|
TrixRabbi posted:Eh, I think it should be on the respective quality of the films. If Jordan Peele runs up against Herschell Gordon Lewis, Lewis may have been around long enough to have a full filmography but did he make anything remotely as good as Get Out? That's a debate to be had when we get to the matchups and I think it's fair. The directors with smaller filmographies are in here because they've so far proven themselves exceptional in a way that warrants graduation into the big leagues. By their inclusion at all, we're saying they can hold their own against guys who've specialized in this genre for decades. Can two great horror movies beat out entire filmographies is a worthwhile question we'll put to the test. Burkion posted:There are also cases like with James Whale who only ever got to make the four horror films due to bullshit going on at the time. An openly gay man getting screwed over by the studio and then shut out of the industry in the 40s, and then the latter portion of his life, he never had the chance to make more than what he did. Sorry if I make no sense, I'm going through some heavy personal poo poo at the moment. I've been kinda thinking along these tangents regarding the directors with a small qualifying filmography. With Whale, I feel there's enough extenuating circumstances such as the studio bullshit which is why he's got the small amount compared to someone like Polanski who's got what...Rosemary's Baby, Fearless Vampire Killers, Ninth Gate and Repulsion out of his entire catalog which to me makes Whale qualify for the lost potential but Polanski doesn't because he chose to only make that few.
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2020 09:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 03:26 |
|
|
STAC Goat posted:I was researching Twin Peaks to figure out if I had to watch the series before I watch the movie and... Considering it's Twin Peaks, it actually makes perfect sense.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2020 06:04
|
|
|
Burkion posted:Okay, proper continuity for watching is kind of straight forward If we ever do brackets for most convoluted franchise order, I vote Godzilla.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2020 07:51
|
|
|
Shrecknet posted:
I remember when I saw the original Amityville Horror at the show. The big takeaway was 'Holy poo poo the property damage...how would you even list that with insurance?'.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2020 10:26
|
|
|
Jedit posted:Stephen King said the same thing in Danse Macabre. He was at a screening and heard someone moaning in horror, "Oh God... the bills." And the one true ringing moment for him was when the money Lutz is given for the repairs by his brother in law vanishes. He described it as an economic horror movie. It does make sense. Even more when you envision trying to deal with an insurance company over this. "Yeah, I know you don't cover Acts of God, but this is an Act of Satan and I've gone over all the fine print and there's nothing saying you don't cover Acts of Satan."
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2020 11:56
|
|
|
Debbie Does Dagon posted:For a more successful version I really have to recommend that you watch my future boyfriend Jeremy Brett as Holmes. The '84 Adventures of Sherlock Holmes series with him has to be one of the best adaptations I've seen yet.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2020 09:01
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:I really regret making a big thing of it because I've been having fun this whole time. I know it hasn't come off that way and the more I say "No, I'm joking" the more it will sound like I'm bsing. But like, really once we got past the qualifying debates I truly did just go "Hey, it may not be what I want but I'm gonna watch a bunch of movies I never saw before and that's cool and fun." I totally did that Wes video specifically to try and show I was goofing around. I just regret that all my "sham" stuff apparently flopped as badly it it has and I feel bad if it annoyed or bothered anyone. I freely admit part of me was hoping Last House would make it solely because way back in the first October Ironman I was in, one of the Fran challenges was having someone pick a movie for you to watch and a friend of mine picked Cabin in the Woods. I still hate Cabin in the Woods as much as I ever have, but writing the review I did was strangely cathartic and sizzled out the ragey-ness out of my hate for the film. I was thinking if you were able to write out something like my original CitW review, it'd be cathartic for you too.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2020 12:54
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:I have like this whole rant about how we horror fans are kind pretentious tools I'm the only person who likes Haunted World of El Superbeasto.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2020 09:34
|
|
|
Shrecknet posted:It's also worth noting the remake of House on Haunted Hill enjoys a game Geoffrey Rush going all out, while BOTH remakes of Black Christmas suck out loud and are just the loving worst. With those early Dark Castle films, they did try some unique tangents while still delivering a decent story for the most part. Even Ghost Ship, while the bulk of the film was pretty rote, it was doubtful anything was going to top That Scene in the beginning. The Black Christmas films just dropped the ball with treating the concept as just 'killings happening around Christmas' and giving lackluster or 'same poo poo take two' plots.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2020 09:27
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:The most you can really peg it on is some male gazing and sexual objectification, but I think Rodriguez does a good job giving most of the women some power. From what I remember reading, Harvey Weinstein had Rose McGowan blacklisted after he raped her and Rodriguez purposely wrote the role of Cherry for her as a middle finger to Weinstein to not only defy the blacklist but also have Weinstein pay for it.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2020 16:20
|
|
|
married but discreet posted:
We probably could do brackets on what constitutes a horror film.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2020 19:29
|
|
|
TrixRabbi posted:Raimi and Campbell have both been pretty clear that the intent was to show clips from the original at the beginning but no longer had the rights to the film. (Remember, a lot of horror sequels at this time felt the need to refresh the audience, see the first few Friday the 13th sequels). They needed to recap the first film so the quickest way to do that was to cut the extra characters, trim it to Ash and Linda, and retell it in a way that was as fast as possible. When the demon attacks Ash and knocks him out is where the first film ends, where Ash wakes up outside just as night is about to fall again is when Evil Dead 2 proper begins. From what I remember when Evil Dead 2 hit the shows, a lot of people had no idea the first film existed and it was kinda iffy if you could find a rental copy of it. I had enough people wanting to see the bootleg I had at the time I ended up charging them recipes for viewings. For how good some like the lemon squares and toffee bars recipes are, it was worth it.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2020 15:52
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:
Some years back I sat through an interview with Cronenberg where they specifically asked him about his earlier films, particularly Shivers and he said that he'd been working through stuff he had going on in his head at the time. For how many times I've rewatched Shivers and catch something I didn't notice before, I still can't help but wonder what the flying gently caress was going on in that man's head back then.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2020 08:10
|
|
|
Debbie Does Dagon posted:
How/where is this being held? I can't seem to find a link or thread for it.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2020 13:38
|
|
Vincent Price Sunday Chill Stream, on the CineD Discord 
With special guests Frankenweenie and The Shape of Water 
|
My Thoughts on the Frankenweens and Shape of Water While I liked both Frankenweens, I'd have to say I liked the '84 one a skosh more than the '12 one. It felt like a tightly paced story while the '12 one felt like it was padded out to where it felt adding more might not've been the best choice to roll with. I loved all the little classic horror nods and references, but they did make it feel a bit overlong in parts. I did chuckle at how much Sparky in the '12 version looked like Family Dog from the old TV show and that ep of Amazing Stories. I did get a bit sniffly in my empathizing with Victor's love for Sparky and resurrecting him. The '12 one would be a great double feature with Paranorman. With Shape of Water, I hadn't seen it when it came out due to tight money/lack of free time, but I heard plenty about the fish sex. One of my co-workers at the call center I worked at back then would refer to the movie as Grinding Nemo and more than a few people I knew who went to see it talked about it as if it was opening to end credits very hot fish sex so needless to say, I wasn't in any hurry to watch it despite making a point to see everything else Del Toro's made. But if my Murder Party viewing taught me anything, it's if I'm not sure about a film, I need to watch it with Goons since there's going to be enough commentary and perspectives to help things along. First, if I ever bump into that former co-worker, I really want to ask her if she even sat through the drat movie. Same goes for the others since they seriously did the film a disservice in the describing. Overall, I mostly liked it, just not as much as I like Pan's Labyrinth. I have to agree with STAC Goat that while Del Toro's a good director, he just blows it out of the water with fairy tales. I wouldn't mind seeing him tear through adaptations of the original Grimm's Fairy Tales (skip the anti-semitic ones though) to see what he comes up with. I also have to agree with Debbie Does Dagon in it could've skipped some of the side intrigues because they did clutter the stronger multiple romance aspects. I'm still debating which to vote for since they're both pretty equal with a good core story but do also have extra clutter that both could do without and still be fine.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2020 14:09
|
|
|
married but discreet posted:I still think it's really funny to describe sweet and thoughtful Shape of Water as a nonstop fish fuckfest. I chalk it up to too many who work in call centers got issues.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2020 15:15
|
|
|
Debbie Does Dagon posted:I'm kicking myself that I didn't double bill Shape of Water with Splash. You just made me remember something I've not thought about in decades. There used to be a mostly sci-fi magazine called Starlog and sometime during the 80s they ran some articles that were what we'd consider fanlore theorizing on certain franchises such as for the old Planet of the Apes franchise it was a closed loop of despite the fairly optimistic ending of Battle '73, over time Ape society still ends up breaking down to the Ape/Human divide so the first film happens. They had done one for merfolk that connected the Creature of the Black Lagoon with Splash where if I remember rightly they were either servitors or the fishing caste of Atlantean society with the classic mermaid types being the ones who interacted with surface society and being the go-betweens with the ones that resembled the Creature who were more adapted to deep sea work. The article postulated that both species had their reproductive others on the surface as a safety measure and Shape of Water pretty much follows that idea. I don't know if there's an archive out there for Starlog, but the articles were pretty interesting ideas to roll around the head.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2020 13:45
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:I definitely didn't mean to undermine him. I agree he does it with purpose. I just always end up feeling he pushed it that extra step further. But maybe that's just me and my prudish sensibilities than some. At times it does feel like he goes that extra when he doesn't have to. I'm brainfarting on which film of his it was, but he'd well established how bad the bad guys were with torture and worse, but then there had to be the scene of a woman getting her nipples razorbladed off. It felt more like just in case someone blinked during all the other horrific stuff the bad guys had done so far, better toss in this to ensure everyone knows these bad guys are the worst. It's that sort of stuff that's pushed me away from watching the extreme stuff. I guess I'm at that stage in life where going the hardcore grue's just not going to cut it. Give me more like good atmosphere, good tension, good story, solid acting and now we're talking.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2020 20:28
|
|
|
Being that not much has been said about 'Salem's Lot compared to Society, I'm stepping up to the podium to speak for it. The book was the first one I read of Stephen King's and if I have to pick a top favorite, it's this one. The 'Lot's like every other sleepy small town that's slowly dying off and is a perfect feeding ground for a vampire. The tension's paced well as at first a few townies feeling under the weather, then the deaths start. The group that becomes the vampire hunters need convincing first that vampires are real and after that, they're kinda inept at the task. The ending is one of the rare 'Holy poo poo, King managed an okay ending in something not a short story'. The '04 miniseries is closer to the book but is lacking in parts on execution of concept. I do recommend the sequel story, 'One for the Road' in the Night Shift anthology. The original 2 parter miniseries was a big deal back in the day. I think it was the second major adaptation of his work. It is very much a product of its time and airing medium. For 1979 the effects are pretty good and they did what they could scriptwise for airing on CBS while sticking close enough to the book. I feel they made a good choice combining characters and trimming out subplots. They were the sort of thing that works fine in a book or a full season series, but would make things cluttered for a 2 part miniseries. Another nice touch was the route they took with depicting the vampires. At the time it was pretty much the cultured aristocrat depiction, so seeing something looking like Count Orlok that growls and snarls with the other vampires looking dead with light reflecting eyes while slipping into a more bestial state with their only sense of self being devotion to The Master was something new and different. It pushed the aspect of inhuman apex predator front and center. Barlow was terrifying not only in appearance but seeing things like him casting aside a cross was new unless one saw the episode of Night Gallery where a vampire hunter learned crosses don't work on Jewish vampires. I don't know anyone who watched the original broadcast who didn't near jump out of their skin when Barlow first appears. According to my Mom, when Barlow appeared, I pretty much crossed the living room in the blink of an eye to join her on the couch. There is also a 'theatrical' cut of the series that was made for European release that was filmed along with the miniseries. It mostly differs in how some scenes were shot so if this is the only version you can find to stream, it's a fine substitute. I know quite a few who prefer it to the original miniseries. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P43PvM5a8Is Considering this one's up against Society, they do share the element of wealthy feeding on the poor. Society's just more overt on the commentary, while 'Salem's Lot's the more insidious aspect of a wealthy big wheel coming to a small town and draining it dry (no pun intended) then moving on. We've all heard of small towns where a big company sets up operations to where the town becomes dependent on the work from the company only to be royally screwed when that company pulls up stakes and goes elsewhere. Here, Barlow and Straker (wealthy enough to travel all around Europe) are opening up a pricy antique shop and even purchase the rumored haunted Marsten House which has been on the market for years. The townspeople are hoping the antique shop might bring in new money from wealthy tourists out antiquing not to mention how much it'd cost for the Marsten House to get fixed up with that money being spent in town. Instead, they're just dinner on legs for Barlow and his growing brood.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2020 09:36
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:I kinda want to get my hands on the bad sequel, remake, and book but who has the time? So many movies to watch. Interesting tidbit is Larry Cohen pitched to direct 'Salem's Lot, but the producer chose Hooper after seeing Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Makes sense since they're both dying small town settings. The '04 version I saw back when I still did the mail the disc sub with Netflix, I haven't been able to find it streaming anywhere that's not sketchy. Book's not a huge read like some of King's other stuff. I'd put it at longer than Carrie but shorter than Night Shift or Everything's Eventual.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2020 10:26
|
|
|
TrixRabbi posted:It's not so much criticizing Ebert for having wrong opinions, moreso calling him a plague upon the horror genre. Like, I think it's not particularly fair to Ebert, a critic and writer who had a deep and wide passion for film, but also the guy came from a traditional newspaper background and was writing for mass audiences as opposed to the in depth, nuanced critique you might find in a New Yorker or Film Comment (or even the fan zines and Fangorias of the world for that matter). It feels like a narrow attack on his entire career and him as a person, rather than these particular reviews (it's worth noting he gave 4 stars to Dawn of the Dead and would speak highly of Godzilla vs. Hedorah). I'm not saying don't criticize the guy, I just don't know if you can singularly blame him for the worst excesses in modern film criticism without also recognizing the positive and inspiring influence he also had on the medium. I do consider Ebert a shitheel for doxxing Betsy Palmer because she was in Friday the 13th, spoiling the ending of that film, and calling for people to confront the people behind Silent Night, Deadly Night for making the film.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2020 02:20
|
|
|
Kangra posted:That was Gene Siskel who gave out the town where she lived and deliberately spoiled the ending. They were both shitheels on Sneak Previews when it came to horror. I agree with Burkion that with the platform they had, they did significantly influence how mainstream critics lambaste horror films.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2020 05:16
|
|
|
married but discreet posted:I don't know, sounds like a trap to me. On the scale of weird requests I've received in my life, this is pretty tame.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2020 17:37
|
|
|
TrixRabbi posted:The Devils is still quite blasphemous but more importantly it's 100% good. On the scale of 'I feel I sat through something blasphemous and might need to go to Confession over it', I'd put Alucarda above The Devils on that scale.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2020 23:13
|
|
|
TrixRabbi posted:Ok but please refer to my latter point I wasn't knocking The Devils saying it's not a good movie. I've sat through various edits and still a good movie. But when it comes down to that edge of 'I think I just sat through something genuinely blasphemous/sacriligious' discomfort, Alucarda has it more than The Devils does.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2020 18:11
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:We never got to watch Night for the tournament so I'm tempted to do Night > Return > Return 2 > Return 3 > Return 4 > Return 5. It would cover a fair amount of films. 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2020 18:30
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 03:26 |
|
|
This was fun. Much thanks to everyone who pulled this together form the listings to the streams.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2020 10:33
|
|