:Naaah. A prop gun is a prop gun. The fact that a particular prop gun looks like a Remington 870 doesn't mean that we have to accept that it's an in-diegesis Remington 870 any more than we have to accept that the fact that an guy is clearly Clint Eastwood means we have to accept that in-diegesis he has to be Clint Eastwood. Snak posted:Are we still talking about this? The e-reader is a "fictional" device that was created with special effects. It's not like they accidentally put it in the movie. High Plains Drifter is obviously filmed at Lake Mono, which isn't in the High Plains! The High Plains aren't even a region where endorheic basins are common! Are we to believe this is some sort of magic
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 20:01
|
|
|
Is there anyway to do a lets watch Possession?
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 00:17
|
|
|
Are we supposed to believe a child with as many health issues as the baby in Eraserhead would released from the hospital so soon? Furthermore erasers are note made from heads and ladies very seldom live inside radiators and nothing is fine in heaven because it doesn't exist. Hollismason posted:It's like Mad Max. When does it take place? Sometime in the past or in the future. It's suppose to be "timeless". The original Mad Max takes place during the 1973 oil crisis.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 00:19
|
|
Hollismason posted:Is there anyway to do a lets watch Possession? You mean some kinda group stream where all the NOOBS in this tread who haven't seen it yet watch it together?
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 00:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 08:26 |
|
|
Lurdiak posted:You mean some kinda group stream where all the NOOBS in this tread who haven't seen it yet watch it together? I'd have want to do that just to silently sit and listen to all the blind reactions.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2015 02:00
|
|
