|
There's a guy on letterboxd who does nothing but argue with people who suggest Spielberg was more involved than credits indicate. I don't think it's meant to be a funny gimmick account but it is one, to me. Poltergeist is the first horror movie I ever bought merch for (a shirt), I think it's really excellent. It would be the horror movie I'd show someone young who wanted to see something "scary"
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2021 15:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 14:50 |
|
|
Basebf555 posted:The more you delve into Hooper's filmography the more you understand that the narrative about Spielberg/Poltergeist is like 90% horseshit. The 10% that's true involves the fact that yes, Spielberg was involved and was often on set. Being involved doesn't mean you directed the film, as Spielberg has proven many times over the years with his producing work. There's a difference. If anything, TCM is such an outlier in Hooper's filmography, with the the closest thing like it being Eaten Alive.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2021 15:56
|
|
|
Yeah, I've been blown away by Hooper's catalogue. He's easily the most versatile and ambidextrous of the "Masters of Horror". TCM2 is entirely different from TCM. Even the TCM and Eaten Alive only kind of feel like distant cousins. Eaten Alive is sleazier and almost a character study of one crazy guy's total break down. TCM's comparatively more self reserved and methodical with what it does. So yeah, I see no reason at all to assume Hooper made Poltergeist and its just another thng he did really, really well.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2021 19:50
|
|
|
Today's horror essential is... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQTy554ojoM Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978) This remake of the 1956 classic ditches the Cold War analogy to portray a much more isolating and creeping sense of paranoia. With creature effects to rival any 80s monster flick and themes of modern alienation and sexism, this movie has some career best performances from some great actors as well as setpieces that will haunt you for years to come. Available to stream on Hoopla, available to rent on Cineplex, Apple iTunes and the Microsoft Store If you've already seen this film, might I recommend the 1956 original or the less ambitious 1993 remake?
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2021 22:47
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:Today's horror essential is... Is the 1993 adaptation less ambitious? It's my favorite of the three, and it feels the most relevant to our current times in a lot of ways. What makes it lesser for you?
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2021 22:53
|
|
|
I've owed that one a rewatch for quite some time. Yay! I did watch Hellraiser the other day as well as Books of Blood. Books is whatever. Its apparently very loosely based on anything Barker. The basic idea is kind of interesting and I enjoyed the Britt Robertson story but I think the rest of it kind of doesn't come together and it works too hard to sell the last act that just doesn't quite make it. But Hellraiser is just a great drat film. In paper its not at all something I'd like. The story is thin and loose and the characters are basically one dimensional with no stand out performances. Its overly reliant on style over substance and gore and sex. I don't mind those things at all but they don't work as draws for me either. So its really impressive how much it all just clicks perfectly for me. Good is good and Hellraiser is just a masterpiece of gore and goop and weird eroticism. There may be no better werewolf transformation scene on film than the scene of Frank pulling himself back together early in the film. Its just incredible to watch decades later. And him going through the various stages of developing his layers like a health textbook or something. And the way everything he touch just ends up all goopy and all his clothes and even skin. Its great. Its so gross. The Cenobite stuff is really just that second half cherry on the cake that elevates it and keeps it from running cold. I wore out a VHS copy of Hellraiser when I was young, I've seen it so many times, and I imagine I'll see it plenty times more.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2021 23:19
|
|
Franchescanado posted:Is the 1993 adaptation less ambitious? It's my favorite of the three, and it feels the most relevant to our current times in a lot of ways. What makes it lesser for you? It's mostly the setting, lack of locations and some frankly terrible early digital effects that overall make it feel like a smaller film to me. It's got this... tv movie quality to it? I don't want to demean it or anything, but it doesn't feel as large scale as the other two films. And, to get into spoilers, despite ending ambiguously, it does end with the protagonists essentially defeating the body snatchers and getting away, which is much tidier than how the previous two films end. Plus anytime something is set on a military base I get "the director got tax breaks for filming here" vibes.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2021 00:07
|
|
|
The 93 version is the only one I haven't seen so I'll try to track it down and post some thoughts
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2021 06:12
|
|
|
Not a lot of reviews in this thread so far, is there some kind of thing happening outside of internet forums that's distracting everyone or something? Anyway. Today's horror essential is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BY6syEApk8 Les Yeux Sans Visage While not as fundamentally terrifying and bloody as his documentary Blood of the Beasts, Eyes Without A Face remains Franju's most iconic work. A stripped down, atmospheric, visually haunting story with only a few characters, this film is profoundly affecting in the way few works of art can be. The horror, isolation, tragedy and helplessness of these characters aren't shown to you so much as you are forced to feel them yourself, like a psychic intrusion. While the dialogue in this film is pointed and clever and layered with meaning, Franju knows better than any director that a picture is worth a thousand words, and few can match his mastery of visual language, which is on full display here. You owe it to yourself to watch this melancholy masterpiece. Available for streaming on the Criterion Channel
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 23:26
|
|
|
Its also on HBO Max. Finally one I haven't seen. Definitely gonna make time for that one.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2021 23:36
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:It's mostly the setting, lack of locations and some frankly terrible early digital effects that overall make it feel like a smaller film to me. It's got this... tv movie quality to it? I don't want to demean it or anything, but it doesn't feel as large scale as the other two films. And, to get into spoilers, despite ending ambiguously, it does end with the protagonists essentially defeating the body snatchers and getting away, which is much tidier than how the previous two films end. The part that always stuck with me when I watched it on a free HBO weekend when I was 12 is when the kid goes to wake up his mother and her face collapses right as he reaches out to touch her. That hits some deep childhood anxieties. I also remember being disappointed that there wasn’t more nudity, but that was how I felt about most movies then.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2021 02:27
|
|
Antifa Turkeesian posted:The part that always stuck with me when I watched it on a free HBO weekend when I was 12 is when the kid goes to wake up his mother and her face collapses right as he reaches out to touch her. That hits some deep childhood anxieties. I also remember being disappointed that there wasn’t more nudity, but that was how I felt about most movies then. The movie's plenty horny as it is, and you definitely get the feeling Ferrara would've crammed in more nudity if the producers had let him.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2021 02:37
|
|
|
Today's Horror Essential is... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjiyV8mtXiU Child's Play https://twitter.com/JayBauman1/status/880545634301820929 Much like the previous Big Franchise entries, this time I'm asking you to watch any entry in the Child's Play series you haven't seen. The original Chld's Play is a masterfully creepy execution of a simple horror concept, but the sequels are never content to recreate the original, and veer off into increasingly unpredictable directions. This series is certainly an underdog compared to the massive success of Nightmare on Elm Street, Friday the 13th and Halloween, but there's a creativity, artistry and practical effects prowess in these films that rivals any bigger budget horror series. Brad Dourif is an amazing and underrated performer and the highlight of every single entry in this strange series who's tone changes every film, and his and Don Mancini's dedication to the character and his universe over the decades are admirable. If you've only seen one or two entries in the little horror franchise that could, you owe it to yourself to check more out. Oh and there's a remake I guess. Most of the franchise is available to rent on Youtube, Google Play Movies, Apple TV Store, and the Microsoft Store
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2021 02:32
|
|
|
I swear I intend to watch these or substitutes for them. Just time. I have however seen every singly Child's Play movie including the remake. And every Mancini film. And every Holland film. So maybe I'll save myself some time and skip this entry.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2021 03:32
|
|
|
I met Alex Vincent at a con once and he was incredibly humble and kind. One of my top horror celeb meetings.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2021 04:43
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:Most of the franchise is available to rent on Youtube, Google Play Movies, Apple TV Store, and the Microsoft Store The 2 numbered sequels and Bride and Seed of Chucky are all currently free to watch (with ads) in Peacock.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2021 20:34
|
|
|
I think they're all up on Showtime at the moment if you have it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2021 20:37
|
|
|
I'd seen the original, so I watched Child's Play (2019) to compare. Making Chucky part of the Internet of Things was clever and worked really well. I wasn't sold on Aubrey Plaza initially, but she quickly grew on me. I'm not sure if the kid group was necessary- sometimes they were trying too hard to capitalize on the whole 80s Stranger Things trend and it felt forced and excessively twee, but other times it was hilarious and was worth it if only for the the watermelon-face part. rear end in a top hat boyfriend ladder + plow-machine (?? I don't own a lawn) murder was good poo poo. The weakest kill was definitely Doreen's- she was nice  and the "driverless car run amok" is cliched. I was genuinely upset when I thought they had killed Detective Mike too, that would have been too cruel. The rest of the store rampage scenes were great (also loved the detail of Andy tripping immediately after his dramatic final-battle entrance, I wonder if that was accidental).Bonus points for a mix of diverse characters. I'm glad the hearing aid was just a normal part of his life and not a Plot Point that miraculously saved the day. The first half was stronger than the second, but overall, a good mix of big laugh-out-loud humor with rather shocking levels of gore- I definitely cringed a few times. It balances and contrasts well with the sillier aspects though. I bet this would have been a great movie to watch in a theaterful of horror fans or at a halloween party. In conclusion, I'm as pleasantly surprised as when I saw the original.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2021 03:58
|
|
|
Today's horror essential is... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMYIvtiTtD8 The Exorcist 3 To call this film underrated is akin to calling the original Exorcist 'influential'. Writer William Peter Blatty's second and last directorial outing is tonally completely different from the original Exorcist, even going so far as recasting some central characters, and yet it is a masterpiece of tension, mood, discomfort, despair, and terror. Brad Dourif gives the performance of a lifetime as the central antagonist, which is especially remarkable since the studio made Blatty reshoot every single scene involving his character. This film explores the dissolution of faith in all its forms, the banality of evil, the bitterness of life, and the existential terror what lies beyond. The greatest shame in the world is that this film is sandwiched between very terrible Exorcist sequels, when it's the only film worthy of the title.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2021 23:22
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:Today's horror essential is... It's very rare that a horror film is "talkative," let alone making that a central highlight of the whole thing, but The Exorcist III makes it work. You can tell that a writer is helming the whole thing, but I think Blatty is underrated as a director of actors, because everyone is great in this. (Yes, Dourif is probably the highlight, but George C. Scott is also doing fantastic work here and gets probably 2 of the 3 best monologues in the film.) Make sure to jump on this one if you haven't.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2021 19:09
|
|
|
Class3KillStorm posted:It's very rare that a horror film is "talkative," let alone making that a central highlight of the whole thing, but The Exorcist III makes it work. You can tell that a writer is helming the whole thing, but I think Blatty is underrated as a director of actors, because everyone is great in this. (Yes, Dourif is probably the highlight, but George C. Scott is also doing fantastic work here and gets probably 2 of the 3 best monologues in the film.) Make sure to jump on this one if you haven't. Agreeing with this. Exorcist III has a lot of great dialogue and the relationship between Kinderman and Dyer is very well portrayed. The other movie Blatty directed, The Ninth Configuration, is also very much worth checking out, though it’s not strictly horror, but horror adjacent.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2021 19:15
|
|
|
Scott's "I Believe" speech at the end is pretty great.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2021 19:28
|
|
|
I watched a YouTube video about how people need to re-evaluate Exorcist III and it was good, if I can figure out who made it I'll post the link (Watch it turn out to have been a CD Poster)
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2021 13:37
|
|
|
If it was a CD poster it would have been about Exorcist II.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2021 14:35
|
|
|
Exorcist II is good 
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2021 15:13
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:Exorcist II is good Yes, but everyone already knows Exorcist III is good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2021 15:18
|
|
|
Exorcist II is.... certainly not worth labeling the worst film ever
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2021 16:23
|
|
|
It's just funny that they got Boorman to do this highly anticipated sequel and then everyone was like "wait a second, this is kinda weird!" as if he hadn't just made Zardoz a few years before.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2021 16:38
|
|
|
El Gallinero Gros posted:I watched a YouTube video about how people need to re-evaluate Exorcist III and it was good, if I can figure out who made it I'll post the link Red Letter Media? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIC6D77YYgY
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2021 16:52
|
|
|
Exorcist II is certainly somewhere in the middle of "worst movie" and "good". But it's definitely neither of those.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2021 19:06
|
|
|
Exorcist II is the rollercoaster version of The Exorcist, stripped of all nuance and depth, and then cranked to 11. As long as you go in knowing that it's fine, just fine, otherwise it probably would seem like a huge disappointment. It's certainly not as good as Zardoz.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2021 19:13
|
|
|
Apologies for missing my deadline. Your next horror essential is.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UCJz617E8s Dead of Night (1945) One of the very first horror anthology films, with 4 directors presenting 6 frightening tales, this film is extremely ahead of its time. While not every single tale is a classic, the overall quality of the production belies its simple presentation and its obviously dated dialogue. With a simple framing device of people telling each other spooky stories, this film manages to dance between comedy, terror, drama, the surreal, the mystical and more. The movie's last tale and ending are particularly memorable, but the entire ride is a masterpiece worth taking the time to watch. Available for streaming on Kanopy
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2021 10:08
|
|
|
I like Dead of Night a lot! I watched it last year. It's really cool to see an old anthology and how they set up the format with the wrap-around story. Wouldn't say it's incredible but the last story in the group (ventriloquist dummy shenanigans) is great fun.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2021 14:42
|
|
|
I just watched Dead of Night for the October challenge, and it owns hard.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2021 16:59
|
|
|
Dead of Night's great. I rewatched it over Christmas and its just the complete bar for wraparound anthologies.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2021 22:04
|
|
|
Today's Horror Essential is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2H-3ObsUEfo The Texas Chainsaw Massacre Perhaps the single most important proto-slasher ever made, and one of the most famous films in horror history. Tobe Hooper's masterpiece is gritty, unflinching, unrelenting, and unforgettable. Infamously, despite having very little gore and violence shown on screen, the film is brutal and unnerving, leaving several critics shaken to their core after seeing it. This movie is so good and the name is so iconic that they just won't stop making terrible sequels, prequels and remakes of it, but nothing compares to the simple and realistic style horror of the original. If you've never seen this one because it's from the 70s or because you basically know all the beats from reading reviews and seeing references, now's your chance to see the movie that forever associated chainsaws with horror. Available for streaming on the Criterion channel and Shudder. Available to rent on Youtube, Google Play, iTunes and the Microsoft store.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 00:08
|
|
|
Possibly my favorite horror movie.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 00:30
|
|
|
I think my favourite thing about Hellraiser is how they clearly shot it in a miserable corner of London but awkwardly dubbed a bunch of incidental characters to be American and never clearly specify it's in England. I think they even had US style cops show up too. Honestly just adds to it's weird atmosphere.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2021 16:41
|
|
|
Spatulater bro! posted:Possibly my favorite horror movie. Absolutely fuckin same, I've seen it at least a dozen times and it never gets old.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2021 14:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 14:50 |
|
|
Today's horror essential is... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YadApPG8W7Q Kwaidan Director Masaki Kobayashi is best known for his dramas and war films, films that examine Japan's shifting culture in the wake of WW2 and the poisonous effect that warfare has on the human condition. So it's very interesting that he made such a visually striking and fantastical anthology of ghost stories. Retelling a series of very old folk tales, this film is more captivating than it is frightening, blending stage-like visuals with modern cinematic techniques and dynamic camera movements to create a dreamlike effect. The colors in this film are as vivid as Suspiria, and each tale creates an entirely different mood with its color palette. The film is 3 hours long, and the standout tale, Oichi the Earless, could very well be its own feature, but the entire thing is worth sitting through. Make some time and put on your reading glasses to watch this phenomenal feature. This is another one you'll want to watch in the highest definition available. Available for streaming on the Criterion channel, available to rent on iTunes tv, Google Play and Youtube
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2021 23:27
|
|