|
I'm just going to dive in headfirst and nominate myself a squad I can root for: The Brutal Brits - Ben Wheatley & Neil Marshall Kill List Sightseers A Field in England Dog Soldiers The Descent Doomsday
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2020 19:38
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 17:33 |
|
|
I guess this brings up the intersection of the No Cherry Picking rule with Thrillers:Y/N? If thrillers are included and there's no cherry picking then that Joel Schumacher list doubles in size and includes a John Grisham adaptation
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2020 20:40
|
|
|
A sensible ruling
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2020 20:52
|
|
|
Minimum 6, no maximum There's an implied maximum because you can't just keep adding directors to a team that's already at 6+
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2020 21:00
|
|
|
I just went off stuff tagged as horror on letterboxd. I didn't realise The Reckoning had seen general release yet.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2020 21:10
|
|
|
MacheteZombie posted:I'm working on a list of one horror film directors for a team. The Shining?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2020 05:21
|
|
|
Predation Jonathan Glazer - Under the Skin Tomas Alfredson - Let the Right One In David Robert Mitchell - It Follows Michael Powell - Peeping Tom Gerald Kargl - Angst Steven Spielberg - Jaws
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2020 06:14
|
|
|
*throws toys out of pram*
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2020 06:32
|
|
|
Debbie Does Dagon posted:Spielberg needs Duel and some big dinos rolled up in there too. I accept this correction. STAC Goat, could you swap out Spielberg for Alice Lowe - Prevenge in my group please?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2020 18:55
|
|
|
I would absolutely count I Saw The Devil
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2020 04:41
|
|
|
Agents Provocateur Brian De Palma Sisters Carrie Phantom of the Paradise Dressed to Kill Raising Cain Paul Verhoeven RoboCop Hollow Man Elle 4th Man Showgirls
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2020 21:45
|
|
|
Franchescanado posted:Swap out Asia Argento for Panos Cosmatos, son of George P. Cosmatos, and we've got Mandy and Beyond the Black Rainbow to play with. Seconded!
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2020 22:32
|
|
|
Irony.or.Death posted:Hmm, torn here - this feels a little bit like breaking theme. I think today more people know Panos' name than George's even though he had more widely-seen films. If I relax my original interpretation to be more about output than personal reputation it maybe works, though - Tombstone is pretty widely beloved and I think I've seen more positive than negative reactions to Leviathan around here even if it's not anyone's favorite. It's your suggestion, so make sure you're happy with the team! My other option to replace Asia Argento would be Luke Scott, son of Ridley, who made Morgan in 2016. Fits your original vision a little better and we can get Panos in via Team Psychedelia or similar
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2020 23:09
|
|
|
Lost & Found Erik Kristopher Myers Butterfly Kisses Stuart Ortiz Grave Encounters Elliot Goldner The Borderlands Phil Guidry / Simon Herbert / David Whelan Savageland Zachary Donohue The Den Joel Anderson Lake Mungo
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2020 01:03
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:So Tarnop wants to separate the two directors who made Grave Encounters - Stuart Ortiz and Colin Minihan - and just nominate Ortiz because Minihan has 3 other solo films. Now that sits weird with me as a rules guy but like, I'm not gonna cry over Minihan's lost films and we all know we're not REALLY doing "best director." So if no one objects I'll allow this. Speak now or forever hold your peace. I will add that I have two on the reserves list for this team, so if anyone wants Colin Minihan in the tournament it does not put me out in any way to change it.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2020 01:25
|
|
|
After some horse trading in the Discord, STAC Goat is going to put together a team with both Grave Encounters films in it and I will sub out Stuart Ortiz for Christopher MacBride with The Conspiracy
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2020 01:33
|
|
|
TrixRabbi posted:Ok, choosing a few weirdos to toss in here for some true Anything Can Happen action: You beautiful, beautiful goon
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2020 04:49
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:What have I done? 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2020 02:38
|
|
|
Rationally I know that Polanski and Landis' films were made by huge teams and not just the directors, and if some less well known member of the cast or crew instead of the director had turned out to be an abusive piece of poo poo I'd probably never hear about it and would go on happily enjoying their films. But watching a film isn't a cold, rational experience and if thinking about the director's crimes is enough of a distraction then I'm not going to be able to enjoy those films anyway. It turns out that my own personal line is The Tenant. Once you get to "directed by and starring" it becomes too unpleasant of an experience. If this was Reddit or some other nest of edgelords then I'd be concerned about the heel team, and that a group of users would want to push them as far through the tournament as possible. The CineD community is, in my experience, not that.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2020 18:16
|
|
|
Everything Don Bluth has ever made is a horror movie
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2020 04:55
|
|
|
married but discreet posted:Don't put too much pressure on yourself STAC - you're doing a great job, and it's not like you have the horror thread shareholders clamoring for an early start to the tournament. We all know it's a lot of work, and if real life issues are in the way don't feel bad for postponing. 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2020 20:42
|
|
|
Excited for this. There's some great match-ups already e: if we get Evil Bong vs Antichrist in the play-ins I'll be so happy Tarnop fucked around with this message at 00:34 on Dec 27, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2020 00:26
|
|
|
I'm glad I saw Silver Bullet I wish I hadn't seen Last Cannibal World I wish they'd had a competent editor for Urban Legends 3 Easy vote for me
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2021 06:26
|
|
|
Shrecknet posted:Hard no on being forced to watch more garbage from a creator who doesn't appear to know how to make a movie. You've already been bodied for your bad take on the film, so no need for me to dive in there, but I'm not sure what you mean by the bit I've quoted above. e: did you mean more Jonathan Glazer films if this team gets through? If so, have no fear. It's a team of directors with one horror film a piece Tarnop fucked around with this message at 18:15 on Jan 8, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2021 18:11
|
|
|
Gotta sneak Eraserhead in there to find out how they feel about having kids
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2021 08:46
|
|
|
I wish I had something new or interesting to say about these films but I can't add much to the posts made already. Just read Machete Zombie's post again, my feelings are basically the same
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2021 14:50
|
|
|
Bracketology XXV: This time it's just John Carpenter
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2021 00:56
|
|
|
Venkman's an rear end in a top hat?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2021 01:16
|
|
|
It was random, and STAC Goat expressed some frustration either earlier in the thread or in the discord that it had worked out that way
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2021 22:51
|
|
|
I'm happy to throw in new releases as long as they're on VOD Option 1 for me
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2021 09:12
|
|
|
Ghostbusters 2 I'm old enough to have been disappointed by this the first time around, so my viewing was definitely coloured by some form of weird inverse nostalgia. This just feels like a fairly formulaic retread of the first film but with the addition of slime and slime guns so they could make some new toys. The lack of any sense that the Ghostbusters are the underdogs, which was really the core of why the first film was a compelling story, strips away any sense of tension. This film for me is summed up by one scene from the montage. A bored Venkman sitting on a park bench effortlessly catching a ghost that was just going for a jog. No threat, no possibility of failure, and a character going the motions The Faculty In a lot of ways this feels like a film that absolutely stacks the deck and then does its best to lose anyway. The cast is absolutely loaded, and while many of these actors didn't do a great deal after the early noughties, people like Robert Patrick, Famke Janssen and Salma Hayek were still at the peak of their fame here. The premise is not exactly innovative but is a combo of influences that make total sense: one part Body Snatchers, reflecting the overwhelming force of high school conformity, one part The Thing for the sense of paranoia that your friends might turn on you at any moment. Kevin Williamson is doing the thing he does, love him or hate him (I was a total mark for Dawson's Creek and don't really care if self-aware teens have "realistic" dialogue) and just like many of the cast, was at his peak in the late 90s. Robert Rodriguez keeps things moving at a good pace and has great action and horror chops. Oh and the whole third act rules. It's not all good though. Kevin Williamson has a real loving creepy obsession with school kids getting into relationships with their teachers. I can cope with the Hartnett/Janssen stuff for most of the film. He's an edgelord boundary pusher who uses the fact that she's repressed to get one over on teacher, and when she does go all femme fatale seductress it's because she's alien-controlled. However the epilogue has her coyly waving at him at football practice which absolutely casts everything before it in a creepy light, and was a serious misstep. Debbie mentioned, while we were watching, that all the female teachers express their alien metamorphosis by getting a makeover. Being generous to the film-makers, I think they were trying to suggest that it makes people more secure and confident, but it also speaks to their limited imagination that "sexy outfit and make-up" was the best they could come up with for this, and it's very noticeable that all it does to the male teachers is change their personalities. Then there's treating the realisation that Stokely isn't actually a lesbian like some sort of triumphant moment. Ugh. Both GB2 and this film have frankly awful sexual politics, but The Faculty is worse in my book. I was genuinely bored through most of Ghostbusters 2, except for when I was being annoyed at the misogyny and ableism. The Faculty has worse offenses, but when it's not being gross it's actually a well constructed film, so it gets my vote.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2021 11:23
|
|
|
Trouble Every Day This is a difficult film to watch and an even harder one to review. I watched this for the second time for Bracketology, and I liked it more the second time around. I think Claire Denis is a talented director, so I'm going to try to look at the odd decisions in this film as intentional rather than mistakes. This is a film that feels intended to come together at the very end, and in retrospect. Much of the first hour is meandering and lacking context for the things that we see. A man buries bodies while his wife huddles nearby, caked in blood. Two young men hang out in a squat and case a large but run down house. A married couple have the crappiest honeymoon, and leave the audience wondering why they got married in the first place. Things slowly start to come into focus as we see Gallo's character, Shane, trying to track down a doctor who, through flashbacks is revealed to be the corpse-burying man. The two thieves break into the house in an encounter that ends in blood-soaked violence. There's the sense that all these people are living hollow, desperate, purposeless lives and the initial lack of context and connection serves to highlight this. Shane is the only one who seems driven towards any sort of end goal but for most of the film we have no sense of why. I remember all of this being frustrating and causing me to disengage on my first watch, so I can understand people reacting negatively. I agree with Debbie's assessment of Gallo's performance. His line-reads are awkward, he's creepy and off-putting and dead-eyed. But I've seen him in other films and, for all that he's a poo poo in real life, the man can act. So if his performance here is not incompetent but intentional then what is it trying to convey? At the film's conclusion, I think we have our answer: Shane is deeply disturbed, possibly a sociopath. He's a pathological liar, he's incapable of forming real connections with people, treating them only as stepping stones for his predatory goals. It does raise the question of how and why his wife chose to marry him, but we see flashes of his manipulation (he buys her a puppy immediately after he rapes a woman) , and her capacity for self deception (she sees, but chooses to ignore the blood running down the shower curtain) I think there are some clever things going on with the camera work here too. For much of the film, the camera is static, dispassionate and distanced. This changes dramatically during scenes of sex and of violence. The lens is so close that it can be difficult to tell what body part we are seeing. An occasional nipple or navel orients us in space only for the camera to veer off searching hungrily for more flesh. This is the human body both as alluring geometry and as hot meat, intoxicating and all-encompassing. Sex and violence are inextricably linked in language and in art, and this is a film that dives head first into that space while showing us how dead the world feels without it to both Shane and Core. I do think there's a quite reasonable question to be asked about all of this, though. How much do we need another film about a dead-eyed violent man with no interior life, preying on the people around him? How does this film compare to what I consider the best of that genre: Angst and Henry? I think this is where the film falls down. I think the story would be better if it didn't focus so heavily on Shane, and I think those other films tell the story of this kind of character in a more compelling fashion. Rabid This is a complete mess of a film. I'll give the Soskas credit where it's due: I think they have a great eye for a striking shot, and I think their use of lighting is often excellent. Unfortunately almost everything else about this is bad. The acting is terrible across the board with perhaps the exception of Gunther, actor Mackenzie Gray taking his fake psychic from Grave Encounters and splicing it with something from Zoolander. He gives the film its only genuinely funny moments. The pacing is a mess. We spend way too long establishing characterisation that just doesn't pay off once we get to the chaos and violence of the third act. There's absolutely no good reason for this film to be longer than 90 minutes, and it feels like it goes on forever. The effects are pretty mediocre. Body horror should be a chance for imaginative and boundary-pushing effects work but this is all unconvincing prosthetics, cheap tentacles, and buckets of fake-looking blood. Worst of all is the script. My god the dialogue is absolutely atrocious. Overwrought, inhuman, laughable. My vote goes to Trouble Every Day, a flawed and perhaps unnecessary film that still easily beats a completely unneeded car-crash of a remake.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2021 12:32
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:I don't see why it even matters, Louis thinks he helped and the crowd thinks he helped. Louis is a character who seems to never get a break except for that one time when he turned into a dog and the guys helped him, and finally here's a moment where he feels like he can finally repay them and even be one of them! It's a feelgood moment for him, who cares if he really made a difference or not. He didn't gently caress it up, he didn't make it worse, he didn't lock himself out or step on a rake or anything that his character would normally do. He put the gear on and got the gently caress over there and tried his best to help. A true Ghostbuster. This is how I've always interpreted that scene
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2021 21:24
|
|
|
I think if he was an incel (a personality type that definitely would have existed at the time, just unnamed), he'd have gone babysitting as a friend with Janine and just tried it on with her when they were alone. He actually asked her out, which for me just makes him a dorky guy who's awkward around people but generally honest about his feelings.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2021 22:00
|
|
|
Franchescanado posted:If you told me the most divisive match-up that upset people was The Faculty vs Ghostbusters 2, I’d have laughed. Most divisive match up yet
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2021 01:19
|
|
|
This is a fun draw! Other than being mildly irritated at the prospect of seeing Doctor Sleep again, I'm looking forward to the streams
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2021 09:55
|
|
|
I'm interested to see if I've mellowed at all since my first viewing which basically went: - how dare this have the audacity to be longer than the shining - rose the hat is a stupid name and she's not remotely scary or even unsettling - how dare this have the audacity to think I'd be watching it without having seen the shining, and so think it needs to reshoot scenes from that film with worse actors I actually quite like Flanagan as a director, but I think inviting comparisons between himself and Kubrick makes him look like a hack
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2021 10:04
|
|
|
I read a lot of King (although haven't revisited for a while) but I think I only like him on booze and/or coke. I'm glad he got sober for himself and his family, but his writing got less fun for me as a result.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2021 10:15
|
|
|
I actually think the film connects to both King's and Kubrick's versions of the story just fine. Of all the things it tries to do, that is both the most impressive and the most successful. I just didn't find the story especially compelling. King said he wrote Doctor Sleep because people kept asking him what happened to Danny, and that's not a question that ever interested me, so it's a story that started off by having to justify its existence. I don't think it managed that. It has some fun and impressive sequences but I think it needs more than that to be worth almost 3 hours and to be invoking one of the greatest horror films ever made. If it was a tighter film with a more sharply written villain and the confidence to go back to the Overlook while trusting the audience to remember the scenes it was recalling (cut the flashbacks, basically), I'd have liked it a hell of a lot more. It may be that on a second viewing with more grounded expectations I'll be OK with it, and I'm already trying to prepare myself to set aside my emotional reaction from the first viewing and give it the fairest chance I can.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2021 10:30
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 17:33 |
|
|
May vs Reanimator would be an actual decision for me. I like Reanimator a lot but I think From Beyond is the Gordon film that beats or stands toe to toe with all competition
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2021 19:36
|
|