This was directed before James Wan, before the Blumhouse Productions train started rolling but right in the middle of the SAW train. Basic premise is that a man is trying to solve the murder of his wife, which he believes may be connected to some folklore from his hometown. The premise and overall story are fine, with some decent foreshadowing and suspense building, although the movie kinda suffers in the writing department. There are a lot of cliche-sounding lines and characters talking to themselves out loud. And the rules of the antagonist lend the movie a lot of opportunities for jumpscares (most of which the movie takes), but it's actually a pretty good way to build tension and I wish they did something with it other than loading up for the jumpscare. The appearance of the antagonist herself is mainly why I like the movie. I have a weird fear of Victorian clothing ghosts (high collars with long necks and dresses that cover the feet so the ghost just floats everywhere) and uncanny valley stuff. Since it's technically not a very good film I guess this falls into "guilty pleasure" for me but no one ever seems to call me out on liking the movie like they do for Van Helsing so *shrug*
I suppose hate is a strong word, but I strongly dislike Coppola's Dracula. Oldman is obviously great as usual, and yeah, it's a gorgeous film... but that's about it. I just really hated most of the characters, in terms of both writing and acting - especially Mina. Plus it's always annoyed me that Coppola had the gall to call it "Bram Stoker's Dracula" after changing the story so much.
Every adaptation of Dracula runs smack dab into the same problem: the novel is fundamentally impossible to adapt to film. Sure, Coppola's film includes some of the epistolary storytelling of the novel for some of the transitions, but that gets abandoned fairly early on to never return. Honestly, it's better to say that the films are more informed by the book than they are adapted.
That being said, Dracula: Pages from a Virgin's Diary is faithful to a degree that you wouldn't expect a black & white silent adaptation of a stage ballet to be. I think it is the only one that remembers the bit when Harker cuts Dracula and money pours out of the wound, so that gives it a ton of points right there.
Fun fact, the first Dracula film I ever saw as a young kid was
Dracula Dead and Loving It
.
Having just watched the 1931 version earlier today it's funny to see how much it takes off from that version rather than the Coppola one that was the most recent adapation at the time.
As for the Coppola one, it's pretty hammy and cheesy and several of the deviations from the book are for the worse (mainly making Dracula more sympathetic/romantic) but it's enjoyable for its design work and Oldman.
Fun fact, the first Dracula film I ever saw as a young kid was
Dracula Dead and Loving It
.
Having just watched the 1931 version earlier today it's funny to see how much it takes off from that version rather than the Coppola one that was the most recent adapation at the time.
As for the Coppola one, it's pretty hammy and cheesy and several of the deviations from the book are for the worse (mainly making Dracula more sympathetic/romantic) but it's enjoyable for its design work and Oldman.
Fun fact, the first Dracula film I ever saw as a young kid was
Dracula Dead and Loving It
.
Having just watched the 1931 version earlier today it's funny to see how much it takes off from that version rather than the Coppola one that was the most recent adapation at the time.
As for the Coppola one, it's pretty hammy and cheesy and several of the deviations from the book are for the worse (mainly making Dracula more sympathetic/romantic) but it's enjoyable for its design work and Oldman.
He is. Peter MacNicol's more comic impression of him is terrific though, and while it's been a number of years since I saw Bram Stoker's Dracula I recall Tom Waits being good, though of course his role was smaller since it followed the book's Renfield.
Started with a double feature since I got home early and the timing worked out.
1. Flatliners (1990) - Shudder
With the new one releasing, I figured to watch the original as well. Keifer Sutherland wants to peek past death and enlists a few friends to help him, and things start to go poorly as they go deeper. I had heard he was in it, but the overall main cast was really good (him, Kevin Bacon, Julia Roberts, lawyer from West Wing, and a Baldwin brother). It doesn't entirely hit things, but it's got a great vibe and it's really fun to watch.
2. Flatliners (2017) - Theater
I watched the original, put my shoes on, and got to the theater in time for the new one. Ellen Page is great, and it has a neat visual style, but it's fairly disappointing. It mostly did nothing new with the concept
(besides apparently unlocking all your memories now?), and it wasted Kiefer's cameo (he's fine, but just having him as the professor and not reprising his role in a plot thread is a shame)
Day 1 as mostly be centered on the king of the undead
Movie 1 - Dracula (1931) [NEW] Movie 2 - Dracula 2000 [NEW] Movie 3 - Dracula (1979) [NEW] Movie 4- The Creature from The Black Lagoon [NEW]
I will say it was fascinating watching Dracula movies from 3 very distinct eras. My big takeaway is that less is more. The original was by far my favorite. A nice, simple story with a compelling actor in the lead role. He did so much with his eyes. Also watched the version without much of a score and just adds to the atmosphere.
Dracula 2000 on the other hand was just dreadful. It reeks of a late 90s movie, and trying to modernize everything just means slightly overdone in so many ways.
Dracula 79 is a bit of a mixed bag. It has a nice narrative and solid actors. Unlike the original it adds a beefier climax as well. Granted, it's a bit silly and over the top, but it's there.
The Creature from the Black Lagoon was a good time. It reminded me a lot like Jaws. Though by the end I wondered why didn't they set up some sort of system for folks to scout incase the Creatured snuck on the boat for like the 100th time. Also the creature design was top-notch!
About to indulge in Dracula's Daughter and Son of Dracula when they air on TCM in about an hour so guess back with those updates soon!
I watched the first Phantasm two days back. The first had one of the best scores, and was wildly inventive and neat. The second is definitely a good time, but comes off more as an action movie than a horror film. It isnt as original as the first, and has some sequel repeating traits. It also had a hilarious sex scene that ends with a grenade going off, so it has that going for it! The four barrel shotgun deserved more screen time.
They sure are! I watched Train to Busan earlier today and The Wailing's on my list. Train to Busan was a great zombie flick that also made me kinda cry a little and that was uhh weird.
A recent Irish Indie release, A Dark Song covers a woman who, in her grief over her dead son, enlists the help of an Gnostic/Kabbalah occultist to speak to him again. The two isolate themselves for months conducting the ritual, placing them at odds against themselves, their own internal problems, and whatever spirits they may or may not be contacting.
Like many horror movies, this one is best seen with knowing as little as possible about it. There's all kinds of interesting ideas and imagery throughout, but the best part is the relationship between the woman and the occultist. Their interactions range from comfortable to deeply unsettling. It doesn't ever cross some of the boundaries you'd expect it to, thankfully, but it's still a difficult psychological experiment overall. The performances carry the day. Each is outstanding.
On a different note: The ending goes some places that are frankly, pretty unexpected given the darkness the rest of the movie lives in. That being said, everything fits thematically and the ending hit me with more of an impact because of its contrast to literally everything else before.
All in all, highly recommended, and it's only 90ish minutes so I mean, why not?
They sure are! I watched Train to Busan earlier today and The Wailing's on my list. Train to Busan was a great zombie flick that also made me kinda cry a little and that was uhh weird.
The story of Halloween as a franchise is as simple as such: they made a masterpiece, and then made the mistake of giving it sequels. The understated elegance of the original never seemed to catch on in the subsequent films, though not from lack of trying. Indeed, the filmmakers did go to some lengths to replicate John Carpenter's reserved style, though never quite grasping the delicate balance of suspense, expert framing and terror that Carpenter managed to make look easy. A lot of that can be blamed for how much more elaborate the mythology of the series became, starting with the big revelation of the first sequel that Laurie was, in fact, Michael's younger sister that was put into a foster family shortly after he killed his older sister. Aside from the unrelated third film, that fact became a jumping off point for the fourth and fifth films, as we followed Laurie's daughter Jamie as her paths would also cross with Michael. The fifth film ended with a rather large cliffhanger, as Michael is dragged away by mysterious strangers while Jamie looks on. It would be six years before we got the answers to those question, and unsurprisingly, the ones we get in Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers are as disappointing and uninteresting as they get.
As it turns out, there's a cult going around that has put all of their faith in Michael to do his thing, though to what ends remains fuzzy at best even by the end of the film (for this, I watched the producer's cut, which is said to clarify a lot of elements that went unexplained in the theatrical version, which must mean that the theatrical version must be truly incoherent). There's more to it that involves poor Jamie's fate, the legacy of the Myers house and of the Strode family that took in Laurie all those years ago, and in a twist that no one should have signed off on, a whole lot more to Haddonfield itself than anyone could have ever asked for. I'm not against cult plots at all, but the one here is so poorly explained and integrated into the overall story of the series that it requires constant clarification from characters in the film, often from the mouth of Paul Rudd's Tommy Doyle, the little boy that Laurie was babysitting in the first film, grown up to be a kind of Michael Myers historian and likely pervert. Good old Dr. Loomis isn't far behind, though certainly because of his advanced age, Donald Pleasance tones down a lot of the near-deranged mania that the character was headed towards for a more even-tempered and calmer interpretation.
There's an awful lot of story here, and a lot of it is rather awful, but we otherwise have a bog standard attempt at aping the original again, filled with retreads of Michael stalking around during the daytime, a more reserved approach to the violence that strangely backfires in one instance involving a stabbing death that quickly becomes an electrocution, and another heroine to follow that sadly doesn't have the capability or the resources afforded to her to avoid being a damsel in distress by the time the conceptually insane yet deathly dull finale comes around. Rudd's Tommy is probably the best thing the film has going for it, if only because of how genuinely odd he comes across when in the presence of other people, and he is for all intents and purposes the main character of the film. Alan Howarth turns in yet another Carpenter soundalike, which isn't a bad thing necessarily (especially since he was such a frequent collaborator with Carpenter), but it can't help but add another layer of "been there, done that, don't care" to a film that didn't need another reminder of its own inadequacies.
The irony of having this as a part of a themed triple feature of the ignoble ends of the slasher icons is that this film is anything but, as the film ends on a big cliffhanger ending involving Loomis becoming his own worst nightmare and Michael managing to slip away into a new kind of Shape for the future. With Pleasance's death ensuring that a direct followup would never happen, there's a sense of relief that the shenanigans that they attempted to get into here were never allowed to go forward. And indeed, given that the film that followed this, one that ignored everything after the first sequel and one that is a part of this marathon to be viewed much later in the month (bet you can't guess which day), the message was clear: this was a dead end that was thankfully reversed out of just in time. It's hard to imagine that there's a worse version of this film not only out there, but included with the package on loan from a friend, but I can safely say that once was more than enough on this sad merry-go-round.
Film for Oct 2: Though I'm surprised at how much I enjoyed seeing Jason eventually go to hell, it's safe to say that day 1 of this year's marathon went about as well as could be expected with two big clunkers weighing things down. It might be time for a little of levity, and as such, we'll be taking a look at one of Peter Jackson's most beloved non-LOTR films in Dead Alive. Purportedly one of the most insanely gory films ever made, it is all in good fun as it promises a Sam Raimi-esque take on 1950s New Zealand, in the midst of a zombie outbreak. If the word about it is true, we'll find out just how ironclad a stomach I have for the material, as everything goes squish here!
I may come back & do a more in depth write up later. I wasn't sure if I would participate this year but I'm going to give it a shot.
Maddie is a writer who is deaf and lives alone in a secluded home whne she is visited by a killer with an unknown motivation. The movie sets up her backstory in a way that that didn't feel forced or rushed. The killer and the main character weren't complete idiots but there were one or two moments where I was shaking my head. Hush has a simple plot but it is told well and had enough tension to keep me interested. It's more thriller than horror but it had somewhat clever ideas that were executed well.
I may come back & do a more in depth write up later. I wasn't sure if I would participate this year but I'm going to give it a shot.
Maddie is a writer who is deaf and lives alone in a secluded home whne she is visited by a killer with an unknown motivation. The movie sets up her backstory in a way that that didn't feel forced or rushed. The killer and the main character weren't complete idiots but there were one or two moments where I was shaking my head. Hush has a simple plot but it is told well and had enough tension to keep me interested. It's more thriller than horror but it had somewhat clever ideas that were executed well.
A bunch of teens start a camp across from the previous one 5 years after Jason's mother went on a murderous rampage. Things go about as well as expected.
gotta be honest I thought they would have some empowerment message or something but I should've known better with this franchise's reputation. it went at a nice fast pace and defied my expectations by having everyone get murdered pretty indiscriminately. I think I know what to expect for the next 8 or so or whatever they got to in this franchise lol
On a side not the girl in the one chase sequence repeatedly pissed me off by hiding in the WORST possible places. Like she backs into a bush and it somehow works, then she hides in plain sight right behind the hood of a car and that somehow works, and then she has Jason down and could easily bash his head in and runs away for some reason which I remember happening with his mom in the first one. And for a movie with just under an hour and half running time they take the first 10 minutes doing flashbacks recapping the first film. I guess they wanted to keep the story trimmed up and not boring at any point.
I think I'll try out either another F13 or maybe start into the Nightmare or Halloween sequels tomorrow.
Tony What's four letters, 76 minutes, and boring as fuck...this piece of shit in case there was any question. I really don't feel like there was anything satisfying about this at all. Look at the poster. Its boring too and that is pretty much the best thing this has going for it. I will say I actually learned something from it though. England has a tv tax to pay for the BBC. Who'd have thunk it? Makes sense but its something I'd never heard before so bravo. This turd was useful for learning something new at least.
I give this one two bloody tv tax collectors.
The Mutilator This was nowhere near as good as Driller Killer but I still loved it! The kids weren't your typical sex starved assholes you wanted to see impaled and diced. They were friendly and fun loving....and yea a bit sex starved but still. What I didn't like was that they were so friendly. The death scenes just didn't feel terribly satisfying because of it although there were two really good ones,
the boat motor was pretty cool but the hook in the tuna was awesome!
That was mean as hell but I was on the edge of my seat waiting on it, hoping it would go there...and it did. The music was really good too. It fit the lightheartedness of the kids which I really would have liked this to be a summer fun movie instead of a slasher type because their escapades were pretty fun.
-My Girlfriend and I watched the remake last year and liked it a lot so I thought we'd check out the original this year - it was great!
I especially enjoyed the practical special effects - I feel like they give a lot of 80s horror films a 'timeless' feel.
Is the sequel worth a watch??
1. (New) Jason Goes to Hell (Vudu) what the heck? Pretty weak fun opener. Overall - boo
2. (New) Trick 'r Treat (Blu) - hot damn I can't believe I slept on this for so long. It was at a time where I was down on what was coming out. Lots of Saw and lame black and white Japanese style demon kids. This is going to be an annual watch. Love the intermixing and variety of the stories. Really like Samhain's presence as well. Overall - Yay!
3. (Rewatch) From Dusk Till Dawn (hulu) - one of my faves. Great dialogue, prime Salma Hayek, and super soakers. Overall - Yay!
Pretty fun Toho vampire flick, the first in an unofficial trilogy. The "vampire" isn't really a traditional western vampire, but her portrayal is still pretty neat. It gets a bit slow at times, but the ending was pretty great. It's nothing too remarkable, but it has sort of a Hammer flair that's interesting to see in a Japanese film.
1. Lake of Dracula (1971)
The second in the trilogy. This one has an actual vampire, but he's not Dracula, despite what the English title and subs say. This one was a bit weaker than The Vampire Doll. It feels fairly aimless for a good portion of its runtime, and it generally makes less sense. Still pretty fun.
I'm not gonna spout off what everyone already knows about the film. It's excellent, and sits among the very best in the paranormal sub-genre, so instead, here are a couple new feelings I have on what's probably my 20th viewing of Poltergeist so far.
As a father of three, having been married for nearly 15 years now, this movie struck an emotional chord that, for whatever reason, never did before. Now, during the scene where Carol Anne reaches out from the ether, and speaks to her parents for the first time, I choked up pretty hard. That scene went from one that I sort of drifted through, to one that stood out as a shining example of what makes the film so amazing. The agony and sadness born from helplessness, those emotions were palpable now. Having lost my own child during a crowded festival, years ago, even though it was only 10 minutes, my world may as well have ended. I can't even begin to imagine what a hypothetical situation like what's presented in Poltergeist would do to me or my wife emotionally. So yeah. As much as I look forward to the clown scene, and the monster-face-in-the-closet scene, this touching moment has now taken the crown as my favorite in the film.
The second thing that really jumped out at me during this viewing was how absolutely beautiful the cinematography was. Seriously, Poltergeist is nothing if not a cinematic horror-painting in motion. So many incredible shots are now seared into my mind, and I'm left feeling a bit gobsmacked by it all. Lighting, framing, camera work....it's technically awe inspiring and has a lot to do with why this film refuses to age.
Here's to the next 20 viewings, and a fantastic start to my Halloween month!
So with one day of October down I've watched Dracula (1931) and the Spanish version of the film. As I had heard, the Spanish version is indeed the better made film. It's better shot, better paced, and the story is a little more fleshed out (and it also covers several plot holes of the 1931 version).
However, it suffers from a weak Dracula, whose actor is not intimidating at all and generally just overacts with silly facial expressions, which hurts several scenes that should be great. Bela Lugosi's commanding and sinister version is sorely missed, while the rest of the cast is serviceable (Renfield and Van Helsing are both superior in the English version, but the ones here are perfectly fine).
If you could somehow transpose Lugosi into the better made Spanish version, that'd be swell.
Yeah that actually came up as the what to watch next suggestion after Hush, I'll watch it sometime this week. It'll an interesting experience not having any expectations since I've never read the book and knew nothing of the movie until today.
So with one day of October down I've watched Dracula (1931) and the Spanish version of the film. As I had heard, the Spanish version is indeed the better made film. It's better shot, better paced, and the story is a little more fleshed out (and it also covers several plot holes of the 1931 version).
However, it suffers from a weak Dracula, whose actor is not intimidating at all and generally just overacts with silly facial expressions, which hurts several scenes that should be great. Bela Lugosi's commanding and sinister version is sorely missed, while the rest of the cast is serviceable (Renfield and Van Helsing are both superior in the English version, but the ones here are perfectly fine).
If you could somehow transpose Lugosi into the better made Spanish version, that'd be swell.
-My Girlfriend and I watched the remake last year and liked it a lot so I thought we'd check out the original this year - it was great!
I especially enjoyed the practical special effects - I feel like they give a lot of 80s horror films a 'timeless' feel.
Is the sequel worth a watch??
No. It's the worst kind of sequel: one that lazily rehashes the same plot through the most contrived of means, and with a way worse antagonist. The remake, on the other hand, is a lot of fun, and smart enough to not follow the original to the letter.
Day 1: Started my marathon with "The Shining" one of my all time favorite horror movies. Really love the atmosphere as it feels so cold and empty. The actors are fantastic they act so uncomfortable and agitated, nails the feel of the story. What else really can be said its one of the all time classics and probably the most referenced horror movie of all time. My favorite moment is when Jack completely looses it and tells his wife he isn't going to hurt just bash her brains in. Must see for any horror fan of course.
-By far the best thing about Dracula is Bela Lugosi's performance. Everything about it is just perfect, from Lugosi's charm, intonations, mannerisms, and facial expressions. And of course his dialogue: "Listen to them, children of the night, what music they make"; so good!
-Also love the atmosphere and set design. Yes it was 1931 and they were limited to using cheesy props (like rubber bats and spiders being pulled by strings), but that just adds to the charm.
The theatrical cut is even worse, somehow. When you're watching the producers cut at least it feels like a real movie, most of the time anyway. The theatrical gives you the impression that the editor was some first year film student. If you're ever curious, I'd YouTube some scenes as a curiosity and leave it at that.
The first film on my list, Insidious, still remains one of my favorite horror films.
Released in 2010, Insidious remains a divisive film - while some applaud the admittedly abrasive and brash style, many view the series much like a cheap haunted house with plentiful jump scares and ear piercing sound design that momentarily startles but never ingrains itself into your brain. I find myself firmly in the former camp.
Where Insidious shines the most are in the quiet moments. While there are plenty of loud noises and startling images to lift you from your seat, the strengths lie in the moments of silence where a passing figure in the background makes you do a double take. The best moments are those where you expect the jump scare but are instead treated with something smaller and far more subtle like a whisper in the distance or the memorable
Tiptoe Through The Tulips
sequence. Another strength of Insidious that continued with each installment are the realistic, endearing characters. Josh and Renai are perfectly cast and acted by Patrick Wilson and Rose Byrne who elevate the character drama well above what the occasionally cheesy dialogue encourages. Also, Id be remiss not to give massive credit to Lin Shaye, though it should be abundantly clear just how phenomenal she was given that the series has spent each subsequent installment desperately finding ways to work her into a prominent spot in the narrative
despite her being axed in the films final moments.
There are so many particular moments worth commending, two of my personal favorites being
the whistling demon sequence that still chills me to the bone despite having seen the film a good seventy or so times, plus the incredibly well done demon reveal that is often cited as one of the best ways to execute a jump scare without it feeling cheap and unearned.
Insidious is a divisive film and for good reason. As someone who faithfully follows Wans work and is a particularly massive fan of the Insidious franchise, I have no qualms admitting that there are many moments throughout the franchise that come across as cheesy, unearned or forced. Similar to another favorite of mine, Sinister, its also understandable that the direction the film takes in the latter half would put off audiences who were hoping to see a more restrained horror thriller, though one of the major components of the franchise that I love is the over the top paranormal realm of the Further. If there are those who watch the film and leave with the impression that its a ridiculous plot serviced by cheesy characters and moments of over-sentimentality, thats perfectly understandable. That said, its that blend of heart, humor, horror and creativity that made me fall in love with the film and the franchise.
Okay, full disclosure, I dont hate this series. I dont hate found footage. Quite the opposite in both cases, actually. The Blair Witch Project is one of my favorite horror films and I remember seeing the original Paranormal Activity in the optimal setting - at home with a group of friends, having never seen a second of footage beforehand. The experience was incredible and memorable for me and much like with another annual series (Saw), I found myself locked into the series. When Paranormal Activity 2 released, I remember feeling immediate deflation. It was everything that many had said about the first film - it was boring, uneventful and entirely ineffective. Much to my surprise, the third entry got things back on track with an entertaining and effective installment that improperly introduced the main narrative thread of the series, the witch coven working to find the proper host for the series demon, Toby. With a renewed confidence and interest in the series, my hype for Paranormal Activity 4 was through the roof. I had been willing to write off Paranormal Activity 2 as a misstep and the new narrative thrust had me more interested than ever to see how things unfolded in the next installment. Of course, Paranormal Activity 4 was a disaster. Not only was it every bit as boring as the second film but it backed down from the intriguing lore set up in the last installment, instead opting for quirky teen sex jokes and some of the most embarrassing product placement in cinema history involving the Kinect. Expecting little after the fourth film, I was trepidatious of the spin-off, The Marked Ones. Instead, much like with the third film, I was shocked to see bold creative decisions that added fascinating angles to the series narrative in addition to some incredibly effective body horror moments.
Oh yeah, and time travel is a thing now.
As the film wrapped up, I promised myself I would keep expectations low for whatever came next. I had begun noticing the pattern that the odd Paranormal Activity films wound up great while the even entries were disappointing. Of course there was no reason that this pattern would hold up to scrutiny, yet with the eventual release of the unbelievably poorly named Paranormal Activity: The Ghost Dimension 3D, my crackpot theory was proven. This movie is some bonafide dog shit.
Sporting some Grave Encounters level CGI demons and a 3D gimmick four years too late, The Ghost Dimension wraps up the six film series by answering the questions on everyones minds like...
What happened to Katie?
- She became a demonic real estate agent!
What happened at the end of Paranormal Activity 4?
- Everyone died except for Wyatt, except he was really Hunter, and he got to time travel and join the midwives cult as a sacrifice for Toby!
Wait, then who was
Robbie
?
- I dont know!
Then what role did
Jesse play in bringing Toby to life or serving the midwives?
- I dont know!
Well what became of the
midwives cult after Toby breaks into the mortal world?
- I dont know!
So the demons have been
black ooze
this entire time?
- I suppose so!
So,
whats the plan now that Toby has a human form?
- Keep doing demon shit, I guess!
As if thats not enough, the highly anticipated finale of the series was shown in a whopping two hundred or so theaters nationwide in 3D and was released simultaneously On-Demand. Say what you will about the series and its quality/lack thereof but for a ridiculously profitable franchise, a glorified straight to video release with nearly no marketing behind it made very little sense at the time, though it became abundantly obvious why Paramount has shied away from marketing the finale beyond a handful of internet teasers once I had sat through this absolute slog. Seeing it for the second time, this time in the comfort of my own home and in 2D, its incredible just how sour the film left me despite already knowing how miserable it was. It left me so bitter in fact that Ive removed Paranormal Activity 3 from my watchlist this month. I think Ive had enough of the franchise for a while and Im not sure that I could stomach sitting through two hours of lore development knowing that it ultimately lead to two hours of 3D schlock.
Two American girls(Michelle and Lillian) travel to Europe to visit a European friend(Mara) of their's who they went to school with and has now returned to her homeland of Transylvania. Inexplicably it is mentioned that there are no hotels to stay in so somehow the girls are invited/allowed to stay in a medieval fort and being history majors this is right up their alley. Said fort once housed a bunch of Transylvanians who were besieged by some Turks and when things were at their grimmest the Turkish army fled. When the Transylvanians ventured outside they found numerous corpses with "bloody necks"...
Going on a little sightseeing trip the next day the girls find themselves outside of Vladislas Castle, crumbling but still imposing, and it is brought up that the castle is never mentioned in any history or folklore. It just sits there.
The girls eventually meet the dreamboat Stefan, a zoologist studying nocturnal animals, and he and Michelle immediately get eyes for each other. And from there a relatively straightforward vampire tale is spun.
True love.
One thing the film does very well is in using the fact that the girls are folklorists to its advantage. If one is familiar with Full Moon's output then you know that because of their low budget, direct-to-video nature there can be stretches of the films that are pretty boring(The Puppetmaster films for instance, there is just so much tme spent without puppets it can be maddening). But here this 'downtime' is used to set the mood and to show off the locale, the film was shot in Bucharest(one of the first American films to do so, I believe) and makes good use of it, and it just fits with the gothic vampire stylings at hand. And also to get some exposition out there in as pleasing a manner as possible. The girls learn the origin of the Bloodstone(the quasi-Macguffin of the film) during an interview with a local woman about a festival that'll be happening soon:
"Vampires killed the Turks and, in gratitude, the people said: 'Let them have the great ruins,' which is where the vampires sleep. The vampires were still hungry, they would come out at night and drink blood. This gypsy, he knew the Pope of Rome had a stone which dripped the blood of all the Saints. So he went to Rome, stole it this stone, and took it to the King of the vampires. And since that time no one in Prejmer has been bitten by vampire."
The acting is surprisingly strong, not Trancers level, there is no Tim Thomerson or Helen Hunt here, but there isn't a real weak spot either. And Anders Hove playing Radu our villainous vampire, is clearly having a ball with the role.
The film is also more stylish than one might expect. Particularly there is a lot of use of Radu's shadow(helped immensely by the characters elongated fingers), a long festival sequence with...
be-masked villagers carrying stakes ends with a great edit between Radu pouncing on Mara and the villagers ritualistically staking a fresh grave,
the filmmakers really tried their hardest and it shows.
Radu escapes.
note: You may have noticed I made no mention of the titular Subspecies, Radu's miniature stop-motion demonic henchlings, that is because the film has almost no interest in them. It is kind of bizarre just how little they figure into things despite being the hook(at least in theory).
Not on my list, but I couldnt resist. I loved it, its as perfect an adaptation as youre going to get to Kings work. The different story pieces flowed into each other, the horror-ish parts worked great, and always nice to see the Giant/Fireman! Carla Gugino puts her all into it. Very much recommended!
My hard drive on my PC died, and my PC is the main source for how I watch things, so Im going to have to bounce around my list some and mostly stick to DVDs and Netflix (hurry up with that PS4 app, Shudder!) until I restore my computer with a new hard drive. Truly the spookiest thing to happen to me this month so far.
My first write up was eaten so I'll probably keep this short. My laptop also died and I have to do this on my phone. Good timing eh?
From Jordan Peele, of Key & Peele fame, comes not only the horror film to beat in 2017 but also one of the most socially relevant films of the year. In a 'Guess Who's Coming to Dinner' scenario, Chris is a black man who is seeing a white woman. The story begins as they are planning a trip to Rose's family home. Chris has concerns since Rose hasn't told her family of their racial differences, but she tries to ease his mind by telling him that her family is not racist (well duh, right?) and it's not a big deal. Of course, as soon as they arrive, there is a sense that something is off. Which is what I consider to be the greatest strength of Peele's debut film, he is able to use feelings of unease and awkwardness effectively to establish dread. He does this in a way that gives you the impression of a more mature filmmaker as well. Not only that, his attention to detail is incredible. Once I finished the film I thought to myself, "yeah, that was pretty good", however my opinion of it went up as I had time to reflect on what I saw. These little moments throughout that I thought were initially insignificant actually turned out to be quite significant after all. The most casual throwaway lines were actually building up some of the bigger surprises. What's most impressive though, is that even though on the surface Get Out seems to be a "silly horror flick", underneath Peele actually demonstrates some of the greater wrongs of society today. Get Out is real life.
Also, I've got to give props for what is probably the widest scene I've ever seen in a movie. The scene I'm speaking of features a white woman, with her hair in a pony tail, browsing on her laptop. She has her headphones on listening to "Time of my Life" from Dirty Dancing, and she's got a bowl of dried fruit loops that she washes down with a glass of milk she drinks though a straw. I mean, my god. It was incredible.
A Netflix original movie that stars Adam Scott(Parks and Recreation, Krampus) and Evangeline Lilly(Lost, Ant man) in a Omen inspired horror comedy, that's both light on laughs & horror.
Let's talk about the "Horror" first. While I don't expect much Horror in my Horror Comedies, this doesn't have much beyond the Omen style premise. Adam Scott's Character is recently married and has a new step son in his life; who happens to be the antichrist or something. While I like the stepdad Omen idea, the script does not know what to do with itself. It picks up random characters just to drop them and it goes in so many directions that it doesn't led in a satisfactory or fun conclusion.
The "Comedy" is bad.
And they try really hard too. The character named Al(played by Bridget Everett) who is Adam Scott's comic relief sidekick, is the worst actor and tries way to hard to be funny;
some parts feel adlibbed and the other ancillary comedic characters, such as the Step Dad Therapy group also rely on adlibbed poop humor like shitting in their kids book bag, for example. You shouldn't be adlibbing if you're not good at it.
The only things I liked was Adam Scott (even tho I've forgot his characters name lol) and some of the Omen gags in the beginning, then the movie cant decide what direction to go in. I cant recommend this to anyone.
I love October and especially love Halloween. This month is Christmas to me and I am participating in the challenge this year. I will randomly pick one movie on Shudder each day to fulfill my daily film challenge for October. Thanks Shudder!
October 1, 2017:
1 of 31 - Sleepaway Camp
The only summer camp slasher that is more classic than this gem is Friday the 13th. Felissa Rose as an amazing Angela and a twist ending I have never forgotten. I think an ending no one has ever forgotten really. The film oozes 70/80's slasher pic in such good ways and worth being watched at least once. Camp Arawak FTW!
I'll keep this one vague as I assume it'll be a popular pick this year - and if you have the opportunity to go into this one completely blind, I suggest you do so (I wish I didn't watch the trailer...).
I'm pretty desensitized to movies, so it's rare that something will make me squirm in my seat as much as Gerald's Game did. While there's only a few moments in the film that did so, they were just that effective thanks to the excellent direction and powerful performances. It's very impressive that the must unsettling scenes had nothing do with with violence or gore at all.
Carla Gugino was incredible. I can't even imagine how difficult filming this must have been, and the supporting cast is just as good.
I'm a bit torn on the ending though. While watching the film,
once the reality of the Moonlight Man is revealed,
I thought it lost a bit of steam. That whole section of the finale felt unnecessary to me. I'm warming up to it more now that it's been a few hours and I'm looking back it it, so I'm not sure how I feel about it at this point.
I've never read the book, but Misery is my favourite Stephen King novel so the similarities between that and Gerald's Game were quite enjoyable to me. Highly Recommended.
Rating:
out of 5 Bub salutes. (2.5 is considered average on this scale)
This was a bit of rough one to start with though due to the content. It's a totally "late in the month, need to re-energize" kind of movie.
My first write up was eaten so I'll probably keep this short. My laptop also died and I have to do this on my phone. Good timing eh?
From Jordan Peele, of Key & Peele fame, comes not only the horror film to beat in 2017 but also one of the most socially relevant films of the year. In a 'Guess Who's Coming to Dinner' scenario, Chris is a black man who is seeing a white woman. The story begins as they are planning a trip to Rose's family home. Chris has concerns since Rose hasn't told her family of their racial differences, but she tries to ease his mind by telling him that her family is not racist (well duh, right?) and it's not a big deal. Of course, as soon as they arrive, there is a sense that something is off. Which is what I consider to be the greatest strength of Peele's debut film, he is able to use feelings of unease and awkwardness effectively to establish dread. He does this in a way that gives you the impression of a more mature filmmaker as well. Not only that, his attention to detail is incredible. Once I finished the film I thought to myself, "yeah, that was pretty good", however my opinion of it went up as I had time to reflect on what I saw. These little moments throughout that I thought were initially insignificant actually turned out to be quite significant after all. The most casual throwaway lines were actually building up some of the bigger surprises. What's most impressive though, is that even though on the surface Get Out seems to be a "silly horror flick", underneath Peele actually demonstrates some of the greater wrongs of society today. Get Out is real life.
Also, I've got to give props for what is probably the widest scene I've ever seen in a movie. The scene I'm speaking of features a white woman, with her hair in a pony tail, browsing on her laptop. She has her headphones on listening to "Time of my Life" from Dirty Dancing, and she's got a bowl of dried fruit loops that she washes down with a glass of milk she drinks though a straw. I mean, my god. It was incredible.
I enjoyed Get Out, but I wouldn't say it was a classic. Does it gain extra impetus if you're an African American? I mean I understand the tone and the message being put across by the movie, but obviously it doesn't 'hit home' for me on a personal level.
I enjoyed Get Out, but I wouldn't say it was a classic. Does it gain extra impetus if you're an African American? I mean I understand the tone and the message being put across by the movie, but obviously it doesn't 'hit home' for me on a personal level.
From my experience, i'll say yes. In a way, it gives some of the sections a slightly comedic feel in that you may have experienced something similar (of course not to the level of some of the events in the movie) but some of the scenes where the main character seems to be patronized.
EDIT: As far as Friday the 13th goes, what would be considered a must watch entry in the series (aside from the first)? I've really only watched a few of them.
EDIT: As far as Friday the 13th goes, what would be considered a must watch entry in the series (aside from the first)? I've really only watched a few of them.
This is disappointing. The trailer didn't really grab me I must admit, but I'm a massive fan of Tucker and Dale Vs Evil, so I still had high hopes for this.
I really liked the first one, and generally like foundfootage style movies.
I was very surprised to see that this is a DIRECT sequal to the first movie, now with a SWAT team going to the same building. Again, it's a very intense experience, especially now that we already know what happened in the building and what dangers lurk.
There's a couple of nice plot twists and a very cool idea regarding light.
I'm very excited to see [REC]3 now. Is it a direct sequel to the 2nd movie?
