Dracula
CS! Gold
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 26,105 
Likes: 5,732
Location:
Member is Online
|
Post by Dracula on Oct 9, 2017 8:40:27 GMT -5
Film Eight: Raising Cain (1992)  Can someone be a great director when a solid majority of their movies are kind of bad? Brian De Palma is a filmmaker who tests that question. The guy has certainly made a handful of great movies but all too many of his movies squander his talents on goofy subpar material with questionable performances and a generally unpalatable seedy aura. De Palma had however gained a lot of legitimacy in the late 80s by working on a lot of legit movies like The Untouchables and Casualties of War but that hit a pretty big speed bump with his adaptation of Bonfire of the Vanities and Raising Cain was in many ways an attempt to get back to his roots as the maker of dark borderline horror films like Dressed to Kill and Sisters. The film focuses on a guy played by John Lithgow who appears to be suffering from multiple personality disorder and one of his personalities of course happens to be a serial killer. This is of course a concept that the movie shares with a LOT of movies, what makes this one a little different is that most of the multiple personality stuff is done from the protagonist’s perspective rather than the perspective of others, so there’s a lot of “multiple John Lithgows on screen type stuff” to represent his inner struggles. Beyond that there’s a bit of an unreliable narrator thing throughout and something of a dream-logicy kind of thing. It’s kind of hard to get into but it does get better in its third act and has a couple decent moments but if you’re trying to luxuriate in that De Palma style there are much better options out there. *** out of Five |
|
Neverending
CS! Platinum
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 65,788
Likes: 8,648
Location:
Last Online Nov 25, 2024 12:00:25 GMT -5
|
Post by Neverending on Oct 9, 2017 9:38:36 GMT -5
De Palma is like the Coen Bros. He jumps back & forth between different types of movies. He followed this with Carlito's Way and Mission: Impossible which are very much in the Untouchables/Casualties of War vein.
|
|
1godzillafan
Studio Head
Join Date: Feb 2017
I like pie!
Posts: 9,480
Likes: 6,217
Location:
Last Online Nov 8, 2024 5:42:00 GMT -5
|
Post by 1godzillafan on Oct 9, 2017 13:03:42 GMT -5
Day Nine: Film Year: 2009 Director: Chris Weitz Starring: Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, Taylor Lautner, Anna Kendrick, Michael Sheen, Dakota Fanning Riff Year: 2010 Riffers: Michael J. Nelson, Kevin Murphy, Bill Corbett Selected Short: How Much Affection? It's a question we ponder every time we tip the pizza guy: How much affection? Is it necessary to set the box down before embracing him? How long do you hold him, knowing that he has other deliveries to make? Can lower tips be compensated for with more affection?
How Much Affection? sadly touches on none of these issues; its Pizza Guy advice comes from the "30 Minutes or Free" era and is therefore quite out of date. What you will find in this short are dates that end in tears, sandwich making and a stern reminder of the potential Gerber-eating consequences of Too Much Affection.
Riffers Mike, Kevin and Bill differ wildly in their estimates of How Much Affection, but mostly because Bill insists on measuring affection using the metric system.Sex is a terrifying and evil thing that must be stomped out at all costs. This twenty minute short from the the 1950’s aims to do just that. Here we have two teenagers on the verge of making whoopie, but torn apart by vows of abstinence. Will having sex destroy their relationship? Honestly with the way the short portrays them as uncomfortable around each other makes me think it would actually SAVE it! But sex will bring babies upon the world. Babies are miraculous burdens that lead to misery. If you have one, you’re life will be ruined, but you will insist it’s the greatest joy you have ever known as you die a little every time you see that fake smile in the mirror. This is another moral the short tries to throw in your face. The short is one of those ambiguous “you decide what’s right” messaged films that will clearly be disappointed in you if you make the wrong choice. The right choice for me is to watch it with Mike, Kevin, and Bill. Their riffs are steady and workmanlike, but sometimes hit their target of the old-timey values that make this short amusing today. Back then love was only for those who could keep it in their pants. As for today? Well, how about that orgy? And now our feature presentation... Twi-Hard. A once proud word that has been shockingly cheapened by over-use. It used to mean something. These days, any given twelve year old girl with Team Edward wallpaper on her iPhone can be the star of a "Vampire Fever" cover story photo in USA Today. It's not right. Just because some soccer mom blows two months of grocery funds on an elaborate face tattoo replicating the iconic "Cullen baseball" scene, that DOES NOT make her a real Twi-Hard, okay? It's something you earn. It's something you live.
Forgive our emotion on this issue, but it's just that Mike, Kevin, and Bill are probably the biggest Twilight fans on the planet. Just survey Kristen Stewart's file of restraining order requests, and see which names pop up the most (Stephenie Meyer's file is alarmingly similar). So it should surprise no one that these three sparkly warriors trekked to the theater dozens upon dozens of times to feast upon the sweet succulent cinematic nectar that is New Moon. After the fourteenth viewing, the girl at the ticket counter was unable to make eye contact with them, muttering something about "grown men" under her breath. The pimply popcorn vendor filled his friends' inboxes with texts like "OMG third time today," while the theater janitor constantly fought the urge to beat them with his mop. In a word: epic.
But the shame they endured, along with the suffering of their long-neglected wives and children, is your gain. Thanks to these endless, obsessive, life-destroying viewings, Mike, Kevin, and Bill are able to present this RiffTrax of New Moon on the eve of its DVD release. Let's just hope that, now that the ride is over, they can put their lives back together once and for all (they're not making any more of these movies, right?).Surely you didn’t think I was only doing one Twilight movie, didn’t you? Haha, you dumb bastard, it’s all or nothing. We’re going the distance, baby. (Oh, I’ve wasted my life) What can I say about New Moon? Well, if I say nothing else about it it’s a much prettier movie than the first one. The flick has some gorgeous cinematography and does some neat camera tricks. Objectively is it a better movie than the first? Well………… Sorry, this is a long Twilight character pause, so give me twenty minutes and I’ll finish that thought. The first Twilight movie is about a mopey girl who eases her depression with a fascination with a boy at school who happens to be a vampire. New Moon is about a mopey girl who eases her depression with a fascination with a boy at school who happens to be a werewolf. Sure there are new concepts of world building sprinkled about in this movie, and if you’re really into the mythology of Twilight that might be engaging, but this is essentially the same movie we’ve seen before. And in the end pretty much nothing happens in this movie. We meet werewolves and flaming vampire kings. That’s it. And this is the longest movie in the series. Siiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigh. This is an inconsequential story that exists because people will buy it regardless of whether it’s good or not. It’s padded, bloated, boring, and a complete waste of time. From a technical perspective I can’t call it the worst Twilight movie, but in many ways it’s the easiest to resent because it exemplifies everything wrong with the franchise. “Complete sentence?.......NO! She’s oh for fifty!” Easing the boredom is this quality Rifftrax. One thing I will say right off the bat is that it’s not as good as the first one, not even close, but when the laughs peak the highs are just as gutbusting. Kristen Stewart’s stammering and just plain weird performance in this film is ripe for the mocking and the boys play with it like Jacob with a chew toy. One thing for me that brings this Trax down is there are quite a few gay jokes in this one. There are a few homoerotic gags in the first, but New Moon is positively saturated with them. I don’t find this too much of a detraction, since they’re not hateful and are sometimes funny if they strike at the right moment, but they play like a safe go-to joke when nothing better is offered. The moment where these could be the strongest is during the Volturi scenes at the end, because these guys are the perfect match for this humor, but by the time we get there we’ve heard so many similar gags that they feel tiresome. But overall New Moon is a worthy successor to the crown jewel of Rifftrax. It has moments where it lags often due to the bloat of the movie it’s linked to, but laughs await those who brave it. I’d suggest the first film for anyone who wants to sample Twilight Rifftrax over this, though.
|
|
Doomsday
Administrator 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 23,303
Likes: 6,769
Location:
Last Online Nov 25, 2024 11:58:10 GMT -5
|
Post by Doomsday on Oct 9, 2017 18:04:06 GMT -5
And now, Doomsday continues his ongoing series of watching horror movies he's never seen before for Halloween......Event Horizon (1997)
 I may have completely misinterpreted this movie's reputation before watching it. Before I turned it on I was under the impression that people enjoyed this movie, that it was some cult hit and a sci-fi/horror gem hiding in the recesses of 90s filmdom. I don't know why, that thought was just in my brain for years which is why I finally put it on my Halloween list so I wouldn't forget yet again. I started to question my impression however when I saw 'Directed by Paul Anderson' in the opening credits. Paul Anderson? As in Paul W.S. Anderson of Mortal Kombat and Resident Evil fame? Well okay. Then came the opening scene, a tracking shot of the spaceship Event Horizon which had obviously met an unfortunate fate. Personal items and tools were floating around, made possible by the shoddy, terrible VFX that could be found in several mid-to-late 90s action movies like Escape from L.A. and, well Mortal Kombat. I wasn't going to judge a movie on its first 90 seconds though. This movie had Laurence Fishburne and Same Neill after all. Event Horizon is basically a horror rip-off of Tarkovsky's Solaris. Solaris featured an astronaut who orbits a mysterious planet which manifests a person's desires. Ultimately the astronaut chooses to spend the rest of his life on the planet amidst the apparitions the planet produces rather than travel back to Earth. Event Horizon takes this idea and turns it inside out with mixed results. A rescue team, led by Captain Miller (Fishburne) and Dr. Weir (Neill) journeys to a spacecraft orbiting Neptune. They set out after the spacecraft sends out a mysterious beacon and they identify the ship as the Event Horizon, a craft that had disappeared seven years earlier while conducting experiments creating black holes. The crew arrives and finds ghastly horrors on board with evidence of torture and mutilation found throughout the ship. They soon discover that the ship and crew had indeed gone through a black hole into another dimension, one dominated by evil and savage cruelty (that's about as much explanation as we get). The dimension has manifested itself within the ship and creates hallucinations for the rescue team in the forms of their innermost fears, memories or horrific experiences. The crew must overcome these visions and get off the ship in order to make it home and prevent being taken back into the dimension from where the evil came. Sometimes it's difficult to put your finger on but you know it when you see it. You can just tell when a movie is really trying too hard to be shocking, scary or controversial. Usually it's when there isn't a lot of substance behind something that is meant to move or shock you. That's what Event Horizon felt like much of the time. It felt like it had to portray gore or violence not to help convey terror, it's used because the filmmaker thought the gore in and of itself was scary. Unfortunately that's the way many (most?) horror movies operate, using things that should complement the terror as the primary conveyors of whatever is supposed to scare you. I think a lot of people confuse the two. Getting a knife shoved into an eye socket and watching blood pour out isn't scary. The suspense that builds around a family in the deep, secluded woods that may or may not be inhabited by a witch can be pretty damn scary (in case it wasn't obvious I'm talking about The Witch which is a fantastic horror film). Event Horizon tries to be an effective horror movie and the concept is actually not bad, it just tries to go for the shock rather than the deep, suspenseful horror which it definitely had the opportunity to develop. If anything I feel Event Horizon was a missed opportunity. As for the reviews that Event Horizon received, well it has an alright 6.7 on IMDB and a pretty savage 24% on Rotten Tomatoes. I have no idea why I thought it was supposed to be this great film and I'll probably never find out. Oh well, upwards and onwards.
|
|
Dracula
CS! Gold
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 26,105
Likes: 5,732
Location:
Member is Online
|
Post by Dracula on Oct 9, 2017 20:49:58 GMT -5
Film Nine: Colossal (2017)  Colossal is a unique little movie about a woman who is something of a functioning alcoholic and who is close to hitting rock bottom after she loses a job and gets kicked out of her apartment by her boyfriend and returns to her home town after years away. Things start to get weird, however, when a giant Godzilla-like monster suddenly begins attacking Seoul, South Korea during her blackouts and she begins to have legitimate reason to believe there’s some connection between her behavior and the monster attacks. I certainly give the film points for originality, I certainly wouldn’t have been able to come up with a way to combine a Sundancey indie movie with a damn Kaiju movie, but somehow it happened and the combo works better than you’d think for the most part and some of the monster effects are actually pretty impressive for a lot budget movie like this. The problem is that, while the movie works as a metaphor, it kind of gets a bit ridiculous if you are just watching it as a regular narrative. The film is meant to show a rather extreme example of how self-destructive behavior can actually be pretty destructive to other people as well and to show the danger in enabling such behavior. That fits for the most part, but it also sets up the consequences for this kind stuff to be so extreme that it becomes hard to believe that anyone would continue to be as much of an unrelenting jerk as Jason Sudeikis becomes at the end of the film. In some ways I kind of wish they’d made this thing as a short film or as an episode of an anthology TV series or something because I’m not sure there was enough material in the idea as a feature film warrants, but when the film is working it works quite well. **1/2 out of Five
|
|
1godzillafan
Studio Head
Join Date: Feb 2017
I like pie!
Posts: 9,480
Likes: 6,217
Location:
Last Online Nov 8, 2024 5:42:00 GMT -5
|
Post by 1godzillafan on Oct 10, 2017 11:43:14 GMT -5
Day Ten: Film Year: 1958 Director: William Castle Starring: Vincent Price. Nobody cares about anybody else. Riff Year: 2010 (also riffed in 2005 and 2009) Riffers: Michael J. Nelson, Kevin Murphy, Bill Corbett (and Paul F. Tompkins, kinda sorta) Featured Shorts: Magical Disappearing Money, Paper and I (also riffed by Paul F. Tompkins) Is there any possible downside to accepting an invitation from Vincent Price to spend an evening in a creepy mansion that was built on something called “Haunted Hill?” If so, Mike, Kevin and Bill couldn’t find it! In fact they were so eager to join Mr. Price and his terrifying moustache that they riffed the film live, on-stage, and now you can reap the rewards from the safety of home with this live show DVD!
Yes, horror classic House on Haunted Hill provides a mesmerizing walk down “people actually used to find this SCARY?!?” lane. Join the RiffTrax guys as they bring their special brand of rapid-fire comedic commentary to every skeleton-hanging-from-visible-wires, clumsy sexual overtone, and a stunningly inept test pilot whose “heroics” typically lead him to bloody his own nose after locking himself in a broom closet!
The guys are joined by guest riffer Paul F. Tompkins, comedy person extraordinaire and quite a snappy dresser to boot! They also riff two vintage, never-before-seen shorts live on-stage: Paper and I, in which a small boy is haunted by a talking paper bag, and Magical Disappearing Money, about a supermarket witch whose main concern is that you don’t spend too much on rice. No, seriously, that’s what they’re really about!
Join Mike, Kevin, Bill, and Paul for an unforgettable All Hallow’s Eve of mind-melting comedy!One of Rifftrax’s earliest live shows, this 2010 Halloween special has a bit more flair than their more recent attempts, namely more than one short and a guest riffer. They were also partnered with Legend Films at this time, which loved to use Mike, Kevin, and Bill to show off their colonization process. Unlike Night of the Living Dead, this version of House on Haunted Hill was Legend’s colorized version, so no this isn’t the shittiest Technicolor you’ve ever seen. House on Haunted Hill doesn’t lose a lot in the transition, because it really isn’t that scary even in moodier black and white, but purists be warned. I’m annoyed by it, but it’s not a deal breaker. But starting at the beginning, it’s Halloween and Mike, Kevin, and Bill waste no time introducing their Halloween costumes. After the intro they jump right into the first short called Magical Disappearing Money, which in my opinion is the better of the two shorts featured. In it a witch haunts a grocery store, makes everyone’s food disappear, and gives them a lesson on cost effective shopping. The short is cute in a Bewitched sort of way, but Mike, Kevin, and Bill put a satanic twist on it, giving the witch a hilariously demonic personality and making her shenanigans terrifying. After the short they introduce Paul F. Tompkins, who has an amusing comical bit about a cliched horror movie scene that he dislikes. Afterward they roll Paper and I, a short about a sentient paper bag who gives a child a lesson in where paper comes from that he neither asked for nor wanted. Tompkins does well with the boys, but their riffs run a bit to similar to the previous, trying to play up the paper bag as an entity from hell. It’s funny, but it’s a bit tiresome, because we’ve seen shorts like this before both on Rifftrax and MST, and they’re usually riffed exactly the same. For more Paul F. Tompkins, he was also brought back for 2017’s live show Summer Shorts Beach Party, where he joined the gang for two more shorts. Moving on to the movie, here we have this rather inane film from 1958 about a morbid birthday bash at a supposed haunted house. Vincent Price hosts and invites a bunch of strangers because...whatever. But is the house really haunted? Is there a murderer among them? What follows is a series of twists, turns, and “oh come on” moments. Admittedly I have seen next to nothing of William Castle’s “spook”-tabular filmography. I saw this movie many years ago and thought it was stupid. But I saw 13 Ghosts last year and thought it was fun. I might need to see more to get a feel for him, but House on Haunted Hill seems to be his best known/beloved film, so if this is as good as it gets I’m not sure I want to delve deeper. What I do know is that it just isn’t October unless you watch something with Bela Lugosi, Boris Karloff, or Vincent Price. Lugosi has some riffed material out there while Karloff has been granted mercy for years despite having some dogs on his resume. I think this is Price’s only riffed film (I could be wrong), but I decided to throw this into my Schlocktober bash because it’s pretty well known. Possibly due to its public domain status, and also partially because it was remade in 1999. But say what you will about this movie, but at least it’s better than the unwatchable remake. However I can say a lot about this movie. It for the most part makes no sense once revelations start pouring in by the bucket full. It might have played better had they gone whole hog on the haunted house aspect instead of introducing a needlessly complicated and underdeveloped murder plot. Everyone here is at their hammiest, with Vincent Price being more Vincent Price than you could possibly imagine Vincent Price being. There’s so much sensuality for the macabre here, and that’s the way Price fans like it. For quite a while this was one of my favorite live shows. I think a few shows have topped it since, with my current reigning king being this year’s Samurai Cop, but this is still a fun one. The movie is so deliciously outdated that watching it with an audience is a hoot. The riffing itself gains momentum the crazier the film gets to the point where gags are rapid fire and constantly hilarious. The leprechaun quips alone are worth the price of admission. One pleasure of these early live shows is that there’s more of an attempt to up the ante and put on something showier than newer shows. For example during a talkier section of the movie the boys put on a skit where they fire Kevin and replace him with Paul F. Tompkins. Having not been up to speed on the movie, Tompkins fails miserably and is booted off leading to them to invite Kevin back. Stuff like this is fun and it keeps me coming back to these shows even all these years later. And of the earliest shows, House on Haunted Hill stands proud among them.
|
|
PG Cooper
CS! Silver
Join Date: Feb 2009
And those who tasted the bite of his sword named him...The DOOM Slayer
Posts: 16,649
Likes: 4,066
Location:
Last Online Nov 25, 2024 11:13:25 GMT -5
|
Post by PG Cooper on Oct 10, 2017 13:13:06 GMT -5
Bit behind, so I'll do day nine now and ten later today. Day Nine: GrindhousePlanet Terror At the time of Grindhouse's release, it seemed that Planet Terror was seen as the more fun and entertaining movie while Death Proof was seen as a bit of a let-down. Part of this might just be because Tarantino begets much higher expectations than Robert Rodriguez, but Planet Terror also definitely has a faster pace and a lot more action. Ten years later however and Planet Terror has basically been completely forgotten. Death Proof hasn't exactly stood the test of time either, but at least people still remember the car chase. The central problem is that while Planet Terror has some fun bits and really impressive make-up effects, the movie just isn't very memorable. The basic premise boils down to a pretty simple "zombie outbreak" tale and while the movie has a lot of action, none of it is really exceptional. I think the bigger problem though is the film has way too many characters. The actors seem to be having fun but with the exception of Josh Brolin no one really stands out. For all my complaining though, I actually liked Planet Terror a little bit more this time around. There are a handful of effective scenes and its vision of zombies feels a little bit inspired, at least visually. CDeath Proof My girlfriend finally crossed the last Tarantino film she had to see off her list. I know that bitter sweet feeling of finishing off a director you love. Safe to say she's a fan given she's liked everything and yes, that includes the much maligned Death Proof. For my own thoughts, I stand by this is Tarantino's worst movie. It's a bit too long and is very simplistic, but it has an awesome set-piece midway through, an amazing car chase, and a great performance from Kurt Russell. Also, the second group of women are pretty damn charming. BThe TrailersMachete: This is probably the funniest of the trailers and does a good job selling that it could be a real movie (something the actual movie did not accomplish). Danny Trejo is used really well and the "Where are my wife and daughter?" bit is priceless. Werewolf Women of the SS: Kind of a mess (like almost every film Rob Zombie makes) but Nic Cage owns. Don't: Maybe not the funniest or most memorable, but the high-concept for the trailer is really good and the aesthetic is well-realized. Thanksgiving: My favourite of the trailers. If not for the presence of Eli Roth, I think this is a fairly convincing 1970s trailer. More than any of the other trailers, I can imagine this movie really existing and I like how, for the most part, this is cut as a serious slasher film rather than a parody. Hobo with a Shotgun: This was actually turned into a feature with Rutger Hauer in the lead, but the initial trailer is much more low-key. It lacks a lot of the charms the other trailers have, but the fact that this was actually made on a low-budget by amateurs rather than professionals playing pretend does loan it some legitimacy. |
|
Neverending
CS! Platinum
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 65,788
Likes: 8,648
Location:
Last Online Nov 25, 2024 12:00:25 GMT -5
|
Post by Neverending on Oct 10, 2017 18:59:38 GMT -5
Ah, Grindhouse. My first big fight with Dracula was over that fucking movie. Has it been 10 years already? |
|
Dracula
CS! Gold
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 26,105
Likes: 5,732
Location:
Member is Online
|
Post by Dracula on Oct 10, 2017 19:47:57 GMT -5
Film Ten: Little Shop of Horrors (1960)  This isn’t the musical from the 80s (I’ll be getting to that sometime before month’s end), it’s the original Roger Coreman directed b-movie that the musical was based on. I think I might have seen this before, certain moments definitely seemed familiar, but I’m not sure. The film is as much a dark comedy as it is a monster movie, maybe more-so, which is probably what made it seem like it had potential for musical adaptation. The film’s setup with the Jewish stereotype store owner, the dim employee, and the girl he has a crush on almost seems like a setup for a sitcom set at a florist shop… then the special Halloween episode takes over. The movie runs a mere 70 minutes long and barely qualifies as feature length and you can see some narrative and character shortcuts it takes to accommodate this. It’s also clearly very low budget. Some of the actors here definitely seem kind of second string talents and the story just generally seems kind half thought through, but there is a certain charm to it all. The way Audrey Jr. shouts “feed me” actually does have a certain creepiness to it, and while Seymore is a pretty broadly drawn dope you do still sort of root for him. **1/2 out of Five |
|
Dracula
CS! Gold
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 26,105
Likes: 5,732
Location:
Member is Online
|
Post by Dracula on Oct 10, 2017 19:53:18 GMT -5
Ah, Grindhouse. My first big fight with Dracula was over that fucking movie. Has it been 10 years already? I was right then and I'm right now. |
|
thebtskink
CS! Silver
Join Date: Jul 2000
It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again.
Posts: 19,462
Likes: 4,984
Location:
Last Online Nov 24, 2024 18:41:41 GMT -5
|
Post by thebtskink on Oct 10, 2017 20:31:30 GMT -5
Ah, Grindhouse. My first big fight with Dracula was over that fucking movie. Has it been 10 years already? I was right then and I'm right now. Alright, halt the thread. I need an oral history, stat. |
|
Dracula
CS! Gold
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 26,105
Likes: 5,732
Location:
Member is Online
|
Post by Dracula on Oct 10, 2017 20:58:12 GMT -5
I was right then and I'm right now. Alright, halt the thread. I need an oral history, stat. Short version: There was a great deal of debate over whether Planet Terror or Death Proof was the better movie. I was Team Death Proof, Neverending was Team Planet Terror. I feel history has vindicated me. This is what's been ported over from the old site: comingsoon.boards.net/thread/116/grindhouse-2007-review-thread, but may the record show that that version of the conversation was edited by Neverending, not me and doesn't fully capture the full tenor of that thread. |
|
thebtskink
CS! Silver
Join Date: Jul 2000
It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again.
Posts: 19,462
Likes: 4,984
Location:
Last Online Nov 24, 2024 18:41:41 GMT -5
|
Post by thebtskink on Oct 10, 2017 20:59:19 GMT -5
So Drac was completely right here.
|
|
Neverending
CS! Platinum
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 65,788
Likes: 8,648
Location:
Last Online Nov 25, 2024 12:00:25 GMT -5
|
Post by Neverending on Oct 10, 2017 21:29:55 GMT -5
What are you people smoking? No one talks about Planet Terror anymore because no one gives a shit about Robert Rodriguez anymore, not because they suddenly hate the movie. And Death Proof only comes up when people wanna talk shit about Tarantino. The only one right here is IanTheCool. Like he said, Grindhouse is merely an experiment that failed. That’s it’s legacy. But I can guarantee you most people would rather sit through Planet Terror again instead of enduring another round of that giant snoozefest Death Proof. |
|
IanTheCool
CS! Gold
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 21,496
Likes: 2,864
Location:
Last Online Nov 25, 2024 7:41:09 GMT -5
|
Post by IanTheCool on Oct 10, 2017 21:31:24 GMT -5
Day this-and-that
Teen Wolf
Never seen Teen Wolf before. Now I have. So yup. Its okay, but it sorta doesn't follow through on any of its potential conflicts. And I don't really like the make-up, or whatever you call it. Kinda grosses me out. But Mikey J. is likable, and its watchable enough. Best horror/sports movie? 6/10
|
|
Neverending
CS! Platinum
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 65,788
Likes: 8,648
Location:
Last Online Nov 25, 2024 12:00:25 GMT -5
|
Post by Neverending on Oct 10, 2017 21:48:36 GMT -5
That honor goes to Teen Wolf Too
|
|
thebtskink
CS! Silver
Join Date: Jul 2000
It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again.
Posts: 19,462
Likes: 4,984
Location:
Last Online Nov 24, 2024 18:41:41 GMT -5
|
Post by thebtskink on Oct 10, 2017 22:19:43 GMT -5
Tarantino needs to cut off about 10 minutes of dialogue in the bar, but otherwise Death Proof is real good.
Terror Planet is great schlock but doesn't really compare to Russells performance or the spectacular chase scene
|
|
Neverending
CS! Platinum
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 65,788
Likes: 8,648
Location:
Last Online Nov 25, 2024 12:00:25 GMT -5
|
Post by Neverending on Oct 10, 2017 22:28:39 GMT -5
Tarantino needs to cut off about 10 minutes of dialogue in the bar, but otherwise Death Proof is real good. Terror Planet is great schlock but doesn't really compare to Russells performance of the spectacular chase scene Planet Terror has this great scene Harvey Weinstein masturbated to |
|
PG Cooper
CS! Silver
Join Date: Feb 2009
And those who tasted the bite of his sword named him...The DOOM Slayer
Posts: 16,649
Likes: 4,066
Location:
Last Online Nov 25, 2024 11:13:25 GMT -5
|
Post by PG Cooper on Oct 10, 2017 23:06:16 GMT -5
Day Ten: Creature Double FeatureThe Wolf-Man Slowly plowing through Universal's catalog of classic monster films I've continuously heard The Wolf Man is among the best. Indeed, this tale of lycanthropy does rank near the top of the studio's pile, just below the trifecta offered by James Whale. The whole thing just feels a little more sophisticated than a lot of what Universal was doing with horror at the time. The production is a little stronger, the dialogue is fairly sharp, and the presence of someone like Claude Rains does a lot to bring some gravity. Beyond that, this is an engaging story with a great sense of atmosphere and making the monster also the victim adds depth to the dynamic. There are certainly inconsistencies to be found and little flaws, but all told this is good stuff and a damn fine example of classic horror. A-Mothra I have a moderate interest in giant monster movies, but it alone probably wouldn't be enough to get me to see Mothra. What really did me in is the band Anvil. You remember the documentary from a few years back about an obscure Canadian Thrash Metal band that we're like a real life Spinal Tap? Yeah, I kind of loved those guys. My Dad is a big fan from way back and naturally they've been a part of my own listening. Anyway, one of their most awesome songs is named after this film and tells of the mighty monster destroying Tokyo. I remember as a kid thinking Mothra must be the most awesome monster ever thanks to lyrics like, "Is this a dream or is God telling you it's over". Then I actually saw the monster and laughed my ass off. Maybe with modern special effects and a substantial budget Mothra could like pretty cool, but from a cheap monster movie from the early 1960s? Not really. Anyway, having finally seen the film itself, it has its moments, but it's ultimately kind of lame. I like the island setting and the film's general weirdness is kind of charming, but it takes way too long for Mothra to show up and when she finally does the results are not nearly as exciting as what Ishiro Honda was able to accomplish with Godzilla. In the realm of monster movies, I'm sure there are a lot worse than this, but all the same I don't think this is very impressive. D+
|
|
Neverending
CS! Platinum
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 65,788
Likes: 8,648
Location:
Last Online Nov 25, 2024 12:00:25 GMT -5
|
Post by Neverending on Oct 11, 2017 2:37:20 GMT -5
BODY PARTS (1991) Remember the Halloween episode of The Simpsons where Homer gets Snake's hair transplanted on his head and then it takes over his mind? Yeah... that was a spoof of this movie. Jeff Fahey plays a guy who loses his arm in a car accident and then gets an arm transplant that has a mind of it's own and tries to go on a murderous rampage. It's a great concept, and there's a lot of great moments, but the script loses steam towards the end. It was obvious they didn't have much of a story to go along with the concept. Or the studio got in the way. This movie isn't exactly Idle Hands. It never gets TOO over-the-top and that may be the core issue.
|
|
PG Cooper
CS! Silver
Join Date: Feb 2009
And those who tasted the bite of his sword named him...The DOOM Slayer
Posts: 16,649
Likes: 4,066
Location:
Last Online Nov 25, 2024 11:13:25 GMT -5
|
Post by PG Cooper on Oct 11, 2017 10:12:56 GMT -5
BODY PARTS (1991)Remember the Halloween episode of The Simpsons where Homer gets Snake's hair transplanted on his head and then it takes over his mind? Yeah... that was a spoof of this movie. Jeff Fahey plays a guy who loses his arm in a car accident and then gets an arm transplant that has a mind of it's own and tries to go on a murderous rampage. It's a great concept, and there's a lot of great moments, but the script loses steam towards the end. It was obvious they didn't have much of a story to go along with the concept. Or the studio got in the way. This movie isn't exactly Idle Hands. It never gets TOO over-the-top and that may be the core issue. Great Simpsons episode. "You're under arrest for the murders of Moe Syzslak and Apu Nahasa...pasa...uh, just Moe, just Moe." |
|
PG Cooper
CS! Silver
Join Date: Feb 2009
And those who tasted the bite of his sword named him...The DOOM Slayer
Posts: 16,649
Likes: 4,066
Location:
Last Online Nov 25, 2024 11:13:25 GMT -5
|
Post by PG Cooper on Oct 11, 2017 12:24:27 GMT -5
Day 11: Random Horror my Girlfriend and I Watched, Part IIEvil Dead It's a shame most of the characters in this film are worthless, because with a more interesting set of people this could be a modern horror gem. As is, Fede Alvarez' Evil Dead remake is still worth seeking out for some strong filmmaking and commitment to batshit insane violence. I was waning on the film early on but when the teacher slipped on a piece of sliced off skin and slammed his back on the toilet I remembered why I enjoyed this movie so much the first time around. The finale is particularly awesome as the skies literally rain blood. This sort of visceral violent horror is definitely not for everyone, but for the right audience it's really something. BApollo 18 I definitely knew this movie was gonna be trash, but it was still disappointing since the central idea has potential. Found footage horror is typically lazy bullshit, but the the idea of making a found-footage horror film based on a secret Apollo mission in the 1970s could have been interesting. The actual footage from the real missions are atmospheric and mysterious, space is inherently a scary place ripe with horror possibilities, and kooky NASA conspiracies can be fun. However the film never does anything interesting with any of these ideas. Instead, we get a trio of interchangeable characters who are plagued by aliens. The design isn't particularly interesting and the threat itself is cobbled from a host of better horror films. I will give the film some credit for trying to emulate the image quality of footage from the real Apollo missions, but only a tiny amount of credit as the film is wildly inconsistent in this regard. Some shots do an okay job of this, others don't seem to care at all. The other big issue here is the film still operates like a standard found footage horror movie even though the visual limitations of these missions necessitate a different, more patient approach. The result is a film which is occasionally laughably cliche, but is mostly just a boring slog. What a waste. Honestly, the documentary For All Mankind actually does what Apollo 18 should have better. That movie is actually quite beautiful rather than scary, but it's mixture of Apollo footage with ambient music is much better at creating a sense of mystery and atmosphere. D-
|
|
1godzillafan
Studio Head
Join Date: Feb 2017
I like pie!
Posts: 9,480
Likes: 6,217
Location:
Last Online Nov 8, 2024 5:42:00 GMT -5
|
Post by 1godzillafan on Oct 11, 2017 12:38:53 GMT -5
Day Eleven: Film Year: 1983 Director: Richard Franklin Starring: Anthony Perkins, Vera Miles, Meg Tilly, Robert Loggia, Dennis Franz Riff Year: 2013 Riffers: Michael J. Nelson, Kevin Murphy, Bill Corbett Selected Short: Krasner, Norman: Beloved Husband of Irma Folks, there is no dancing around this issue: the plot of the first ever Norman short is that Norman uses a public restroom. Is this a pleasant experience for Norman? How dare you ask that question. This is Norman we are talking about. Having bad experiences with toilets is the closest thing he has to a personality.
Fortunately, the director made the choice to film the entire short in stark black and white, to really amp up the despair factor, and also the sense that this might have all been found footage from a restroom surveillance camera. This lends the short a noir-ish, Bergman-esque touch to scenes such as Norman begging for change in a public restroom, and Norman overflowing the toilet.
Fans of Norman should grunt, groan, and probably steer clear of the can for at least half an hour after Norman’s been in there in what is truly one of the top three shorts where Norman roots around in a toilet. See where it all began in: Norman Krasner.Well, since we’re watching film’s most famous Norman today it seems fit that we start tonight off with Rifftrax’s favorite Norman. I hadn’t seen this short before now, and I was curious as to why it wasn’t riffed in a live show like other Norman shorts. Now I have a rough idea. It’s not very amusing, and it’s honestly a little gross. Pretty much the entire short is devoted to Norman taking a dump. We watch him look for change to get into the stall, sit on the toilet for several minutes, look for toilet paper, let it overflow, and finally he gets locked in. There’s even a strange moment in which he is propositioned by the man in the next stall. It’s not Norman’s finest hour, and I’m left wondering how this could spark such a strange short series. The riffing is par for a Norman short, as they pretty much just heckle him mercilessly. Honestly I was so turned off by the short that the riffs were drowned out as I just tuned out of the entire thing. And now our feature presentation... Turns out hilarious re-imaginings of classic Hitchcock movies aren’t just for James Nguyen! They even dug up the original Norman Bates (aka, Anthony Perkins, you may know him from his other work in just kidding, obviously, just kidding) and his momma (quite literally) for this one! Not to mention the Motel and roadside homestead, and even the iconic shower scene! Because, when you see a timeless thriller beloved by millions, the thing you want most is to follow it with a sequel 22 years later that pays homage by just whizzing all over it in every way possible.
Norman gets released home to his family crime scene with some help from psychiatrist Robert Loggia, who’s tough and cool as always, but utterly inept as a psychiatrist. Despite the fact that Norman’s killing spree would’ve made national news, with college kids wearing ironic t-shirts of him in his mother’s dress by now, very few folks in his sleepy hometown seem to remember him at all. And those that do are eager to give him a job, or, in the case of Meg Tilly, go back to his home and spend the night, just for funsies. Only Dennis Franz (and, presumably, his bare bottom) is suspicious of the man who IS STILL OBVIOUSLY INSANE. But hey, who knows, maybe Norman’s fine now? JUST KIDDING, OBVIOUSLY, JUST KIDDING, HE’S STILL NUTS AND TELLS THEM SO HIMSELF MULTIPLE TIMES.
Join Mike, Bill, and Kevin for Psycho II, and turn the crank on Hitchcock’s grave one more time!The closest they ever got to riffing Alfred Hitchcock. Actually technically they do riff Hitchcock here, since the first few minutes of this film are footage from the original’s famous shower scene. But most of the jabs in that scene are mocking Psycho II for daring to feature footage from the classic. But really the one thing that I can’t stop thinking when watching this movie is that it is way better than a Psycho II had any right to be. Most of its inadequacies come from comparing it to Hitchcock’s tight and calculated original. And yes, it’s nowhere near as artistic as its predecessor. But considering this was made during the wave of the 80’s slasher boom, and instead of taking the easy route of typical gore fest they come up with an interesting story and keep it psychological. Psycho II sees Norman Bates rehabilitated and trying to rebuild his life. He returns to reopen his motel but finds the world rallying against him. Eventually he begins hearing voices from mother again. There’s an interesting commentary in this film about someone who did horrible things and trying to move past them only to see that very few people will let him, treating him like a monster and leading to a monster being awakened. It’s a story that I think has immense power and it’s one that keeps me coming back to Psycho II almost as much as the first. Not to say that the movie is perfect. As it unfolds some logic flaws take shape. Plus the twist of Norman’s “mother” in this film is a bit unwelcome, because it cheapens Norman’s relationship with his mother in the first film. But Psycho II is a very smart movie with a story that I think is far more interesting than most thrillers. Mike, Kevin, and Bill however don’t see it that way. They accuse the film of desecrating Hitchcock’s original and provoke Norman to the point where they almost blend in with the townspeople who hate him. This riffing style is strange to me, because they’re feeding into the subtext of the movie while being somewhat oblivious to it. I think these riffs would be better suited to Psycho III instead of II, where Norman is clearly crazy from the get go. But even taking Psycho II’s riff by itself, they repeat these riffs to the point of monotony. There’s not enough variety in this release to be fully recommended. Sometimes their “Hitchcock is rolling over in his grave” jokes land. Sometimes their “Norman is cuckoo and deserves to be locked up” jabs get a chuckle. I wish there was more to it than that personally. I’m pretty sure Hitchcock would have hated Psycho II (or actually I theorize he probably wouldn’t have seen it), but even as somebody who enjoys this movie I find myself disappointed that they couldn’t do something funnier with it. This Rifftrax has it’s moments, but doesn’t deliver the goods.
|
|
Dracula
CS! Gold
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 26,105
Likes: 5,732
Location:
Member is Online
|
Post by Dracula on Oct 12, 2017 6:23:19 GMT -5
Film Eleven: Drácula (1931)  The story behind this one is well known to fans of the Universal Monster movies: that for a brief window the studios reacted to international distribution of sound movies by simultaneously making multiple versions of certain movies in different languages and that the most famous of these was the Spanish version of Dracula, which actively tried to one-up their English language counterpart and which some people think is actually the better version. There are indeed some legit arguments to be made in the movie’s favor but I don’t necessarily think it’s the better movie. On one hand, yes, director George Melford (who was a very prominent director during the silent era) is a lot freer with the camera and adds some nice extra touches to certain scenes. However, it does have one clear problem: no Bela Legosi. Legosi’s iconic performance is the major reason that the original movie is famous and without him there is definitely something missing. Additionally the Spanish version is about 20 minutes longer and I don’t know that those twenty minutes really improve the movie. Most of what’s added is additional exposition and a whole lot of extra Renfield stuff. Still, this is a really cool artifact of the film and there is plenty to gain from watching it. **** out of Five |
|
1godzillafan
Studio Head
Join Date: Feb 2017
I like pie!
Posts: 9,480
Likes: 6,217
Location:
Last Online Nov 8, 2024 5:42:00 GMT -5
|
Post by 1godzillafan on Oct 12, 2017 11:40:23 GMT -5
Day Twelve: Film Year: 2008 Director: Matt Reeves Starring: Michael Stahl-David, TJ Miller, Jessica Lucas, Odette Yustman, Lizzy Caplin Riff Year: 2008 Riffers: Michael J. Nelson, Kevin Murphy, Bill Corbett Selected Short: Drawing for Beginners: The Rectangle Can genius be taught? It is one of the great philosophical questions. With enough time, patience, and dedication, can the next Van Gogh be created? Or is the mastery of an artistic discipline something that only a few people are born with the inherent capacity for? The producers of the series Drawing for Beginners believe that a great artist lurks inside all of us, and with the proper attention and guidance, it may one day emerge like a beautiful butterfly, to bestow artistic gifts unto humanity the likes of which the world has never seen.
Step one? Rectangles! Four lines, four right angles. Sounds easy right? WRONG! Improperly drawn rectangles are the second most common mistake witnessed by elementary school art teachers, right behind birds in the shape of lower case m's which most biologists agree make no evolutionary sense. It turns out rectangles are the foundation of all art. Don't believe us? What do the Mona Lisa, American Gothic and The Scream all have in common? Innovations in painted light, aerial perspective and irony? WRONG! The answer is rectangular frames! The next time you're in the Sistine Chapel, why don't you look up at the ceiling and tell us what shapes you see up there. Hint: not rhombuses. Still don't believe us? Pull a DVD off your shelf. Yeah, that one will do. Wait, is that...you own What About Bob? on DVD? No, no, I'm not saying it's bad, it just doesn't seem like the kind of movie you'd really want to watch repeatedly. Well, saying it's a gift doesn't exactly explain it, the person who gave it to you would still have to assume that you would want to - LOOK, the point is, what shape is the box? A rectangle! Art! Rectangles! They just go together!
It therefore goes without saying that if you want to create art, you better damn well learn to draw your rectangles. And Drawing For Beginners: The Rectangle is as good a jumping off point as any...for weeding out the dullards who actually need instruction about drawing rectangles and who clearly have no business ever picking up an artistic implement of any type, lest they injure themselves or others. Maybe they'd be happier watching the Number Munchers demo screen.
Mike, Kevin and Bill take pen in hand and do some old fashioned rectanglin' in Drawing For Beginners: The Rectangle!It should speak volumes of how I feel about this movie that I chose to pair it up with the most rudimentary short Rifftrax has ever done. Honestly, I think this short might be more interesting so maybe I’m giving this movie too much credit. Have you ever thought about how many things you can draw with rectangles? Wonder no more because this short will let your imagination fly! We’ll draw houses, flags, windows, and many others! This short is meant for beginning artists to show them what can be accomplished with simple shapes, and it gets the point across really well. I imagine we’re supposed to draw along, but I left my paper at home. “And now for a real challenge we’re going to draw a brick!” But the simplicity of the short is under full attack by Mike, Kevin, and Bill, as they narrate along that first you must master breathing to attempt to draw a rectangle, while Kevin panics because he never learned how paper works. Their joshing of the short’s innocence is very funny throughout the ten minutes it lasts. If you’re a Rifftrax fan and you haven’t checked out Drawing for Beginners: The Rectangle yet, quit being such a square. And now our feature presentation... "What if a monster attacked a city?" This is the shockingly novel concept behind the viral marketing triumph of the year! Filled with "fresh"* performances and "authentic"** cinematography, Cloverfield masterfully takes a page from The Blair Witch Project, reworking the "snotty 20-somethings endure trauma while repeatedly saying 'dude'" genre into something unique while still being very much the same. Look for star turns by That Girl Who Was in Mean Girls and That One Dude Who Played Eric in The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants.
Mike, Kevin and Bill's RiffTrax was found by the Department of Defense (and then thrown away, but we dug it out of a garbage can.)
*Not very good.
**Not good at all.I recall seeing the first trailer for this movie with Transformers way back in 2007. You know, that one that didn’t have a title and drove everybody nuts. Honestly, I thought the trailer wasn’t very good or memorable at all, but the explosion of “WHAT IS THE TITLELESS MOVIE?” became an internet obsession. That might have been a tactical move on the part of the marketing, hook people with the mystery of the title and they won’t care that the movie looks like ass. And eventually the title came out as Cloverfield, and a resounding “lolwut” was heard across the land. And yet, the movie had already gotten suckers invested in it, obsessed with the movie’s “mythology” even though the film doesn’t really have one in the final product. The continued obsession with this movie is both puzzling and kind of funny because the movie feels so undercooked yet people analyze the hell out of this thing. This is really only the third time I’ve watched the movie. The first was because I was seeing a girl who wanted to see it when it came out and the second was when the Rifftrax for it was released. I was curious to see if my reaction was the same after all that annoying hype long since died down nearly a decade prior. After all, as a fan of giant monster movies I do want to like this movie (just like I want to like Peter Jackson’s King Kong, though that’s never quite panned out for me either). While I find my feeling to be softer than the intense loathing I used to have for it, this is still a really dumb movie. I see glimmers of where the idea of a civilian eye point of view of a monster attack might be an interesting movie to make, but there’s so little here to make it a worthwhile experience. I don’t give a crap about this cardboard love story between a nimrod and his “not-my-girlfriend-but-maybe” and his quest to find her. I have even less interest in this dumber than a bag of hammers cameraman and his inability to leave the camera behind despite common sense. There’s nothing here for me to latch onto except my love of giant monsters, and even that is botched by the constant cutting away from the creature and the really shitty creature design, which makes me glad it’s barely shown. The most I got out of revisiting this movie all these years later is discovering that I actually recognize the people who starred in it from more than just this movie now. It wasn’t until today that I found out the moron with the camera in this movie is TJ Miller, who went on to roles in Deadpool, How to Train Your Dragon, and Big Hero 6. Lizzy Caplin I suppose has a fan base now, though I mostly recognize her from the mediocre Seth Rogen comedy The Interview. Jessica Lucas went on to do the remake of Evil Dead and became a recurring character on Gotham. Odette (Yustman) Annable was on shows I used to watch like Breaking In and House, and I even just saw her on this week’s season premiere of Supergirl. Seriously, the cast of this movie needs to stop spreading like a virus. “Wow! It looks so real because it’s shot so poorly!” I remember thinking very highly of this Rifftrax when it was first released, so it had a lot to live up to in my memory. Of course, in the back of my mind I was always afraid to revisit this one out of fear that I would discover that I only liked it because I hated the movie so much back then. Revisiting this Rifftrax however proved to be a joyous romp through a dimwitted movie by three guys who exist to point out the stupidity that’s playing out onscreen. Mike, Kevin, and Bill question the logic behind everything these idiots do, ESPECIALLY the use of the camera. The precision of their comments do wonders for making this unbearable movie entertaining. And yet I still wonder if my love for the Rifftrax is because I just have a deep rooted desire to see this movie mocked. But by comparison, recently I just watched the Rifftrax for The Hunger Games for the first time, which is a movie I despise even more than Cloverfield. While I thought it was good and they definitely poked fun of elements of the film I thought were silly, it never really made me laugh as consistently as this Rifftrax. But whatever the reason is for me loving this commentary so, it certainly is a giddy pleasure to see this movie dragged out in the street and revealed for what it really is, but alas that’s just preaching to the choir. If I were to say anything against this Rifftrax it would be that paying attention to both the riff and the film is damn near impossible. The movie starts out with a lot of dialogue and it throws it at the viewer at top speed, while most of the riffs talk over it. And what’s worse is that the audio quality varies a lot, which makes syncing the Rifftrax a bit of a bitch because it’s hard to make out most of the checkpoint lines. This is definitely a riff that benefits from having seen the movie beforehand, and if you haven’t then I recommend putting the subtitles on. Having not seen the movie in years I started out this Rifftrax pretty dazed from trying to listen to both the riffs and the heavy handed spoonfeeding of the plot simultaneously. But I’m going to say yes, I still love this Rifftrax. I may not hate the movie as much as I used to (it’s just kinda laughably stupid now), but it’s well suited to the treatment throughout the final three-quarters of the film. This is definitely a must see for riffing fans.
|
|
