|
I'm planning to watch all the They Shoot Zombies top 100 films I haven't seen yet. According to Letterboxd, that's exactly 13 entries, though I may just keep going with the list afterwards. Edit: 14 actually. I forgot about Martyrs. Samuel Clemens fucked around with this message at 01:52 on Apr 29, 2019 |
#
¿
Apr 28, 2019 18:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 19, 2024 00:10 |
|
|
Journeying through the They Shoot Zombies… list #80 Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1931) A while ago, someone in the Horror thread asked about the earliest film that still holds the potential to scare modern audiences. Speaking for myself, I can confidently say that the middle portion of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, where the titular Hyde starts an abusive relationship with Ivy Pearson, genuinely unnerved me, more so than any other monster story from this era. It’s easy to brush off vampires and werewolves as superstition, but domestic abusers like Hyde still walk among us, and, terrifying make-up aside, they don't differ much from the way they're depicted here, using a mixture of emotional and physical violence to keep their victims mentally chained. Fredric March earned deserved praise for his double role, but Miriam Hopkins easily proves his match acting-wise. When she reveals to Jekyll that she thought about drowning herself to escape her situation, you feel the pain in her voice. Aside from those observations, what stood out most to me was the film’s visual brilliance. It almost feels proto-Ophülsian in its dynamic use of the camera. The lens is constantly panning, zooming or tracking, the story opens with a very well-done POV sequence (the earliest such sequence I know of in cinema) and a lot of care went into the various scene transitions. All the more impressive considering how static many early sound films come across nowadays. There are some wonderful special effects on display as well, with fancy mirror tricks and an inventive use of dissolves to simulate Jekyll’s transformation. Between this and Island of Lost Souls, I’m honestly starting to believe that Paramount was the better pre-code horror studio than Universal. On a side note, do you really pronounce the name Jee-Kill? I always called him Jack-ill. #83 The Black Cat (1934) If I had to describe Ulmer’s directing style in a single word, I would use efficient. He doesn’t waste a single frame or gesture when telling a story, everything runs like clockwork. I think his no-nonsense approach suits noir better than gothic horror, which after all thrives on slowly building up tension. The final act of The Black Cat in particular seems to just rush through the necessary plot developments. That said, I won’t deny that Ulmer creates some effective moments along the way. I like the way he sells us a car crash in a single quick cut or conveys Poelsig’s diabolical desire for Joan in a simple hand movement. Beyond that, The Black Cat mostly serves as an excuse to have Karloff and Lugosi play off each other, something that must have thrilled audiences back when these two stars were still in their prime. Lugosi proves the weak link, I’m sorry to say, his performance too emotionally distant to portray a man ravaged by betrayal and lost love. On the other hand, Karloff does a phenomenal job as melancholic recluse, roaming the empty hallways of his mansion like a spectre forgotten by time. As in The Mummy, he and his penetrating gaze elevate what are otherwise fairly standard villain tropes. Also, 30s horror films sure loved their public domain classical music, didn’t they? This is the second time in a row Toccata and Fugue in D Minor prominently appeared, and you can hear a bit of Beethoven in the score as well. Samuel Clemens fucked around with this message at 21:51 on May 2, 2019 |
|
#
¿
May 2, 2019 19:21
|
|
|
Journeying through the They Shoot Zombies… list #84: The Orphanage (2007) I remember watching Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom in a theatre and not thinking much of it until the last act turns into a surprisingly effective slasher, with the genetically engineered supersaur stalking the protagonists through the rooms of a dark mansion. Today I learned that its director cut his teeth on the horror genre, so it’s no wonder that he performed better during the scary moments than the spectacle. The Orphanage sadly doesn’t feature any dinosaurs, but it no less heavily relies on architecture to set the right mood. The old orphanage with its dark corners and creaking floors provides just as much tension as the actual ghosts. We spend almost the entire runtime within the house, and by the end it feels like we’ve explored every nook and cranny, becoming as familiar with the setting as its inhabitants. I really have no complaints, The Orphanage is a well-done eerie tale with charmingly old-school sensibilities. It’s almost a shame that there’s a fairly graphic moment in the middle, otherwise this would have been a perfect film for younger audiences: relying on atmosphere rather than shocking images, with a likable family dynamic in the centre and a reconciliatory ending that suggests the dead are just as much deserving of sympathy as the living.  #87: The Fall of the House of Usher (1928) Suggested drinking game: Take a shot every time the name Usher appears in one of the intertitles. In my last post, I’ve criticised The Black Cat for its lack of atmospheric build-up. Conversely, The Fall of the House of Usher is nothing but build-up. You could convey the actual plot in about five minutes. The remainder of the running time chronicles Monsieur Usher’s steady descent into madness. Director Jean Epstein clearly had a lot of fun experimenting with different techniques. Off-beat camera angles, heavy fog, lots of candlelight, and slow-motion draw us into his otherworldly nightmare vision. He pays tribute to impressionism and Soviet montage but imbues these techniques with a very unique kind of rhythm. The closest analogue I can think of would be Dreyer’s Vampyr. Both films aren’t so much narratives as mood pieces. Unlike Vampyr however, Usher takes a while to get going. You have to be willing to put up with more than a few lengthy shots of characters wistfully staring off-screen before everything becomes truly bonkers.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2019 02:45
|
|
|
Journeying through the They Shoot Zombies… list #88: The Changeling My change-a-ling, My change-a-ling I want to play with my change-a-ling Entertaining mixture of traditional ghost story and 70s-era “Don’t trust The Man” conspiracy thriller. For a purported mystery there is a conspicuous lack of twists and turns, but when you have an assured craftsman at the helm and the ever-reliable George C. Scott in the lead, an okay script suffices. One thing that I don’t quite understand is why the ghost needed John to help him in the first place. He appears quite capable of communicating with and even manipulating the outside world, so why bother bringing an uninvolved human into your family dispute?  #89: The Howling The first act suffers from the same issue as the middle portion of Dracula, in that it ostensibly presents a mystery to which the audience already knows the answer. No one watches The Howling without being aware that it centres on werewolves. Even if you didn’t see the trailer or poster, the title almost certainly clued you in. As such, we spend a fairly long time just waiting for the characters to catch up to us. Once the film stops playing coy and lets the beasts roam, it becomes quite a spectacle though. The standout scene is the transformation of course, with make-up so convincing it’s a crime the responsible artists didn’t win the Oscar that year. I'd also like to give an honourable mention to the ending, in which Joe Dante flexes his satirical muscle and offers a perfect resolution to his tongue-in-cheek werewolf conspiracy story. Samuel Clemens fucked around with this message at 00:56 on May 4, 2019 |
|
#
¿
May 4, 2019 00:53
|
|
|
Journeying through the They Shoot Zombies… list #90: The Others (2001) Glowing praise is often and rightfully heaped upon Nicole Kidman’s performance and the well-executed final reveal which re-contextualises the events leading up to it. (I didn’t know about either when going in, so both were a pleasant surprise). It’s to the film’s credit that even without the last-minute swerve, it could proudly stand as one of the high points of the haunted house genre. Some may deem the pacing too languid for their taste, but I found myself consistently engrossed. We’re always handed just enough information to keep us wondering, and most of the seemingly disparate elements ultimately coalesce into a satisfying whole. My biggest gripe is the wasted WW2 setting, which thematically never bears the fruits that individual moments promise.  #91: High Tension (2003) Yeah, gently caress this poo poo. I usually refrain from spoiling important plot points in these mini-reviews, but I’ll have to make an exception for High Tension because my issues with the film primarily stem from its final reveal. Feel free to skip the next paragraph if you’d rather not know what happens near the end. The story revolves around a young student named Marie, who stays at the family home of her friend Alex in the country. A nameless intruder shows up, kills the family, and kidnaps Alex, forcing Marie to pursue them. However, it turns out that the intruder never existed. Marie killed the family and kidnapped Alex because she was secretly in love with her, all the while believing that her crimes were committed by someone else. It’s almost appropriate that I watched High Tension immediately after The Others, because while the latter is a fantastic example of how a well-done twist can enrich a narrative, the former proves how easily a badly-thought out twist that only serves as a cheap ‘gotcha’ can ruin an otherwise competent execution. Aside from contradicting everything we’ve been shown for the past hour, forcing us to mentally reconstruct the entire plot for ourselves (which, even with the most beneficial reading, still results in more than a few unexplainable discrepancies), the ending also instrumentalises Marie’s homosexuality as driver of mental illness and murderous intent. We’re led to the conclusion that lesbianism explains her actions, a message far more disgusting than the excessive violence the film prides itself on.  #92: The Body Snatcher (1945) Technically the second Lugosi/Karloff collaboration I watched for this challenge, although Lugosi barely features and the two share little screen time. Mostly, this is Karloff’s show, and he handles it with the finesse I’ve come to expect, giving a performance that I can best sum up as affably creepy. Every time he shows up on screen, the mood notably shifts into a much darker direction. Credit also has to go to director Wise who, as in The Haunting, proves himself a master of the mise en scene, convincingly recreating 19th century Edinburgh in a studio lot. The inclusion of real folk songs and numerous mentions of real-life murderers Burke and Hare help make The Body Snatcher feel a lot more like an actual slice of history than the usual horror period pieces from the 30s and 40s. Samuel Clemens fucked around with this message at 19:35 on May 4, 2019 |
|
#
¿
May 4, 2019 18:50
|
|
|
Journeying through the They Shoot Zombies… list #94: Martyrs (2008) I suppose it’s nearly impossible nowadays to go into Martyrs without knowing of its reputation as one of the most brutal horror films to date. It’s not a film you’d catch by accident on a TV channel or that a streaming algorithm would recommend to you, so if you go to the effort of tracking down a copy, you probably did so out of morbid curiosity. Initially, I swore to myself that I wouldn’t spend this entire review talking about its graphical nature because that’s already well-trodden ground. But to be honest, I’m not sure what else there is to talk about. Camerawork and editing are adequate at best and at times outright bizarre (particularly in the first half), and the genre shifts don’t ever seem to coalesce into a satisfying experience. The most interesting aspect is the quasi-religious motivation underlying the villains, but even that is treated in such a curiously off-hand manner that I can’t figure out where the film actually wants to go with it. In the end you’re left with an experience that hinges solely on how disturbing you find the depicted violence. To which I honestly have to admit, not very, I felt rather distanced from the proceedings. Maybe all these years of watching horror have broken me, or maybe I just couldn’t connect to the events on an emotional level because what we’re shown is so abstract. With something like Salò, I can at least see the ideological critique inherent in the torture, but here the nihilism feels so forced, so calculated to upset, that I don’t feel involved. I don’t know, maybe Robert Bresson could have pulled it off.  #96: Jacob’s Ladder (1990) I’d seen Jacob’s Ladder once before, but that was over a decade ago, so I was curious to see how well it holds up. Overall, I came away with positive, if slightly mixed impressions. I still think anything relating to Jacob coming to terms with his death works effectively. The supernatural scenes are seamlessly integrated into the overall structure and the ending feels emotionally satisfying. At the same time, the governmental drug conspiracy angle stuck out like a sore thumb, as it doesn’t fit very well with the main plot. To elaborate, since everything but the Vietnam scenes takes place in Jacob’s head, the Ladder is either his fabrication and thus entirely meaningless or the universe chose an extremely roundabout way of revealing this fact to him by re-creating the entire conspiracy within his head. Additionally, the whole side story messes with the pacing. The second conversation with the chiropractor clearly outlines the film’s themes and offers an explanation for the events we witnessed, so it would make sense to go directly into the conclusion from there. Instead, we’re treated to the chemist interlude, which doesn’t relate to the central metaphor at all and consequently feels like it was taken from a different film. Both ”you see demons because you’re dead” and “you see demons because the government tested a dangerous drug on you” are fine premises, I just don’t see them mixing very well. ------- Jedit posted:"JEEK-ul", but yes. If you come to Edinburgh and start talking about "Dr Jeckle", you will get an eyeroll. It's an Anglicised spelling of the Breton name Gicquel. Let no one say watching horror films isn't educational. Thanks.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2019 16:20
|
|
|
Journeying through the They Shoot Zombies… list #97: Phantasm (1979) An American production that feels distinctly Italian with its unconventional editing style, catchy score, and plot that’s sustained more by mood than coherence. Angus Scrimm is the clear draw, delivering a performance that lies somewhere between Boris Karloff and Nicolas Cage, but there are plenty of other things to keep you entertained as well. One has to admire the novelty of seeing a young kid in pre-Spielbergian times team up with a guitar-playing ice cream vendor and a Harrison Ford lookalike to combat an alien force and its army of dwarves. Even if Phantasm perhaps never quite fully delivers on the surreal imagery that you’d expect from the premise (and that a few tantalising shots hint at), it more than justifies its 90 minutes of goofy fun.  #99: Near Dark (1989) The least campy de Laurentiis production I’ve seen, which is to say it’s still pretty drat campy. Kathryn Bigelow reunites half the cast from Aliens to bring the vampire myth from dusty castles to dusty streets, mixing western and horror with a distinctly 80s punk aesthetic. Sure, it’s little more than a series of rough sketches, and Bigelow’s relative lack of experience becomes apparent in the disjointed edits at times, but by and large, it’s a good time, in no small part due to Bill Paxton’s deliriously unhinged turn as bloodsucker.  #100: The Vanishing (1988) No jump scares (no real scares at all honestly), no special effects, no grisly make-up, and no real surprises to speak of either. Nothing but the unflinching portrayal of a sociopath and the man who’d give everything to learn his secrets. Stanley Kubrick famously called this the most terrifying film he’d ever seen, and I can understand where he’s coming from. Like some of his own works and the similarly excellent Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer, The Vanishing horrifies precisely because it refrains from dramatizing, instead offering a cold, detached look at the darkest recesses of the human soul. It’s also a good example of how arbitrary genre distinctions are to an extent, as nothing outside of maybe the ending possesses the traits we’d usually associate with a horror film. That’s the They Shoot Zombies top 100 rounded out. I’d be lying if I said that all films were equally enjoyable, but as a sort of horror ‘canon’, I think it works rather well, covering just about every subgenre and time period and featuring both obvious classics as well as undervalued cult favourites. Not sure where to go next. I’ll probably take a break from horror for a few days to watch something else, and then maybe continue to round out the top 200. Unless someone has a neat idea. I’m open to suggestions.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2019 01:07
|
|
|
It's pretty well-acclaimed, I'd say. #26 on the Zombies list, #30 on the one Franchescanado posted, and one of the few horror films to make They Shoot Pictures (at a respectable #390). Not at the very top, but then those spots tend to be reserved for the most influential/well-known titles.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2019 16:38
|
|
|
weekly font posted:Lady in the Water manages to edge out The Ring for "most blue movie ever" which is an admirable feat. Surely neither of them holds a candle to Blue?
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2019 05:16
|
|
|
weekly font posted:I've seen Lady in the Water twice but I've never seen a second of the three colors trilogy. I was making a dumb joke about Derek Jarman's Blue, which is literally just him and a few others narrating over a blue screen for 70 minutes.
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2019 10:59
|
|
|
Maniac is one of those films where I just can't see the appeal. Everything it does well was done better in Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer or Vengeance Is Mine. Except for the Savini scene of course. That one's perfection.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2019 18:12
|
|
|
TheBizzness posted:My favorite baseball player isn’t the best baseball player and Henry is probably better than Maniac, but I personally like Maniac more. It's certainly a lot more fun. Well, insofar as that a film about a women-killing serial murderer can be fun, I suppose. Shrecknet posted:Is this your first time seeing it? "Just kidding! A ten, it's a ten!" If you've got a few minutes, here's Maltin himself telling the story of how he ended up in Gremlins 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zd8ktdcdzcc
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2019 00:55
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:I choose all tubi.tv picks based on their titles and cover art. The only true way to select films.
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2019 02:40
|
|
|
Journeying through the They Shoot Zombies… list Apparently, the list was updated to 2019 sometime during the past few days, so the viewing order I planned doesn’t quite fit. Not a huge deal though.  #113: Whatever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962) I guess question marks in titles weren’t considered a bad omen back in 1962. I’d only seen one film by Aldrich before (the excellent Kiss Me Deadly) but that was enough to let me know that he’s not a director to shy away from darkness. And that he loves setting films on the beach. (I think you can even see the beach house from Kiss Me Deadly at one point). Whatever Happened to Baby Jane? lies somewhere between Sunset Boulevard and Misery, an acerbic tale of lost fame turning to delusion and an ostensible caretaker turning abusive. Aside from the gorgeous photography (the film is littered with effective deep focus shots), its main draw lies in seeing acting giants Bette Davis and Joan Crawford together for the first time. Their off-screen rivalry was the stuff of legends, and they’re really having a go at each other here. There’s a fascinating meta-element running through the whole story, although, to the film’s credit, you don’t need to know about the background to enjoy the experience. Whatever Happened to Baby Jane? works excellently as a straightforward thriller as well.  #150: Ginger Snaps (2000) Finally answering the all-important question: What if Ghost World had werewolves? Using lycanthropy as metaphor for puberty is such a good fit that I’m surprised there aren’t more werewolf films which went that route. Ginger Snaps effectively prays upon the teenage fear of our body undergoing changes beyond our control. Even though it lacks a stand-out transformation scene, there is more body horror going on than you usually see within the genre. There are a few digs at the high school environment and the societal perception of sexually active women as well, although those tend to fall flat because they’re not well-woven into the overall narrative and because most side characters are one-dimensional caricatures. The film is at its best whenever it forgets about the external world and focuses on the relationship between two sisters pushed to their limits by an uncertain fate.  #956: Zodiac (2007) I technically didn’t watch this for the challenge, but turns out it’s listed on the newest version of the They Shoot Zombies… list, so what the hell, I’m counting it. The infamous basement scene certainly leaves a much more lasting impression than a lot of other horror films I've seen. As you might infer from the title, the film tells the story of the real-life Zodiac killer and the people who investigated him. Fincher stays relatively close to historical facts, at least in the first two-thirds, showing the entire timeline from the Zodiac’s first murder to his last letter. The connection to real-life both elevates and hinders the film. Elevate in the sense that it gives the depicted events an intensity they would have lacked otherwise. It’s much harder to emotionally disconnect from a violent stabbing if you know it didn’t simply emerge from the mind of the writer. Hinder because real-life doesn’t always write the most satisfying stories. If you’re familiar with the case, you’ll know that the police never managed to convict or even charge anyone for it. The hunt for the Zodiac killer was a decade-spanning wild goose chase, every seemingly important clue turning out to be either a red herring or insubstantial evidence. In awareness of this, the last act of Zodiac desperately tries to build up one of the suspects as the definitive killer, which even if you could make a good case for him (and based purely on what the film tells me, I’m not sure you can), comes across as a weird and honestly kind of gross form of mob justice. I guess that take's a bit hypocritical since I love Stone’s similarly conspiracy-drenched JFK, but at least that film only fingers powerful institutions instead of individuals.  #121: Village of the Damned (1960) George Sanders and creepy children? Sign me up! If Ginger Snaps perfectly encapsulates teenage fears, Village of the Damned must be the nightmare of all middle-aged couples. The idea that your children, the most important people in your life, turn out terrifyingly inhuman and will treat you as nothing more than a useful asset is a rather unpleasant one. Stylistically, the film feels like a lost Twilight Zone episode at times. There’s a distinct lack of visual flair and the low budget becomes quite apparent during the effect-heavy moments, but the whole enterprise is saved by strong writing and acting. At a measly 70 minutes, it’s fairly briskly paced too.
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2019 00:49
|
|
|
"Somewhat of a chore highlighted by a handful of fantastic scenes" sums up most of Fulci's work pretty well.
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2019 01:55
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 19, 2024 00:10 |
|
|
Franchescanado posted:My favorites were The Vanishing, Rob Zombie's Halloween II, and Popcorn. I liked the majority of Trouble Every Day, except Vincent Gallo. What's up, The Vanishing buddy?  Definitely my favourite discovery as well.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2019 01:41
|
|