Found footage is just like any filmmaking technique: if it's used well, it can certainly bring an authenticity to the film that more conventionally staged methods can't hope to match. I do think that a lot of found footage films opt to have far too conventional of story structures, which undermines the point of using that style of filmmaking in the first place.
I firmly believe this is why people got (and continue to get) so angry with The Blair Witch Project, as it does not feature a typical three-act structure, nor does it ever feel a point where it has to be showy or particularly expository.
the timeline in these films is muddled. i would suggest (if you enjoyed this one) maybe checking out the first two ju-on films (often called ju-on: the curse 1/2) to fill in some more of the history of the the victims/house. the sequel is MUCH better than the American one in that it actually makes a semblance of sense. it is a little "more of the same" though.
as for your questions:
But what's up with peekaboo? It's Toshio re-enacting how he originally watched his father murder his mother, cowering behind the railing.
Why didn't the old man burn down the house like he planned after seeing that girl (his daughter?)? He became too frightened to do anything.
Why didn't anyone else think about burning down the house? They die before they can collect themselves to do something about it.
Why did everyone's leg fall apart when seeing zombie woman? Again, paralyzed with fear. The idea (I think) is that the power of the curse and the ghosts are so great that people are rendered almost immobile with fear.
Was Izumi the daughter of that old man? I presume you mean the retired detective? Yes.
Was there a random time skip that then reversed itself for Rika's final act and her awesome haircut? Rika's segment occurs at the same time as Toyama's. Izumi's segment occurs years in the future. The last scene of Rika in the attic is presumably in the same timeframe as Izumi's story.
I know why Izumi got killed, but what was up with her interaction with her deceased father? That whole part confused the living hell out of me. It was a shared vision they were having across time.
Thanks for answering all of those questions! The film is even better now because of it.
More story spoilers:
At first, I thought Izumi and Rika shared the same timeline, but I decided aganist that theory because how old Izumi looked. She looked to be completing the eighth grade. When I saw young version of her, I thought she was nine or ten. I also thought Rika would have been murdered before a few years passed. Why wasn't she killed? How did she live for so long when everyone else died (excluding the retired detective, since he lived longer than one would expect once entering the house) in a relatively short manner?
Your deduction was right too; my comment was directed towards the retired detective.
I'm going to toss Ju-on 2 on my Halloween marathon list because of your comments. I would watch the earlier films if they were available via Netflix.
Also, I know Takashi Shimizu directed Grudge 1/2 in America, so how are they such a step-down compare to the originals? Any true reasons? Like I said, I enjoyed the first Grudge, so my statement refers more to Grudge II.
Sorry if this was covered, but what are some of the best horror anthologies?
Trick r Treat is our annual Halloween night movie, and we are watching Creepshow tonight. What other good ones are out there?
I have also seen Tales from the Hood (which I like ok). Probably a few others but suggest away, we are completely open to watching movies this month we have already seen.
3 Extremes
After Midnight
Asylum
Black Sabbath
Body Bags
Campfire Tales
Cat's Eye
Deadtime Stories
Grim Prairie Tales
The House That Dripped Blood
Nightmares
The Offspring
Terrorgram (if you can find it)
Trilogy of Terror
Twilight Zone: The Movie
The Willies
Pontypool
This film was hilarious at the start, psychologically befuddling in its premise and conclusion, and definitely an awesome/smart take on the locked-in-by-zombies subgenre. I loved the cast's performances and found myself very much rooting for these three stranded (soon to be under siege) individuals. The dynamic that is shared between the tech-girl, producer, and DJ is totally unique and endearing all the way through the finish.
I felt that the premise
which revolved around an epidemic that starts with the English language (but not all language, somehow, don't ask me how) and turns people into flesh-eaters
was just grounded enough to work. It also played well with the setting of the film. I admit that I didn't love the fact that the movie didn't show the zombies themselves ever, but the tension still built up nicely to a final act that had me wanting more from Grant Mazzy, a morning radio host it's hard not to like. If you watch this one - and it's on Netflix streaming so why wouldn't you! - make sure to tune in for the credits and the scene found thereafter.
Personally, and I understand that most do not share this point of view, but personally, I get angry with The Blair Witch Project mostly because people falsely attribute to it the origination of the found footage subgenre.
Kids these days have just never seen Cannibal Holocaust, I guess. SMH.
You might have a better experience than me if you enjoy found footage flicks, but they all annoy me to no end, so any flaws just compound on my dislike for them.
This was a fantastic movie. Not necessarily a pure horror plot, maybe more of a gothic romance or even fairy tale. David Bowie, Catherine Deneuve and Susan Saradon all look fantastic in it, and that's not to mention the lesbian scene we get to partake in. Wonderfully shot, it has great cinematography and a Bauhaus cameo and even manages to have a genuinely creepy final climax. RIP Tony Scott.
I think the glut of poorly done found footage is due to Blair Witch. Grave Encounters wasn't trying to be Cannibal Holocaust. I don't think found footage was very popular before Blair Witch, so maybe you can attribute found footage's popularity to it rather than it's origin.
I'm bummed to see Sinister and the new Evil Dead coming off as lackluster on the board, still looking forward to those (but expecting less).
Also looking forward to Pontypool, but probably Tucker & Dale tonight.
- So yea another slasher like flick to come out of the early 80's post Friday the 13th boom. This is just pretty poor overall with little to go for it but some boobs, but a lady is raped and traumatize, apparently the baby grows up to be some huge super strong mutant mongoloid so she lives alone with him on some island. Kids on a boat trip get stranded on the island and well you can figure out the rest..... You don't really get to see the creature since the whole movie was filmed without proper lighting, but from the black and white promo shots for the film, yea it's best they kept it in the dark since that was some piss poor makeup effects. Not much gore either even in it's uncut format.
Thought I might as well make it a day of 2's. I saw the first V/H/S a month or so ago and, despite it being a severely flawed film, sort of fell in love with it. Lot of great different ideas and formats all squeezed into a single film made it a really interesting thing to watch. Needless to say, I was excited to see someone take another go at the format and was really looking forward to V/H/S 2. Did it live up to my expectations? Well, yes and no. I guess it'll just be easier to go through short by short and give my general impressions.
The first short has a fantastic premise. The way it's shot and the blinking effect put on the camera is incredibly immersive and cool. It gives the film a really great limited FOV and really helps to sell the atmosphere. Other than that, though. The first short was pretty damn awful. Worst of the bunch, easily. Plot wasn't very interesting, characters were terrible and the over reliance on jump scares sucked all the tension out. Really left me with a negative impression right out of the gate.
The second short was, thankfully, an improvement. Loved the concept of a
film shot from the point of view of a zombie
. Great moments of gore mixed in with a really interesting idea. I don't think it was a very strong horror film, it didn't really have any tension or scares, but just a fun concept brought to life in an interesting way. The only thing I didn't really enjoy was the dialogue. Just the worst. I know horror movies aren't renowned for snappy writing, but this was a whole different level of bad. Thankfully, there was very little of it to get in the way of my enjoyment.
The third short is by far, by far the best of the bunch. It's probably my favorite short of the V/H/S series in general. Just an incredible amount of atmosphere and tension. It takes it's time revealing to you the mystery of the convent and cult. The film really benefits from that. For a short film, it has an incredible amount of patience. I think the payoff goes on a bit too long, but not really enough to be a problem. A great piece of horror that kept me in constant fear throughout.
The fourth and final short is a bit of a comedown after the third. It doesn't live up to the one that immediately precedes it, but it can't really hope to. It does some great stuff in its own right, though. It has an incredible use of lighting that makes its creatures far scarier than perhaps they otherwise would be. It's also got some really interesting point of view shots and, like the third, builds a great sense of tension throughout. While it's not the best one of the bunch, it's still one I really enjoyed overall.
In general, the film is really good. I don't think on average it's quite as good as the original, but it has a higher high point and the lows aren't nearly as low. The framing narrative is still sort of garbage, but nowhere near as shit as the original so it didn't really detract much. Overall, I'd probably give V/H/S 2
This one didn't turn out how i expected, it's more of a romantic drama with horror elements. It's a slow film but the story was overall rather good and well acted.
I watched this last night with two friends while drinking some beers, and man we had a great night. If you know Troma stuff you'll know what to expect. The Fuckman is a character I will not soon forget. It went on just a little bit longer than it needed to, but the ending shot made it all worth it. 8/10
1. Tucker & Dale Vs Evil
A comedy-horror about a couple hillbillies that get mistaken for murderous psychopaths. It's about what you'd expect from a parody. There's the haunted cabin in the woods, scary stories, horny & stupid teenagers, and everyone suffers violent deaths. There's a bit of heart to the movie that keeps things engaging in-between the gags. Altogether it was pretty enjoyable.
2. The Evil Dead (original)
I've seen Evil Dead 2 and Army of Darkness, so I figured I may as well finish the series. In any other horror film, Ash would have been one of the first to die. He makes all the horror movie mistakes, is easily duped, and gets thrown into shelves a lot. Still, I appreciate the more grounded Ash. He's just a schmuck going through hell, no chainsaw arms or quotable lines here. The monster effects are the real star of this picture though. The demons are nasty and suffer gruesome deaths. There's just something about seeing what looks like colored grits pouring out of an open wound that makes me wince in the best way. I'll have to watch Evil Dead 2 again but eh...I think I like this movie more.
Holy crap, what a gem. If you are like me, you love terrible slashers. Not to say that they are bad movies but...wait yes they are! But I love these eighties cheapies, with their keyboard soundtracks, their crazy hairdos, their cheap as dirt gore and their mysteries that make 0 sense whatsoever.
Somehow I avoided Aerobicide for years, but tonight I decided to check it out while playing FFXIV on the side and goddamn what a masterpiece of schlock! This is pure 80s madness at it's best.
The movie is literally just about super hot women in leotards and legwarmers doing elaborate exercising scenes to various ULTRA CHEESY disco music. Seriously you could smell the cheese off the speakers. It's charming in it's sleazyness. Tons of crotch shots to bring a smile to your face.
Anyhow, this movie has it all. The horribly catchy music. The hot babes. The murder mystery. Even terrible fight scenes and shootouts. And the plot is absurd. Metric tons of murders related to ONE gym and nobody seemingly cares about all the dead bodies. There's like no real tension at all, lol. It's just dancing, shooting, punching, and some killings thrown it. Well not some. The mystery killer racks quite the bodycount here.
And the slasher's weapon of choice? A fucking safety pin. You read that right. Now you are thinking: "Oh maybe there's some sort of spiked apartus called a safety pin, I didn't know about..." NOPE! A SAFETY PIN. To the throat. To the skull. Hell yeah. There's a Psycho rip-off scene, really early in the movie, and it ends with a beautifully over the top arterial spray from a safety pin wound that has to be seen...to be believed.
This is like: Cheesy eighties slasher, THE MOVIE. What a find. It's completely flat and terrible in every way, but I loved it.
The first two films I watched were pretty similar in there themes and pacing, they were slow burns revolving around men performing research to make a documentary/book. However I feel there's a vast difference in the quality between the two.
Sinister had some things going for it, namely the tapes were really well done and suitably creepy. However the risk you run with slowly paced horror movies is that they need to have a big pay off, Sister decides it would be a great idea to telegraph exactly what's going to happen at the end moments before it happens and then what happens isn't all that great. With that said it did have other glaring issues which took away from the climax including an over reliance on jump scares and over-exposing you to the threat, it also didn't help that at times the threat was flat out comical
a terrible use of suitably terrible child actors.
There's nothing in the build up that's as shocking as the snuff tapes in Sinister however it does a great job of building a harrowing atmosphere thorough the amounting paranormal occurrences and the way that characters lives are torn apart. However Noroi really shines in it's climax, it essentially does everything right that Sinister got wrong.
In particular I love the fact they only show the face of the demon in one brief shot, it was one of the most unnerving things I've seen in a horror films leaving me with the feeling that I might have made it up in my head.
I wouldn't consider watching either films if you don't like slow build ups and I think Noroi is far better than Sinister but I'd still recommend them both as even Sinister has its moments.
2. The Evil Dead (original)
I've seen Evil Dead 2 and Army of Darkness, so I figured I may as well finish the series. In any other horror film, Ash would have been one of the first to die. He makes all the horror movie mistakes, is easily duped, and gets thrown into shelves a lot. Still, I appreciate the more grounded Ash. He's just a schmuck going through hell, no chainsaw arms or quotable lines here. The monster effects are the real star of this picture though. The demons are nasty and suffer gruesome deaths. There's just something about seeing what looks like colored grits pouring out of an open wound that makes me wince in the best way. I'll have to watch Evil Dead 2 again but eh...I think I like this movie more.
Day 2:
The Fly (1958): I watched this with my podcast group for this weeks episode. I'll post a link after the episode goes up this weekend at our site. I will say I did not like it. Aside from a few creepy moments and one or two good storytelling elements, it does not hold up well, and certainly hardly resembles a horror movie. The premise is very good and I think very innovative, but horror movies hadn't caught up to good ideas yet. Just skip to Cronenberg's remake. That movie is amazing.
Hellraiser II: I like this movie just as much as the first one. The director and writer were different. Tony Randel directed instead of Clive Barker and though it was based on a Barker story, he did not write the screenplay. Still, it's a great movie, every bit as good as the first in my opinion.
It picks up where the original left off and, as I said yesterday, really showcases Julia as the main villain. Pinhead didn't really become the focus of the series until part three.
I remember being disturbed most of all, when I was younger, by the scene with the straight razor. Good foley work there.
This installment starts to add a little bit of character to the cenobites, which works well, I think, but the mythos starts to sound a little religious as well. Not much, just hints of it.
On the plus side, the sexual perversity is ramped way up. Love it.
Anyway, if you like the first you should like this one as well. Some of the dialogue is not very natural and Ashley Lawrence's acting hasn't improved, but it's a very innovative horror movie that can be an immersive experience if you let it.
I liked a lot about this movie, but in the end it skirted the line of "not worth watching." The set design, direction, photography, even acting were all above par. The lighting and scene transitions in particular made the movie beautiful. And the music is absolutely top notch, the low droning seriously put my on the edge of my seat without even realizing.
Unfortunately it squanders its potential as a horror movie. Little actually happens, and even less than that happens that is scary. The
cat creature
had potential, its first two or so appearances were really unsettling almost purely because of the way they shot it, but after that it just becomes a cliche, chasing him until he runs behind a door.
I liked the idea behind the movie, that
it was all in his head
, but they didn't do enough to convince me about it.
For the first 45 minutes you'll be drawn in, and you'll think, "oh man, I can't wait for stuff to get real!" But it never really does. In retrospect, it's just plodding and a little boring.
There's nothing in the build up that's as shocking as the snuff tapes in Sinister however it does a great job of building a harrowing atmosphere thorough the amounting paranormal occurrences and the way that characters lives are torn apart. However Noroi really shines in it's climax, it essentially does everything right that Sinister got wrong.
In particular I love the fact they only show the face of the demon in one brief shot, it was one of the most unnerving things I've seen in a horror films leaving me with the feeling that I might have made it up in my head.
noroi is some sublime slow-burn horror. i wasn't even that freaked out over it until about a full day later. then it stuck with me for weeks, especially as you said
the face of kagutaba
.
day 02. film 02. 稀人 / marebito
another lovecraft-inspired j-horror flick from another director with an acclaimed release (this time Takashi Shimizu, responsible for the Ju-On films) that, not unlike last night's total borefest Occult, fails to really impress.
this film was apparently completed in 8 days, and it shows mostly in the rapid development, poor execution, and non-existent follow-through on a number of (on the surface) interesting ideas. characters act because an unknown force (the script) says they have to in order for Shimizu to make bloated overtures about the nature of Japanese people, the media, and the people who greedily consume it.
the film stars Shinya Tsukamoto (he himself responsible for the Tetsuo series of body-horror films) as bored cinematographer Masuoka who spents most of the film with a camera practically glued to his hand. the problem is that in developing an 'average joe' protagonist, Tsukamoto borders on sleepy for about 85% of the film. when the twist ending starts rearing it's head, he picks up the energy a little, but it's way too little way way too late.
but, marebito does have two things going for it. one is the sound design. the score itself isn't much to write about, but the sound effects are particularly evocative, if not a little stomach turning. the other saving grace is Tomomi Miyashita as 'F', a feral girl whom Masuoka finds deep in the sewers of Tokyo. her blank, animalistic stares and almost over-dramatic feeding scenes are actually a little uncomfortable to watch (and hear).
however, at the end of the film you're left with not a lot. there are MESSAGES throughout the film, though their delivery is ham-fisted and clumsy, and the plot is either so convoluted that unwrapping it properly may take days, or so poorly constructed that it just 'feels' complicated. i'm leaning heavily toward the latter.
it's not fair to call this film "found footage" as a large chunk of it is experienced via third person camera. however, like found-footage movies, the budget is low, the cinematography is grimy, and the direction oscillates between hammy and fractured. given the lovecraftian nature of the story, i can understand the choppy editing and pacing of the story, but it just feels like nobody either in front of or behind the camera was really committed to the film.
i need to stop watching these low-budget rush jobs.
★★☆☆☆
good for: looking scary, sound design, interesting ideas bad for: not actually being scary, poor executoin
Holy crap, what a gem. If you are like me, you love terrible slashers. Not to say that they are bad movies but...wait yes they are! But I love these eighties cheapies, with their keyboard soundtracks, their crazy hairdos, their cheap as dirt gore and their mysteries that make 0 sense whatsoever...
Plus one! Love this movie and all the movies like it that came before and after. Not sure if the safety pin is worse than the tire iron from Sorority Row.
Thanks for reminding me I need to rewatch this one again soon. You have good taste, my friend.
In a way, you have to feel bad for Brandon Cronenberg. Who knows what kind of subject matter he would have been interested in, what kind of themes he would deem worth exploration, what kind of filmmaker he'd be if he had a different father. On one hand, it's David Cronenberg: the Baron of Blood, the King of Venereal Horror, a director whose body of work represented one of the most fully realized and truly unique visions in all of film history, let alone the horror genre; a man whose influence is far reaching, and yet has never been approximated to anywhere close to a satisfying degree, let alone equaled. On the other hand, it's David Cronenberg, and all the same things apply yet again, casting a shadow so large that there are only so many options any child of the man could wish to take by following in his footsteps. A Pixar feature is never going to be in the cards for Brandon. What's someone to do in that position? As Antiviral answers, not falling far from the tree, or whatever passes for a tree in the Cronenberg household, proves to be an obvious yet intriguing option, even if it is, realistically, the only one that may have been on the table.
Incidentally, the film's biggest weakness is its concept and structure. Rather than glimpsing into the future, as his father often did, Brandon opts to keep the focus on the ongoing debate over celebrity worship, where autographs aren't just signed photos anymore, but brief dalliances with that celebrity's recent illness, and even going as far as eating meat produced from their muscle cells. Such imaginative new twists on the extremes that people will go to to live vicariously through the rich and famous do little to curb the fact that there's precious little it adds to the conversation, and is more fit to regurgitate existing arguments through the filter of Brandon's visual eye. And truth be told, anything it does have to say about it is exhausted by the half-hour mark, when the film's plot evolves into a thriller, with our main character being pulled back and forth between forces that seek to exploit him for their own purposes, and his attempts to break free from their grasps once and for all. It feels like a different but similar looking movie after that point, one that takes a little too long to shift into higher gears. It's one of those films with a surplus of plot threads and twists that could have stood to lose one or two and not feel like it's missing much from their exclusion.
If Brandon isn't quite as focused from a screenwriting standpoint, the film definitely makes a strong argument for that reason being that his true talent lies behind the camera lens itself, as Antiviral is a thoroughly engaging film from a visual standpoint, with meticulous editing, gorgeous framing, and excellent camerawork. Even conversations are visually interesting, as Brandon opts to film them from profile rather than head on, giving even the most mundane conversation a unique flair to them. With cinematographer Karim Hussain (perhaps best famous for the Argento-esque visual flair for Hobo with a Shotgun), the film's cold, sterile look manages to make the moments of color that splashes in there, often in the form of blood itself, feel truly alien. Brandon is the kind of patient filmmaker that we need more of, and it's that attribute that is going to serve him well for future projects.
As Syd March, rising star Caleb Landry Jones rarely spends a moment off the camera, as his story is the film's story. His slithery features and comforting yet enabling vocal tones are put to good effect early on when he's making his sales pitches to customers wishing to partake in the ultimate celebrity experience. They know it's not good for them, but who is going to argue with someone who knows how badly you want it and can play you like a violin? Jones' demeanor serves him even more effectively as the virus he carries inside of his body begins to take serious tolls on him, necessitating the use of a cane that, combined with his already meek frame, feels like an actual appendage than an aid. His dialogue feels unimportant at times: he can carry entire scenes with just his composure.
While Antiviral isn't quite the overwhelming success that one could hope for, it certainly paints a bright future for Brandon Cronenberg, further cements Caleb Landry Jones as a talent to watch, and reminds us that there is still some really weird shit in the water in the Great North, and that we need more people drinking it.
October 3 preview: We take a break from more serious filmmaking for something a lot goofier. Nazi forces may have stumbled onto the ultimate countermeasure for the coming Russian onslaught, but do they know what they're getting into by unleashing Frankenstein's Army upon the world?
Quite a nice piece of a film. Has a Near Dark vibe which is pleasant. Soundtrack was good too. Maybe unnecessarily explicit at time for this kind of a movie though.
Synopsis: When his gorgeous fiancée "goes to pieces" in a freak lawnmower accident, aspiring mad scientist Jeffrey Franken is determined to put her back together again. With the aid of an explosive superdrug, he sets about reassembling his girlfriend, selecting the choicest bits from a bevy of raunchy New York prostitutes. But his bizarre plan soon goes awry. His reanimated girlfriend no longer craves his body... she craves every body! And, for money, she'll love anyone... to death!
Every October I make sure to include a touch of Frankenstein in my horrorthon, and well, Frankenstein never looked like this before. Straight from the mind of Frank Henenlotter (Basket Case), Frankenhooker brings the quirky horror experience that I expect from him. It's crammed full of nudity and though I wouldn't call it a gore-fest, there is plenty of it to go around. The highlight of film for me was the monster herself named Elizabeth (Hey! I understand that reference!). She's charismatic, hilarious, and very easy on the eyes, though I guess most Penthouse Pet's of the Year would be. Unfortunately that relates to my biggest criticism of the film. She might be the highlight, but she also has a very limited amount of screentime. I know in an 84 minute movie the filmmakers can only include so much, but I still wanted more of her.
Parts of it seem like Re-Animator, particulary the scenes featuring the lead Jeffery Franken who at times seems like he's doing his best Herbert West impersonation. If you plan on watching it, expect a low-budget flick with a good amount of charm. You can tell the crew had fun making this one.
This was the first movie in a long while to actually frighten me. I finished it with the lights on. At the same time, it also pissed me off more than any film in a while.
The good stuff here is in the lighting and audio design, even if it was overdone. This is an oppressively dark film with a heavy foreboding atmosphere. It's never light: day time scenes feel like the sun lost 90% of its power, every light in the house has the strength of a dim night light, if they are used at all. Shadows crisscross every room, and they are all pitch black, making it feel as if something could be hiding inside them. And sometimes there is.
The audio has this deep pulsing shadow of a beat to it in many scenes, with sounds and static layered over. It's a transparently manipulative soundtrack, but an effective one. Dread lingers in nearly every scene. My one major critique of the sound in Sinister is it never knows the value of a long silence. Audio clutter is pervasive and often telegraphs events. I called the first jump scare right down to the second because of how the audio cut out.
Sinister is thankfully more restrained when it comes to revealing its actual threat.
I was worried we'd have Beghoul or however you spell it starring in the last quarter of the film. Nope - we only get a couple lingering shots of him, and otherwise just glimpses. It was refreshing. He was genuinely freaky but would not have been had he been over exposed.
That said, the plot and most of it reveals are so thoroughly telegraphed by the midpoint of the film that the scares were largely manufactured. The aforementioned audio chatter and constant shadows, increasingly frequent jump scares. And most frustratingly a lead character who commits pretty much every sin you can when it comes to handling the kind of situation he's in.
I think we spend a quarter of the film watching him walk around in the dark - never telling his wife what's up, never turning on a goddamn light (well, just that once). His character was so frustrating that I found myself actively rooting for his demise by the 30 minute mark.
The back story and the way it slowly intercepts the unfolding one does have a nice feeling of inevitability to it, which helps the growing feeling of dread in the second third. But then the film squanders most of it in the last third as the the film increasingly relies on stupid character decisions and jump scares. All that said, the ending was satisfying, even if the beats it followed were predictable.
All in all, a frightening if frustrating horror film with a solid second act and a (mostly) great sense of menace throughout, and just enough good sense to practice restraint when it comes to its payoffs.
As a side note, do NOT watch trailers for it. I did so after seeing the film, and holy crap did they spoil not only much of the plot, but many of the scares along the way.
Is The Brain the only horror movie you've covered? I plan to watch that eventually (it's one I saw as a kid and want to revisit) so I'll listen to your podcast after I get to it, but that might not be until next October.
Don't know if this is the right place, but if anyone is interested we're doing a "Viewing Party" of Poultrygeist: Night of the Living Chicken on Friday.
Poultrygeist is a fun movie. I think it would work pretty well for a viewing party. I'd take part if my month wasn't so full already but I'm kind of locked down with my list right now. Hope you guys enjoy it though and be sure to post some impressions of it after you watch!
I remember watching a Ghoulies movie tons of times when I was a kid. Actually I think it was both Ghoulies 1 and 2 that I saw a ton. They just seemed to always be on somewhere. I don't remember them very well though and I've been meaning to watch them all, including 3 & 4 which I've never seen.
This was a fantastic movie. Not necessarily a pure horror plot, maybe more of a gothic romance or even fairy tale. David Bowie, Catherine Deneuve and Susan Saradon all look fantastic in it, and that's not to mention the lesbian scene we get to partake in. Wonderfully shot, it has great cinematography and a Bauhaus cameo and even manages to have a genuinely creepy final climax. RIP Tony Scott.
OCTOBER 3 - Father's Day
I watched this last night with two friends while drinking some beers, and man we had a great night. If you know Troma stuff you'll know what to expect. The Fuckman is a character I will not soon forget. It went on just a little bit longer than it needed to, but the ending shot made it all worth it. 8/10
Yes! I was hoping more people would check out Father's Day. I friggin' love that movie and I can't wait for Astron-6's Giallo. I'm too scared to show Father's Day to my friends, they already think my taste in movies is weird enough.
It's too bad Troma fucked them over so much. Apparently the version of Father's Day on disc isn't even Astron'6's final cut and A6 has no idea if it will ever be fixed as Troma doesn't tell them shit (last I heard, anyway).
I just discovered that a few weeks ago while looking for stuff to watch this month. Sounds awesome! I'm hoping to discover some 80s slashers I haven't seen yet from this thread, so that one is going on the list.
Henenlotter is a mad genius. I wish his output was a little larger, even his bad movies are worth watching because they're so absurd. I doubt he'll do another one though since he's in his 60s now
I decided to join the festivities here, started yesterday with V/H/S/2 which was actually pretty afwul. The scare moments got drowned out by the annoying fake digital glitches and overdone sound effects in most of the segments. Only the Borneo story had some meat in my opinion. Wasn't a fan of the first one either, but at least that one had a peculiar atmosphere that I found missing here.
Tonight I might go for April Fool's Day, haven't seen that one ever!
@ThirstyFly -- We put up an episode every weekend, and starting this weekend they'll all be horror until the end of October, so just check back with us Sunday night. Thanks for looking at the site and hope you enjoy them. There are audio commentary tracks to go along with each movie we talk about in the podcast as well in case you want an mst3k-style experience.
Oh, and you could definitely consider Split Second and DNA horror movies, too, at least in the same sense that Alien is.
Witchtrap, a KevinTenney movie, is in there as well.
To the guys watching sleepaway camp II and April Fool's Day, you're in for a real treat. Those are both super fun movies, I think.
It's on the lower part of the spectrum of slashers, nothing really to redeem it outside of perhaps how hilariously stupid the douche bag brother is. "Im good at things too!"
@ThirstyFly -- We put up an episode every weekend, and starting this weekend they'll all be horror until the end of October, so just check back with us Sunday night. Thanks for looking at the site and hope you enjoy them. There are audio commentary tracks to go along with each movie we talk about in the podcast as well in case you want an mst3k-style experience.
Oh, and you could definitely consider Split Second and DNA horror movies, too, at least in the same sense that Alien is.
To the guys watching sleepaway camp II and April Fool's Day, you're in for a real treat. Those are both super fun movies, I think.
This was a fantastic movie. Not necessarily a pure horror plot, maybe more of a gothic romance or even fairy tale. David Bowie, Catherine Deneuve and Susan Saradon all look fantastic in it, and that's not to mention the lesbian scene we get to partake in. Wonderfully shot, it has great cinematography and a Bauhaus cameo and even manages to have a genuinely creepy final climax. RIP Tony Scott.
The Hunger is really beautiful. I think the horror elements are generally more subtle and layered in this film than you found in most '80s horror. Do they even make movies like this anymore?
Like most kids who spent a lot of time in video stores in the '80s, I remember the talking videocassette case fondly. I can't describe how happy I was to learn, upon watching the movie 30 years later, that it was actually really good. Great review!
My first entries:
Day #0 All the Boys Love Mandy Lane (Dir, Jonathan Levine; 2007/2013)
I hadnt originally planned on watching this one, a favorable review on the Filmspotting SVU podcast caught the interest of my wife and I, so I watched it as a warm-up to the marathon proper. Both podcast hosts liked Mandy Lane quite a bit, and Matt Singer favorably compared it to Cabin in the Woods, calling both movies clever deconstructions of the horror genre that sat on studio shelves for several years. I loved Cabin and generally share Singers tastes, so I was looking forward to the movie, even though Ive been lukewarm on Levines other movies.
Im sad to say that I disagreed with the Filmspotting take and found Mandy Lane to be, at best, a pretty distraction and pretentiously vapid at worst. You can tell that Mandy Lane is Levines first film, as it makes too many first film errors, particularly an over-reliance on soundtrack and way too many distracting trick shots. There is a sort of meta-textual critique of the slasher genre in the form of a twist
the virginal final girl actually orchestrates the killings
but its neither well-developed nor interesting enough to excuse the films half-hearted adherence to standard genre tropes, such as unlikable, hard-partying teenagers and punitive kills.
When not trying to be too fancy with jump cuts and color saturation, the movie is quite nice to look at, and the performances, while unremarkable, do get the job done. But theres not much of a job to be done, and its a lot of nonsense to forgive in service of a dull story.
GRADE: C
Day #1 Targets (Dir, Peter Bogdanovich; 1968)
I could not ask for a better start to my 31 Days marathon proper. Targets has been a huge gap in my horror movie education, but its reputation actually scared me away. Ive always heard it discussed only as a metatextual turning point in horror cinema, from the Euro-gothic of the Universal and Hammer monster movies, to more naturalistic slasher and mass-murder flicks of the 70s and 80s. Targets is, of course, very much a commentary on the genre. It tells two parallel stories, that of Byron Orlok (Boris Karloff), a classic horror movie star who decides to retire because audiences are no longer scared by his films, and of Bobby Thompson (Tim OKelly) a seemingly perfect middle-class young man who gives into his murderous urges and starts shooting random people.
I expected a cerebral, but dull, meditation on forms of horror; what I got was a genuinely terrifying experience. Karloff is absolutely magnetic, perfectly retaining the dignity of an old craftsman, even as he petulantly slinks out of the spotlight. His performance is just as big as those in any Universal classic in one of his most engaging scenes, he deflects a hippy DJs inane questions by reciting W. Somerset Maughams The Appointment in Samarra but he brings just enough humanity to fit within the naturalistic world Bogdanovich has created. OKellys murders, by contrast, are horrifying in their dispassionate frankness: he kills people from a distance, shooting them as they go about their daily routines. Bogdanovich does use a few trick shots, but unlike Levine in Mandy Lane uses them to enhance the narrative. Most effectively, he uses smash zooms to simulate the movement of the bullet, thereby putting the audience face-to-face with the heretofore nameless victims of Thompsons spree.
So while the movie does effectively comment on horror movies, its first priority is to be a genuinely moving, genuinely frightening horror movie itself.
P.S. I have to point out that Matt Singer, the host who steered me wrong with Mandy Lane, wrote a fantastic essay about Targets, published last month at The Dissolve.
GRADE: A
Day #2 Carnival of Souls (Dir, Herk Harvey; 1962)
Ive seen this one a few times, but it has been a few years. Carnival of Souls tells the story of Mary (Candace Hilligoss), a young, dispassionate church organist who, after escaping from a fatal car accident, is haunted by a ghostly man (Harvey). Every time I watch it, I am befuddled by the quality of the filmmaking: are the seemingly haphazard transitions from scene to scene or the wooden acting actually shoddy work, or an attempt to disturb and disrupt the audiences expectations?
Whatever the intent, the movie completely works for me. It is genuinely creepy throughout, and the things that dont make sense only contribute to the surreal sense of dislocation. Mary is largely a cypher, with no dialogue before the accident and wild mood swings after, which makes it difficult to empathize with her. But these shifts feel less like poor storytelling to me, and more of a way to retain Marys strangeness theres more going on with her than shes willing to show, to us or to other characters. This is made more apparent with the introduction of a lecherous neighbor (Sidney Berger), who gets angry with Mary for rebuffing his greasy advances. Despite his clearly loathsome qualities in his very first scene, he leers at Mary as she changes after a bath we viewers find ourselves sharing his frustrations: why does Mary change her mind so much? Why is she so rude? Why doesnt she like us? We just want to like her.
The story does reach resolution, helped along by some clunky exposition here and there, but the denouement occurs with no explanation, underscoring the inescapable inevitability of its conclusion. Conversely, other plot points, particularly one about the struggle between Marys secular, mercenary approach to church service and the various pastors who try to save her remain underdeveloped and unresolved. Again, though, all of this works in the movies favor, constantly keeping audiences unsure of what theyre watching.
3 Extremes
After Midnight
Asylum
Black Sabbath
Body Bags
Campfire Tales
Cat's Eye
Deadtime Stories
Grim Prairie Tales
The House That Dripped Blood
Nightmares
The Offspring
Terrorgram (if you can find it)
Trilogy of Terror Twilight Zone: The Movie
The Willies
I'm going to look into several of these myself!
I've heard amazing things about 'Nightmares', but the DVD is seemingly OOP. *EDIT* It looks like the entire movie is up on YouTube so I can finally check it out!
I bolded Twilight Zone as it's also one of my favorites, it simply slipped my mind.
I don't remember it very well, but I think I've seen Trilogy of Terror as well (it had a story about an evil Tiki doll, right?).
After looking over my DVD shelf last night, I came across 2 more anthologies: Tales from the Crypt (1972) The Vault of Horror (1973)
Both are based on the same EC comics that inspired the well-known TV series, and are anthologies of short stories presented in a similar fashion to Creepshow (some of which were later remade as episodes of the TV show).
There is a budget-priced DVD 2-pack containing both films:
#2 - The Devil's Backbone (2001)
Atmospheric Spanish film set in an orphanage against the end of the Civil War where a new kid uncovers the numerous secrets the place holds. Felt somewhat like a movie for kids, as the protagonists and his comrades are children and the grownups are mostly viewed from child's perspective. This does the film good, as Del Toro succeeds in portraying a child's sense of wonder and curiosity while delivering the sad ghost story with a real sense of humanity. I found it lacking in scares, but there is a real story to be told and Del Toro's direction is terrific. 7/10
So happy to see more love for The Hunger. One of the most beautiful vampire films ever made. And it's a great love story too. The visuals are simply out of this world.
I’m sad to say that I disagreed with the Filmspotting take and found Mandy Lane to be, at best, a pretty distraction and pretentiously vapid at worst.
Right there with you, I remember the trailer and attention given to it on the festival circuit and then it's subsequent year or more absence from the American market. Imagine the disappointment of tracking it down after two or three years.... So lackluster in so many ways. The teenagers and their motivations were so, so, so bad. And that's okay if the payoff or the tone is in line, but both fell flat (for me).
Kind of like Eden Lake now that I think about it. Are horror fans so starved they support some of the weakest shit out there? /cynicism.
Edit:
To the guys watching sleepaway camp II and April Fool's Day, you're in for a real treat. Those are both super fun movies, I think.
Day #2 Carnival of Souls (Dir, Herk Harvey; 1962)
Ive seen this one a few times, but it has been a few years. Carnival of Souls tells the story of Mary (Candace Hilligoss), a young, dispassionate church organist who, after escaping from a fatal car accident, is haunted by a ghostly man (Harvey). Every time I watch it, I am befuddled by the quality of the filmmaking: are the seemingly haphazard transitions from scene to scene or the wooden acting actually shoddy work, or an attempt to disturb and disrupt the audiences expectations?
Whatever the intent, the movie completely works for me. It is genuinely creepy throughout, and the things that dont make sense only contribute to the surreal sense of dislocation. Mary is largely a cypher, with no dialogue before the accident and wild mood swings after, which makes it difficult to empathize with her. But these shifts feel less like poor storytelling to me, and more of a way to retain Marys strangeness theres more going on with her than shes willing to show, to us or to other characters. This is made more apparent with the introduction of a lecherous neighbor (Sidney Berger), who gets angry with Mary for rebuffing his greasy advances. Despite his clearly loathsome qualities in his very first scene, he leers at Mary as she changes after a bath we viewers find ourselves sharing his frustrations: why does Mary change her mind so much? Why is she so rude? Why doesnt she like us? We just want to like her.
The story does reach resolution, helped along by some clunky exposition here and there, but the denouement occurs with no explanation, underscoring the inescapable inevitability of its conclusion. Conversely, other plot points, particularly one about the struggle between Marys secular, mercenary approach to church service and the various pastors who try to save her remain underdeveloped and unresolved. Again, though, all of this works in the movies favor, constantly keeping audiences unsure of what theyre watching.
Yeah, I think we are pretty starved. Think about it -- in comparison to other genres, how often does a really good horror movie come out? Maybe once a year? Two a year if we go worldwide? Every other genre gets a few per year, at least enough to satisfy the hardcore fans, but we have to deal with countless SyFy CGI nonsense, personality-free remakes, and PG-13 teen dramas masquerading as fright films. Being a horror fan is kind of like being Charlie Brown: we see a movie that looks like it might be scary, we get all excited and run toward, but just as we think we've got something good -- Lucy pulls away the football and we're watching another watered-down variation of the same old fake-outs and tired tricks we've seen a million times before.
That said, horror fans are lucky in that there's usually something to be enjoyed in even a terrible horror movie. This is less true of any other genre (save, maybe, action) -- a bad romance movie can't make the relationship matter, a bad comedy is abysmal, and (unless it's The Room) a bad drama is nothing but excruciating whining. At least an utterly incompetent horror movie, like the one in your avatar, is still a wonder to behold.
This is becoming less true, I think, because CGI lacks the charm of practical effects -- can you imagine watching a CG version of TerrorVision? -- and because of SyFy movies like Sharknado, which are too in on the joke.
But, overall, I think that horror fans do get fewer highs, but our lows are a lot more fun than the lows of others.
I consider the original 1985 version of Return of the Living Dead to be a Cult Classic, and one of the more underrated zombie films out there. It's a great time, with a decent cast and story that doesn't take itself too seriously. The undead look cool, and this was also the movie that introduced the brain as a delicacy to the zombie masses.
That said, I had my cringe reflex ready for the sequel. Part II takes place shortly after the first one, where a military truck is transporting the barrels of Trioxin. One of the barrels falls into the river and washes up near a Mausoleum, were some kids find it. The kids release the Trioxin and the undead rise once again, and it's up to good kid Jesse, his sister, a cable guy, and some grave robbers to survive as the zombies invade the suburbs.
First off -- the Zombies in this one have the worst special effects and makeup I have ever seen! They are so beyond awful it's hilarious. And that really is the only good time that will be had watching this sequel, is just laughing at how bad the zombies look. The ending is also an epic fail in that the
town corrals all of the zombies into a power plant where they all get electrocuted
. The director must have told them to dance or something because that's what it looks like they are doing, and even an undead Michael Jackson joins the fray.
I have a soft spot for Return2 though as I watched it as a kid. It still has one of my favorite settings in a horror film (suburbs under construction) as well as poster art(included above, its amazing!). Its very much supposed to be a comedy though and should be viewed as such.
