Dracula
CS! Gold
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 26,101
Likes: 5,731
Location:
Member is Online
|
Post by Dracula on Oct 13, 2014 8:35:45 GMT -5
Film Twelve: Pacific Heights (1990) Yuppie Horror Installment 3: While The Stepfather predated Fatal Attraction and Dead Calm was different enough that it didn’t really need to live in its shadow, Pacific Heights is the first of the yuppie horror films to be pretty obviously inspired by the success of that Adrian Lynne film in 1987. Here we are once again treated to a pair of upper middle class people (albeit a little younger this time) who find their lives turned upside down when a crazy person shows up in it. This time we look at a young couple (Matthew Modine and Melanie Griffith) are the new owners of an apartment building that they have purchased at great risk by taking out a mortgage that they can only pay if they collect all their rent payments promptly. The plan is upended when a man named Carter Hayes (Michael Keaton) becomes one of their first tenants and promptly begins acting strangely. He makes noise all through the night but never answers the door and his rent payments haven’t shown up either and when these inexperienced landlords try to evict him he finds a number of ways to dodge the orders. The film is in certain ways a 1990s answer to Cape Fear (it was made a year before Martin Scorsese’s remake) in that it’s about a psychopath who terrorizes a family without ever really breaking any laws and occasionally making them look like the bad guy. Unlike Cape Fear, Carter Hayes’ motivations are never entirely clear. Sometimes he comes off like he’s merely a con man who hopes to profit from what he’s doing, other times he seems like he just gets off on causing mischief, and sometimes he seems like a straight-up psycho. The goal of the movie is to put you in the shoes of these landlords who suddenly find themselves in the middle of this kafka-esque spiral of trouble. However, the movie sort of undercuts this by making its protagonists (but particularly the Matthew Modine character) almost impossible to relate to or sympathize with. The Modine character is a flat out impulsive moron who brings most of his problems on himself by getting ridiculously aggressive and making mind-bogglingly stupid decisions at every turn and never fucking learns. He makes the boyfriend in Paranormal Activity look calm and collected by comparison. The Melanie Griffith character is a bit more likable and proves to be more capable than she looks by the end, but she’s also under-developed and Griggith’s performance isn’t much better than Modine’s. Michael Keaton obviously gives the standout performance here, but I still don’t know that I’d really call Carter Hayes a particularly good villain. In fact I strongly suspect that earlier versions of the script (or perhaps early cuts of the film even) had Hayes being less of a dangerous psychopath and more of a jackass trying to rip people off and that this was changed at the last minute by a studio note that demanded that the film play more like a thriller and that a bunch of shots of Keaton behaving like a sinister creep be added which don’t really get followed through on. There’s a really bizarre scene with Hayes right at the very beginning of the film that seems to be completely incongruous with everything that comes after and I can’t help but wonder if this is a residual piece of that alternate version of the film. Who knows, at the end of the day this just isn’t nearly as good of a film as it could have been. It’s certainly beneath the dignity of director John Schlesinger (who seemed to have fallen off in a big way during the 80s) and is generally just kind of forgettable. ** out of Four
|
|
Deexan
CS! Silver
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 18,196
Likes: 2,995
Location:
Last Online Nov 13, 2021 19:23:59 GMT -5
|
Post by Deexan on Oct 13, 2014 10:38:21 GMT -5
Haha - I like the Ghoulies one. Translation: "Ghoulies are green and devilishly evil!"
|
|
Neverending
CS! Platinum
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 65,765
Likes: 8,645
Location:
Last Online Nov 21, 2024 17:53:27 GMT -5
|
Post by Neverending on Oct 13, 2014 14:47:23 GMT -5
I'm getting back into the swing of things. PG COOPER WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED ANYMORE! THE CAR (1977)If you felt that Steven Spielberg's 1971 breakout film, Duel, needed more violence and mayhem then The Car is the movie for you. It's literally about a supernatural car that kills people at a small town. That's it. It stars James Brolin, Ronny Cox and a bunch of other people. But they don't matter and the story doesn't matter either. The purpose of The Car is to watch outlandish stuff. There's literally a scene where The Car drives through a house and kills a person. Seriously. It doesn't crash into a house. It drives through a fucking house. You can't help but laugh at how stupid it is. And the ending is ridiculous. They go out into the desert and blow up The Car in Michael Bay style. Then you see the face of the devil in the flames of the fire. I'm not making this shit up. Go watch the movie. It's hilarious if you're in the right mood. C says DeexanCRUISING (1980) Cruising is one of the worst movies ever made by respectable people. Let's ignore the controversy for a minute, which is the main legacy of the film, and focus on the movie itself. It's about a police officer, played by Al Pacino, who goes deep undercover at gay S&M clubs to investigate a serial killer. He's so disgusted by what he witnesses, that he goes home and has rough sex with his wife - played by Karen Allen of Indiana Jones and Animal House fame - so he can wash the gay away. I'm not making this up. Then, after he catches the serial killer and is hailed a hero, there's another murder of a gay person and the film ends with the ambiguous revelation that Al Pacino's character was either the serial killer or he has been turned into one. Okay. NOW let's focus on the controversy. Can you believe this movie exists and it was released only 34 years ago? Cruising pissed off so many people that William Friedkin's career pretty much ended because of it. Sure, he has had his moments since then, but overall, the acclaimed director of The French Connection and The Exorcist destroyed his career because of homophobia. F says Doomsday
|
|
PhantomKnight
CS! Gold
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 20,527
Likes: 3,130
Location:
Last Online Nov 22, 2024 0:32:12 GMT -5
|
Post by PhantomKnight on Oct 13, 2014 14:51:50 GMT -5
DAY THIRTEEN: HANNIBAL WEEK - DAY ONE: MANHUNTER (1986)
First off, I can say that this is a competently-made and well-acted film. While Mann effectively downplays the more "freakshow" qualities of the story, I also found that this approach also gave this movie a rather dull and monotonous feel a lot of the time. Especially in comparison with the later on-screen iterations of the "Lecter-verse", Mann's treatment is more straightforward, and while I can see why some people would like that, I found it made the movie feel more average and also pretty dated with all of its 80's stylistic choices. Manhunter does, however, offer up a pretty interesting interpretation of the character of Will Graham. William Petersen plays the character in such a way where his past experiences with Hannibal Lecter clearly haunt him, and the scenes where we get glimpses of that are rather good. Brian Cox's interpretation of Hannibal is solid, yet nothing really memorable, and the actor playing The Tooth Fairy here didn't really leave an impression on me. But again, my biggest beef with Manhunter is that it never managed to truly involve me in the story, something which the later interpretations of Thomas Harris' work (save for Hannibal Rising, since I haven't seen that) managed to do, and pretty easily, I might add. And it pains me even more to say this when considering someone like Michael Mann is the director. But fortunately, much better things are ahead for Dr. Lecter. **/****
|
|
PG Cooper
CS! Silver
Join Date: Feb 2009
And those who tasted the bite of his sword named him...The DOOM Slayer
Posts: 16,645
Likes: 4,060
Location:
Last Online Nov 21, 2024 23:47:45 GMT -5
|
Post by PG Cooper on Oct 13, 2014 15:20:20 GMT -5
I'm getting back into the swing of things. PG COOPER WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED ANYMORE! CRUISING (1980)F says DoomsdayNot disappointed. Cruising sounds...um, interesting. 13. The Most Dangerous Game (1932)The Most Dangerous Game is a very famous short story and I was curious to see what this early adaptation would be like. The filmmaking on the whole is pretty solid. Some of the performances and staging share the awkwardness that a lot of early 30s films have, but that's more a product of the time and can be forgotten. What really holds the film back is the central hunt, which feels more like a conventional chase than a true battle of wits in the heart of the jungle. There are very few slow moments with most of it consisting of people running, and there isn't really a sense of tension or brutality. In general, the film just feels light and with a runtime of barely over an hour, there's not much here. Still, it's a breezy enough watch that keeps your attention, even if it fades shortly after being seen. C
|
|
Neverending
CS! Platinum
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 65,765
Likes: 8,645
Location:
Last Online Nov 21, 2024 17:53:27 GMT -5
|
Post by Neverending on Oct 13, 2014 16:41:11 GMT -5
I'm getting back into the swing of things. PG COOPER WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED ANYMORE! THE CAR (1977)If you felt that Steven Spielberg's 1971 breakout film, Duel, needed more violence and mayhem then The Car is the movie for you. It's literally about a supernatural car that kills people at a small town. That's it. It stars James Brolin, Ronny Cox and a bunch of other people. But they don't matter and the story doesn't matter either. The purpose of The Car is to watch outlandish stuff. There's literally a scene where The Car drives through a house and kills a person. Seriously. It doesn't crash into a house. It drives through a fucking house. You can't help but laugh at how stupid it is. And the ending is ridiculous. They go out into the desert and blow up The Car in Michael Bay style. Then you see the face of the devil in the flames of the fire. I'm not making this shit up. Go watch the movie. It's hilarious if you're in the right mood. C says DeexanCRUISING (1980) Cruising is one of the worst movies ever made by respectable people. Let's ignore the controversy for a minute, which is the main legacy of the film, and focus on the movie itself. It's about a police officer, played by Al Pacino, who goes deep undercover at gay S&M clubs to investigate a serial killer. He's so disgusted by what he witnesses, that he goes home and has rough sex with his wife - played by Karen Allen of Indiana Jones and Animal House fame - so he can wash the gay away. I'm not making this up. Then, after he catches the serial killer and is hailed a hero, there's another murder of a gay person and the film ends with the ambiguous revelation that Al Pacino's character was either the serial killer or he has been turned into one. Okay. NOW let's focus on the controversy. Can you believe this movie exists and it was released only 34 years ago? Cruising pissed off so many people that William Friedkin's career pretty much ended because of it. Sure, he has had his moments since then, but overall, the acclaimed director of The French Connection and The Exorcist destroyed his career because of homophobia. F says DoomsdaySorry. I got interrupted midstream by work, so anyway, moving on... DAWN OF THE DEAD (2004)A lot can change in 10 years. Remember when Zack Snyder was a nobody and James Gunn was mostly well-known for having written those awful live-action Scooby-Doo movies? Now, Snyder is the guy responsible for making sure that Warner Bros catches up to Marvel in the superhero department and Gunn is the guy who directed Guardians of the Galaxy, the breakout film of 2014. But nothing happens overnight. These two guys didn't suddenly reach this level of success by accident. It all began 10 years ago with the financially successful remake of Dawn of the Dead. The remake tells the same story as the original. A group of people seek shelter at a mall during a zombie apocalypse. The difference between the two is the approach to the story. The original is very much a classic George A. Romero zombie movie, but the remake is trying to cash-in on the success of Danny Boyle's 28 Days Later. As a result, the remake seems very dated to me. It's very much a product of it's era. The original, by comparison, has its own identity. No one can recreate the magic of Romero. They can try, but they'll never succeed. However, I'm not gonna completely criticize the remake. It does have good elements. Some of the actors do a respectable job and their characters are fun to watch. A few of the zombies are very creative, like the pregnant woman and her undead newborn. And everyone is aware of Zack Snyder's skills as an action director. So despite loads of mediocrity, the remake has its moments of greatness and I would recommend watching it at least once. C says MovieBuffTHE WOMAN IN BLACK (2012)Look, we all know that characters in horror movies tend to be stupid, but you can't cross the line and expect the audience to go along with it. The Woman in Black clearly didn't follow that advice because its main character, played by Daniel Radcliffe, makes an alarming number of idiotic decisions. The story in the film is quite simple. A haunted mansion in an English village needs to be sold and a poor bastard, played by Harry Potter, is the guy in charge of doing all the paperwork. Right off the bat, nothing makes any sense. If this is a haunted mansion, and everyone in the village is aware that it's haunted, then who the fuck is gonna buy this place? I could maybe understand if the mansion didn't look haunted and an outsider thought the villagers were crazy, but everything about the mansion, even its location, is super creepy. Then, the main character has the nerve to stay in the mansion by himself to do the paperwork. Why would you do that? WHY?! And when supernatural things start to happen in the mansion, this guy is dumb enough to investigate. No, dude. Don't do that. RUN! Run as fast as you can and get the heck out of that mansion. Don't be a fool. Even teenage girls in slasher films have more common sense than you. And for that reason, I'm giving The Woman in Black a... DSTOKER (2013)Speaking of stupidity, what the fuck is this movie? I was super excited for it because of the awesome trailers, but man, it is AWFUL. Let me breakdown the story for you. A girl's father dies under mysterious circumstances. She's played by Mia Whats-Her-Face from Alice in Wonderland. Naturally, she's sad and whatnot, but her mother recovers very quickly and starts hooking up with her brother-in-law. These two characters are played by Nicole Kidman and Matthew Goode (Watchmen). Now, most screenplays would stop right there, but not Stoker. No. Stoker needs to go to certain places and do certain things. Turns out, the brother-in-law is a serial killer and his niece is turned on by that. There is literally a scene where he kills a guy in front of her and she goes home to masturbate. Okay. That's... interesting. Then, despite all the sexual tension between the two of them, not to mention an awkward love triangle involving the mother, the girl is forced to kill the uncle when she discovers that it was him who killed her father. That unleashes the beast inside of her and now she becomes the serial killer in the family. Some people will defend this bizarre film for taking risks and tackling taboo subject matters, but that's not why I hate the movie. I hate Stoker because it has nothing to say. It's weird for the sake of being weird. This is not a psychological drama that treats everything seriously. It's just an over-the-top and completely unrealistic horror film that's purposely outrageous to standout. That may work for other people - I'm looking at you, Letterboxd - but not me. F says Dracula
|
|
PG Cooper
CS! Silver
Join Date: Feb 2009
And those who tasted the bite of his sword named him...The DOOM Slayer
Posts: 16,645
Likes: 4,060
Location:
Last Online Nov 21, 2024 23:47:45 GMT -5
|
Post by PG Cooper on Oct 13, 2014 17:10:53 GMT -5
I like the Dawn of the Dead remake. It's not great, but I think it's a well-made little zombie film.
|
|
PhantomKnight
CS! Gold
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 20,527
Likes: 3,130
Location:
Last Online Nov 22, 2024 0:32:12 GMT -5
|
Post by PhantomKnight on Oct 13, 2014 17:21:36 GMT -5
I liked The Woman In Black. And Stoker, too, at first, but the more it sits with me...yeah, it was pretty unnecessarily weird.
|
|
Neverending
CS! Platinum
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 65,765
Likes: 8,645
Location:
Last Online Nov 21, 2024 17:53:27 GMT -5
|
Post by Neverending on Oct 13, 2014 21:53:32 GMT -5
THE PG COOPER HAPPY TRAIN CONTINUES.SPONSORED BY TIM HORTON'S. IT'S 7/11 BUT CANADIAN.THE SENTINEL (1977)This movie is wild, babe. Just wild.Alison Parker (Cristina Raines) is a New York model who moves into a Brooklyn apartment for $400-a-month. Even for the 1970's that's a great price, so what's the catch? Oh... I don't know... maybe that the devil lives in the building and starts playing mind games with Alison so she can end up killing herself. The first half of The Sentinel is amazing. Director Michael Winner, of Death Wish fame, creates a movie with a creepy mood, psychedelic atmosphere and a little bit of William Castle thrown in for entertainment value. And the ending is just as satisfying as he goes full exploitation with over-the-top horror and lots of random gore. Any fan of the genre will have a great time watching the film. However, the middle portion is a bit disappointing. The movie turns into a mystery tale with Alison's boyfriend (Chris Sarandon) trying to figure out why she is being targeted by the devil. A lot of it ends up being boring exposition that the film could have revealed in much more interesting ways. But luckily, as I said, the ending is loads of fun so this is just a minor complain. Overall, The Sentinel is a thrilling horror movie from the 1970's and I highly recommend it. And be on the lookout for minor roles from Tom Berenger, Beverly D'Angelo, Ava Gardner, Jeff Goldblum, Burgess Meredith, Jerry Orbach, Christopher Walken and Eli Wallach. A
|
|
Dracula
CS! Gold
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 26,101
Likes: 5,731
Location:
Member is Online
|
Post by Dracula on Oct 13, 2014 22:57:06 GMT -5
Film Thirteen: Blacula (1972) Blacula is one of those movies like Snakes on a Plane whose basic existence is just kind of amusing. It was actually made pretty early in the Blaxsploitation cycle (it came out only a little over a year after Shaft) but I always got the impression it was something that got made simply because at a certain point in the 70s they were just trying to remake every movie under the sun and just at “black” to their titles (what next? Blackablanca? The Wizard of Bl… actually they kind of made that one). I wasn’t expecting much from the movie but a little bit of cheesy fun, and that’s mostly what I got. The filmmaking was a little more competent than I expected actually. Director William Crain had a pretty solid command of film grammar and the budget, while low, wasn’t quite at the shoestring levels I thought it would be at. The film also does a pretty good job of keeping the pace up and making sure that things continue to happen over the course of its running time. All too often these 70s grindhouse movies have long lulls of inactivity but that never really happens here. It’s certainly not scary at all, and it’s obviously dated, but in a fun way. It will never be viewed as a great vampire movie and it’s also second-tier among Blaxsploitation movies, but the film does work as camp if you’re in just the right mood. **1/2 out of Four
|
|
Neverending
CS! Platinum
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 65,765
Likes: 8,645
Location:
Last Online Nov 21, 2024 17:53:27 GMT -5
|
Post by Neverending on Oct 13, 2014 22:57:53 GMT -5
THE BLOB (1958)The Colonial Theater in Phoenixville, Pennsylvania. They host a "Blobfest" every year. It should come as no surprise that there's very little blob in The Blob. It's an independent low-budget film with limited 1950's technology. You know you're gonna watch a movie that's cheap, dated, and hopefully comical. Instead, it has a surprisingly well-told story with Steven McQueen, the King of Cool, in his first leading role. McQueen plays a young adult on a date with a very beautiful girl. They're in a car that's parked in the middle of the woods, and suddenly, a meteor lands near them. Before they can investigate it, an old man and his dog find it and become the first victims of the blob. Since the blob just arrived from space, it isn't very powerful yet. It simply attaches itself to the old man's hand and he starts screaming for help until he gets run-over by McQueen and his date. They notice the blob and immediately take the old man to the doctor. No, not the hospital. Just the doctor. They live in a very small town in Pennsylvania, so there's just one guy to take care of everyone's medical problems. And it is at this doctor's office where the blob gains strength. He eats the old man, a nurse, and the doctor. McQueen and his date are the only witnesses, so they rush to the police station for help. When they return, the blob is gone and there's no evidence of three people having been killed. So the police think they've been victims of a prank and send the two of them home. Meanwhile, the blob is roaming around town eating people. McQueen and his date know this and try their best to make people believe them. The Blob was made for teenagers and the filmmakers do a wonderful job of creating characters that the intended audience can relate to. These are just ordinary young people that want to be taken seriously. It also helps that a lot of time is spent exploring the townspeople. The movie takes a Frank Capra approach where we get to meet a lot of different personalities and ultimately get attached to everyone. So halfway through, these feel like real people in real danger. And with the low-budget and technological limitations, everything is handled very simplistically and it gives the film a sense of realism. It's definitely not what you expect from a movie with a very silly premise. For that, look no further than..... BEWARE! THE BLOB (1972) The Blob is a respectable film but the sequel is a quintessential schlockfest. It's the type of movie you watch at three in the morning and fall off the bed laughing. It's directed by Larry Hagman in that dry period in-between I Dream of Jeannie and Dallas. You can tell he did it for the money because he made no effort whatsoever to create a timeless classic. It's very much a film influenced by the 1970s and that's what I find most amusing about it. It's a time capsule. For example, in the original, the townspeople dismiss the kids as pranksters. Here, they accuse them of being on drugs. In fact, there's a scene where a cop is about to arrest Cindy Williams, of Laverne and Shirley fame, for possession of narcotics and the blob literally kills the guy right before he can do anything. You can just picture teenagers in 1972 giving that scene a standing ovation. Another great scene involves an old barber rolling his eyes when a long-haired hippie shows-up. He tells the kid, "let's wash your head before we cut it" and the blob comes up through the sink and attacks him. It's a brilliant crowd-pleasing moment. So, as you can see, it's not a good nor bad movie. It's just fun. Plus, the special effects team did a marvelous job. We see the blob a lot and it's always awesome. THE BLOB REMAKE (1988)
Following the success of Dream Warriors, director Chuck Russell (The Mask) and screenwriter Frank Darabont (The Shawshank Redemption) made a Hollywood remake of The Blob which was intended to spawn a franchise but, unfortunately, it under-performed at the box office. The remake did find an audience on late-night television and became a cult classic. Since there is big Hollywood money involved, Russell and Darabont are able to create a visually stunning blob movie with lots of memorable kill scenes. However, the strength of the remake is finding it's own identity. They could have taken the easy route by simply rehashing old ideas, but instead, they take a major detour. In the original and it's sequel, the plot revolves around teenagers trying to convince adults that there's an alien monster on the loose. In the remake, it starts out that way, but halfway through, it becomes an entirely different film. In this version, the blob isn't an alien creature from space. It's a biological weapon that went amok during testing and a team of scientist's show up to quarantine the entire town. So, there's no escaping the blob. They have to deal with it, and worst of all, the scientist's don't want to destroy it. They just want to stabilize it even though there's mass causalities. This all leads to the highlight of the film. The two main characters, played by Kevin Dillion (Drama from Entourage) and Shawnee Smith (the Saw franchise), become incredibly pro-active. They're no longer asking for help. They're gonna save this town by themselves. It results in a couple of spectacular action set-pieces that end the movie with a bang. Some people might be turned-off by the large scale second-half, but I think it's very entertainment and a nice change-of-pace.
|
|
Neverending
CS! Platinum
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 65,765
Likes: 8,645
Location:
Last Online Nov 21, 2024 17:53:27 GMT -5
|
Post by Neverending on Oct 13, 2014 23:10:14 GMT -5
Film Thirteen: Blacula (1972) I need to re-watch Blacula, but I remember being a fan of it as a kid. Just from memory, I would rank it in my Top 10 Blaxsploitation movies.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
Location:
Last Online Nov 22, 2024 3:53:59 GMT -5
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2014 4:54:56 GMT -5
I enjoyed the original Blob. It's a lot of fun.
|
|
Deexan
CS! Silver
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 18,196
Likes: 2,995
Location:
Last Online Nov 13, 2021 19:23:59 GMT -5
|
Post by Deexan on Oct 14, 2014 5:32:09 GMT -5
CLASSIC HORROR POSTERS - DAY #14:
|
|
Neverending
CS! Platinum
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 65,765
Likes: 8,645
Location:
Last Online Nov 21, 2024 17:53:27 GMT -5
|
Post by Neverending on Oct 14, 2014 8:25:07 GMT -5
BASIC INSTINCT (1992)Basic Instinct is an interesting movie. Director Paul Verhoeven (Robocop) did a remarkable job of creating an erotic thriller with Hitchcockian overtones. But the script by Joe Eszterhas is very problematic. It's about a novelist who is the prime suspect in a murder investigation. Did she use one of her books as a blueprint to kill her lover or is a psychotic fan using the books as inspiration? It's a very simple premise but the execution is very convoluted. If you sit down and think about it, much of it doesn't make sense and almost all of it is ridiculously outlandish. But let's be honest. No one is watching Basic Instinct for the story. Everyone is watching it for Sharon Stone's breakout performance, the softcore pornography and Jerry Goldsmith's memorable score. And since all of those things are exceptionally well-done, I consider the film a success. It's a messy success but a success nonetheless. A-
|
|
PG Cooper
CS! Silver
Join Date: Feb 2009
And those who tasted the bite of his sword named him...The DOOM Slayer
Posts: 16,645
Likes: 4,060
Location:
Last Online Nov 21, 2024 23:47:45 GMT -5
|
Post by PG Cooper on Oct 14, 2014 13:52:36 GMT -5
14. SecondsThis John Frankenheimer film didn't seem to make much of a splash back in 1966, but in the last few years the film seems to have formed a sizeable cult following. I certainly enjoyed the film, but I'm not convinced of its greatness yet. The first and last third of the movie are really good. This material is most directly tied to the company which specializes in faking people's deaths and providing them new faces and identities. The blunt nature of the company and the scenes regarding it are really interesting. Frankenheimer also manages to create a really tense atmosphere through James Wong Howe's direct and intense cinematography and Jerry Goldsmith's haunting score. In fact, these elements are really the only reason Seconds feels like a horror film. Very little truly horrific occurs, but the cinematography and music create such dreadful anxiety that it feels extremely horrific. What I'm not wild about is the middle section, which felt aimless and misguided. I guess that was to reflect how the main character felt, but I feel like his dissatisfaction could have been expressed in a better way. I'm also not sure about Rock Hudson in the lead role. He's not bad, but he's so stoic that he can be a little boring. I suspect the old school actor wasn't the right choice for the more introverted character. Seconds is a very well-constructed movie, with some interesting themes regarding regret and starting fresh, but it is very flawed. Enough so that I need some time before I think about calling it great. B+
|
|
PhantomKnight
CS! Gold
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 20,527
Likes: 3,130
Location:
Last Online Nov 22, 2024 0:32:12 GMT -5
|
Post by PhantomKnight on Oct 14, 2014 15:41:24 GMT -5
DAY FOURTEEN: HANNIBAL WEEK - PART TWO: SILENCE OF THE LAMBS (1991)
I think it's safe to say that Hannibal Lecter is one of the most famous on-screen serial killers in the history of cinema, and Anthony Hopkins' brilliant performance in the role in Silence of the Lambs makes it easy to see why. Jonathan Demme's 1990 thriller, winner of Best Picture for that year, is a pretty carefully-crafted and well-executed film to be sure. From the moment FBI agent Clarice Starling comes face-to-face with the infamous "Hannibal the Cannibal", there's a strong sense of tension and dread that carries through the rest of the scenes that follow. The relationship that develops between Clarice and Lecter is indeed the best aspect of the film; the conversations the two engage in here and there throughout the running time are fascinating and gripping, just like the characters themselves, as well as serving as more than enough proof for why Hopkins and Jodie Foster deserved all their accolades for their work. Now, do I think Silence of the Lambs is a particularly great film? Well, I think it's very, very strong, but I wouldn't exactly call it great. While everything concerning Clarice and Lecter is top-notch, and the film features some really suspenseful and tension-filled sequences, not everything about it soars for me. Ted Levine gives a solid performance as Buffalo Bill, but the character is essentially just a freak and not really explored that much except for on a basic level. And while Jonathan Demme certainly creates a strong sense of atmosphere, the plot eventually devolves into a more standard serial killer story. When compared against something similar like Se7en, I feel Silence of the Lambs pales a bit in the comparison. But still, it's better than a lot of others of its kind, elevated just enough to make it stand out. ***1/2 /****
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
Location:
Last Online Nov 22, 2024 3:53:59 GMT -5
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2014 16:37:53 GMT -5
Seconds is much, much better than a "B+". It is an existential nightmare.
|
|
PG Cooper
CS! Silver
Join Date: Feb 2009
And those who tasted the bite of his sword named him...The DOOM Slayer
Posts: 16,645
Likes: 4,060
Location:
Last Online Nov 21, 2024 23:47:45 GMT -5
|
Post by PG Cooper on Oct 14, 2014 18:43:07 GMT -5
I was hoping you'd rewatch Silence for the series.
|
|
Neverending
CS! Platinum
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 65,765
Likes: 8,645
Location:
Last Online Nov 21, 2024 17:53:27 GMT -5
|
Post by Neverending on Oct 14, 2014 20:57:59 GMT -5
SLAUGHTER HIGH (1986) Slaughter High is a British, pretending to be American, slasher film about a bullied nerd who gets revenge at his High School reunion. The only notable cast member is a 37-year-old Caroline Munro playing the role of a teenager. I'm not making this up. You may remember her as the villainous Bond Girl in The Spy Who Loved Me and as the love-interest in Ray Harryhausen's The Golden Voyage of Sinbad. Her husband is one of the directors of Slaughter High. Yes. He's ONE of the directors. There's three of them and that's what makes the movie so... awkwardly put together. You can tell each director was in charge of different sections because some scenes are incredibly cheesy and hilarious, other scenes are typical slasher film stuff and a few scenes are surprisingly well-made spectacles of special effects and cinematography. And because of this, Slaughter High is both good and bad. It's bad because it's uneven, and lacking one voice, and it's good because there's enough entertainment value to earn your viewership. C- says DeexanBY THE WAY, the music by Harry Manfredini (Friday the 13th) is awesome:
|
|
IanTheCool
CS! Gold
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 21,492
Likes: 2,864
Location:
Last Online Nov 21, 2024 22:52:07 GMT -5
|
Post by IanTheCool on Oct 14, 2014 21:03:25 GMT -5
How are you guys picking your movies? Cause there's some really obscure stuff being watched here.
|
|
Dracula
CS! Gold
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 26,101
Likes: 5,731
Location:
Member is Online
|
Post by Dracula on Oct 14, 2014 21:12:54 GMT -5
How are you guys picking your movies? Cause there's some really obscure stuff being watched here. The movies I've been watching have fallen into a few categories: My Yuppie Horror Marathon (Pacific Heights, Dead Calm, etc.) which is one of many "Crash Course" marathons I've had up my sleeve, The last of the Jason movies (which brings to end a tradition I've been doing for years), Creature From the Black Lagoon movies (boxed set I've been meaning to watch), New releases (Only Lovers Left Alive, etc), stuff from my collection I've been meaning to rewatch (American Psycho, Mimic, etc) and random shit that happened to be on TV (Final Destination, Blacula).
|
|
PG Cooper
CS! Silver
Join Date: Feb 2009
And those who tasted the bite of his sword named him...The DOOM Slayer
Posts: 16,645
Likes: 4,060
Location:
Last Online Nov 21, 2024 23:47:45 GMT -5
|
Post by PG Cooper on Oct 14, 2014 21:18:44 GMT -5
How are you guys picking your movies? Cause there's some really obscure stuff being watched here. Horror movies on Netflix I haven't seen which look interesting, movies I feel like rewatching, and while I was home for Thanksgiving I grabbed all of the horror movies I PVRd from TCM.
|
|
PhantomKnight
CS! Gold
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 20,527
Likes: 3,130
Location:
Last Online Nov 22, 2024 0:32:12 GMT -5
|
Post by PhantomKnight on Oct 14, 2014 22:12:08 GMT -5
I was hoping you'd rewatch Silence for the series. Why wouldn't I? How are you guys picking your movies? Cause there's some really obscure stuff being watched here. A combination of re-watches of stuff in my collection and on Netflix that I've already seen, plus some on Netflix and DVD I've yet to see. I plan on covering two popular horror movies I haven't seen yet soon.
|
|
Dracula
CS! Gold
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 26,101
Likes: 5,731
Location:
Member is Online
|
Post by Dracula on Oct 15, 2014 1:39:30 GMT -5
Film Fourteen: The Sacrament (2014) One of the few promising up-and-comers in the horror world is Ti West, whose films The House of the Devil and The Innkeepers have both generated significant buzz amongst genre aficionados while also getting some kudos within the general indie scene. If his style is characterized by anything it’s patience. His films are slow burns that build up to moments of intensity and they don’t feel obligated to fill themselves with little scares during the early scenes where the story is being set up. His latest film is about three reporters (AJ Bowen, Joe Swanberg, and Kentucker Audley) who work for Vice (yes, that Vice) who have gone to a strange enclave called Eden Parish looking to document one of the reporter’s reuinion with his sister (Amy Seimetz). The enclave is located in an unnamed foreign country and is filled with disaffected Americans who have decided to leave their old lives behind at the insistence of their leader, an enigmatic man who calls himself father (Gene Jones). Increasingly, this enclave begins to seem less like an innocent hippie commune and more like a Jonestown like cult. In fact, calling this cult “Jonestown like” is perhaps misleading, because it’s more than “Jonestown like,” it’s almost exactly like Jonestown. The story more or less follows the actual story of what happened to Jonestown beat for beat. I was maybe expecting there to be some added twist, but no, all that’s really been changed is the era, the details of who are in the party documenting its last days, and a few other details here or there. In this sense there wasn’t really much of a sense of surprise to the film, but Jonestown is one of the more disturbing stories of the 20th Century so a straightforward (if fictionalized) retelling of what happened there is not entirely unwelcomed. The film uses a found-footage format, perhaps to its detriment. It occasionally dips into the End of Watch sin of breaking its format here and there. There are definitely some shots towards the end that don’t appear to have been filmed by any discernable character. So the film isn’t flawless, but I still mostly liked it. The performances are by and large quite good in that authentic found footage Youtube kind of way and some of the images towards the end do retain some real power and suspense. It’s not Ti West’s most ambitious or elegant work, but it’s probably his most watchable, and it’s also probably one of the better horror movies of 2014. *** out of Four
|
|