Page 73 of 173 FirstFirst ... 236369707172737475767783123 ... LastLast
Results 1,081 to 1,095 of 2589

Thread: Rate the last movie you've seen

  1. #1081
    Zombie Flesh Eater EvilNed's Avatar
    Zombie Flesh Eater

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    6,302
    Undisclosed


    2/5.

    I'm sorry, but this just hasn't aged well. I know it's a werewolf classic but the deal with it is that it's just not that exciting. The mystery of the Colony and the unraveling of it is a non-starter. It's never that mysterious to begin with and by the end of it there's just not that much of an exploration to begin with except the motly crew of woodfolk shrugging their shoulders and proclaiming "Yeah, we're werewolves". The climactic chase of the werewolves is short and part of it is a thoroughly bland shootout, which is not at all what I want in a horror film.

    There's a good story in there but I just don't think it's executed that well. It is a bit original tho and not just a classic retelling of the Wolfman trope. But for being 90 minutes, maybe a werewolf ought to stick to the classic "I got bitten by a strange wolf, now whats happening to me?"-telling rather than attempt worldbuilding.

    Everything aesthetic about it is great tho. The werewolves look good and the transformation scene is a classic. Comparing this to An American Werewolf in London has been done to death... But I prefer the wolves in this one and the transformation scene in that one.
    Last edited by EvilNed; 21-Nov-2016 at 11:57 AM. Reason: sdfsdf

  2. #1082
    Feeding shootemindehead's Avatar
    Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    4,062
    Ireland
    Quote Originally Posted by EvilNed View Post


    2/5.

    I'm sorry, but this just hasn't aged well. I know it's a werewolf classic but the deal with it is that it's just not that exciting. The mystery of the Colony and the unraveling of it is a non-starter. It's never that mysterious to begin with and by the end of it there's just not that much of an exploration to begin with except the motly crew of woodfolk shrugging their shoulders and proclaiming "Yeah, we're werewolves". The climactic chase of the werewolves is short and part of it is a thoroughly bland shootout, which is not at all what I want in a horror film.

    There's a good story in there but I just don't think it's executed that well. It is a bit original tho and not just a classic retelling of the Wolfman trope. But for being 90 minutes, maybe a werewolf ought to stick to the classic "I got bitten by a strange wolf, now whats happening to me?"-telling rather than attempt worldbuilding.

    Everything aesthetic about it is great tho. The werewolves look good and the transformation scene is a classic. Comparing this to An American Werewolf in London has been done to death... But I prefer the wolves in this one and the transformation scene in that one.
    Without a doubt the werewolves in 'The Howling' are better than 'An American Werewolf in London', with the exception of the final shot of the laughable thing that Dee Wallace turns into, but that's where it ends. The latter film is a far superior picture. I've never had that much time for Joe Dante and I don't really know why he gets such praise from genre fans TBH. 'Gremlins' was ok, but other than that, he's a big dose of meh dining out on a couple of hits.

    This is the film that could do with a remake, not John Landis' one. A remake of 'The Howling' could be great.

    - - - Updated - - -

    'The Prowler'

    7/10

    Bog standard entry into the slasher sub genre, that's actually more entertaining than a lot of its kin. Apart from a wierd semi logic hole (why would the killer wait 35 years to start killing again?), it trundles along well and benefits from a decent "final girl" with some simple, but excellent and effective special effects from Tom Savini. The ending though... . Kid me knew this film as 'Rosemary's Killer', and I remember the video cover very well and also my inabiltity to actually rent it (due to the fact that we had no video player and I was way too young ) Bizarrely, this ended up on section 3 of the conservatives "video nasty" list, which is remarkable given where we are now. 'The prowler' won't blow you away, but it's certainly worth a watch.

    'The Shallows'

    5/10

    A neat concept let down by poor CGI, an unnecessary back story and a bad series of musical choices. Blake Lively stars as a surfer who runs off to a "secret" beach her dead mother used to visit before she was born. She gets attacked by a great white (of course) and has to combat the shark, blood loss, exposure and a rising tide. Inevitable comparsions with 'Jaws' will abound, but 'The Shallows' is an entirely different film altogether and Bruce would chuckle at the poor representation of a great white shark that's on offer here. However, the film isn't a disaster despite its very strong shortcomings. Lively is decent in the role, the tension is very well built and there's some very attracive underwater photography early on. By the final third of the film, unfortunately, things start to fall apart and the action oriented conclusion is a bad idea, very badly executed. A film that veers toward the good end of the average scale and worth a cautious look.

    'Whoops Apocalypse'

    4/10

    1986 film based on the 80's TV show of the same name, 'Whoops Apocalypse' starts off as a good idea and then destroys it with a woefully unfunny SAS sequence featuring Rik Mayall. For the most part it consists of entertaing satre on the Falklands, featuring genuinely comic moments. It's never laugh out loud, but there are some sniggers to be had, in a sort of "snorty" way. The most fun I got from it was seeing a lot of well known faces pop up, such as John Sessions, Michael Richards, Lorretta Swit, Alexi Sayle and the aforementioned Mr Mayall. Probably, the most entertaining chatacter was Peter Cook's Prime Minister, who's interesting cure for Britain's high unemployment problem and solution to the impending nuclear doom were the highlight's of the film. A sum of its parts, it's difficult to completely trash and it sort of works in a Monty Python "hit and miss" kind of way.
    I'm runnin' this monkey farm now Frankenstein.....

  3. #1083
    Team Rick MinionZombie's Avatar
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    The Mandatorium
    Posts
    24,165
    UK
    Quote Originally Posted by shootemindehead View Post
    Oh, it's as cheap as chips no doubt, as I said. But I liked the dry approach in the interviews. But, yeh, it looks like something made for 5 quid and round of chips, I agree. I felt it was rather neutral in its appreciation though? Agree on the framing of the clips as well. Don't know what happened there.

    Haven't seen 'Memories of 42nd Street' yet though and I haven't got 'Pieces' cos that film's rubbish, so I don't know whether I will see it. Ha ha...42nd Street...fucking Disneyland nowadays, overpriced and gaudy. I don't know which was better.
    Pieces? You mean "Anthropophagous" - that's where the 42nd Street doc is.

    Yeah, the "Eaten Alive!" doc was pretty even-handed in terms of criticism, but overall it didn't feel like there was much energy in the whole thing - presentation or interviews. The 42nd Street one, on the other hand, is very lively thanks to the interviews (which are still shot in a disappointingly dull manner, mind you) - the likes of Frank Henenlotter, 42nd Street Pete, Lynn Lowry, and Veronica Hart make for very entertaining stories. Which is part of the reason why I felt the "Eaten Alive!" doc came off as if it didn't care two hoots for the subject matter, which was unfortunate. It was alright, there were some interesting bits in there (e.g. Lenzi getting arsy over Deodato's place in the sub-genre, yet still saying Cannibal Holocaust is the pinnacle of the era ) ... and I liked the views that Deodato expressed about "The Green Inferno" (which I also thought was a rather good flick).

    Quote Originally Posted by shootemindehead View Post
    'The Prowler'

    7/10

    Bog standard entry into the slasher sub genre, that's actually more entertaining than a lot of its kin. Apart from a wierd semi logic hole (why would the killer wait 35 years to start killing again?), it trundles along well and benefits from a decent "final girl" with some simple, but excellent and effective special effects from Tom Savini. The ending though... . Kid me knew this film as 'Rosemary's Killer', and I remember the video cover very well and also my inabiltity to actually rent it (due to the fact that we had no video player and I was way too young ) Bizarrely, this ended up on section 3 of the conservatives "video nasty" list, which is remarkable given where we are now. 'The prowler' won't blow you away, but it's certainly worth a watch.
    I've only seen it the one time, it's not brilliant, but there are some good set pieces - and Savini's gore effects are superb (the exploding head rivals the one in Maniac). Although, I will say with the Video Nasty list - the entire House of Commons backed that up. It was under the Conservative's watch, absolutely, but (so I learned from that Video Nasties: The Definitive Guide documentary - it and its follow-up are both well worth watching, btw) all parties got behind it, bowing to tabloid pressure. It's funny nowadays, isn't it? These films play on TV, you can pick them up all over the place, and hell - The Walking Dead and Game of Thrones are two of the most popular shows on the planet and are far more violent, gory, and sexual (in GoT's case) than almost anything in the video nasties line up ... tonally they're very different (the video nasties had that gritty, grotty, sleazy, lurid vibe). That was then ... recently it was all about videogames being the new nasties, the controversy playing out in similar ways ... and now it's about, if anything, porn. But even then, the contexts change, the fury reshapes, the answers and solutions change...
    Last edited by MinionZombie; 21-Nov-2016 at 06:06 PM.

  4. #1084
    Feeding shootemindehead's Avatar
    Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    4,062
    Ireland
    Quote Originally Posted by MinionZombie View Post
    Pieces? You mean "Anthropophagous" - that's where the 42nd Street doc is.
    On the Grindhouse 'Pieces' blu as well. https://filmschoolrejects.com/grindh...02b#.v9an40269

    Quote Originally Posted by MinionZombie View Post
    Yeah, the "Eaten Alive!" doc was pretty even-handed in terms of criticism, but overall it didn't feel like there was much energy in the whole thing - presentation or interviews. The 42nd Street one, on the other hand, is very lively thanks to the interviews (which are still shot in a disappointingly dull manner, mind you) - the likes of Frank Henenlotter, 42nd Street Pete, Lynn Lowry, and Veronica Hart make for very entertaining stories. Which is part of the reason why I felt the "Eaten Alive!" doc came off as if it didn't care two hoots for the subject matter, which was unfortunate. It was alright, there were some interesting bits in there (e.g. Lenzi getting arsy over Deodato's place in the sub-genre, yet still saying Cannibal Holocaust is the pinnacle of the era ) ... and I liked the views that Deodato expressed about "The Green Inferno" (which I also thought was a rather good flick).
    Yeh, it's pretty deadpan, but that didn't bother me. I think with a doc like '42nd St Memories' though, the broader range of subject matter plus the huge number of people involved that one could draw upon would allow for more "livelier" content?

    Yeh, the Lenzi/Deodato thing, I hadn't heard of. FFS lads relax.

    Didn't mind 'The Green Inferno' myself, but it wasn't great. Kinda like every Eli Roth film I suppose. I reckon I expected more.

    Quote Originally Posted by MinionZombie View Post
    I've only seen it the one time, it's not brilliant, but there are some good set pieces - and Savini's gore effects are superb (the exploding head rivals the one in Maniac). Although, I will say with the Video Nasty list - the entire House of Commons backed that up. It was under the Conservative's watch, absolutely, but (so I learned from that Video Nasties: The Definitive Guide documentary - it and its follow-up are both well worth watching, btw) all parties got behind it, bowing to tabloid pressure. It's funny nowadays, isn't it? These films play on TV, you can pick them up all over the place, and hell - The Walking Dead and Game of Thrones are two of the most popular shows on the planet and are far more violent, gory, and sexual (in GoT's case) than almost anything in the video nasties line up ... tonally they're very different (the video nasties had that gritty, grotty, sleazy, lurid vibe). That was then ... recently it was all about videogames being the new nasties, the controversy playing out in similar ways ... and now it's about, if anything, porn. But even then, the contexts change, the fury reshapes, the answers and solutions change...
    Graham Bright's bill was very much a conservative party drive though, even if the house ratified it. In the face of the overwhelming nonsense that prevailed after Bright floated the motion, they would have found it difficult to reject it and the fallout over a few cheap foreign trash movies just wouldn't have been worth it. But the censorship fervor was very much kicked up by the conservatives, largely because it was a cheap source of being seen to be doing something about something. I was alive then and as a young kid I remember newpaper articles featuring the worst excesses spread across pages and "outrage" spewing forth from the likes of Mary Whitehouse etc. The newspapers was where I first caught sight of 'Cannibal Ferox' and the sight of Zora Kerowa being hung up by her pair of acting talents and a maggot infested corpse from Fulci's masterpiece. I thought those films looked like the greatest things ever! It led to a years long search by me to find a VHS copy of 'Zombie Flesh Eaters'. I finally found an ad in the back of DarkSide magazine by a lad in Northern Ireland who could sell me a pirate copy in the 90's. Utterly ridiculous now I look back on it, especially as (you rightly say) these flicks are available almost everywhere. It's funny to think I could actually torrent the entire list in a few hours if I wanted to. Although having seen every film that was put on the list (or lists), I can't say I'm inclined to. As for the Video Nasties doc, I saw that a couple of years ago. It's pretty good, even if Bright was still pushing his nonsense. IIRC, He at one stage says that the film's were "evil".

    You're correct to in that the drive for censoring something is always there, it's just the context that changes. 'The Walking Dead' came in for some serious negativity with Glenn's baseball act, but I have to admit I'm surprised that there's not more calls for censoring media from the usual suspects in society these days. Perhaps they know, due to the internet, that their opinion is outdated and simply wouldn't gain any real traction.

    With games, though, there is nearly ALWAYS sombody whining and they are usually unconnected with gaming too. The whole Anita Sarkesian/Gamergate thing was a truly lamentable expose on all of that. Neither side coming out of it smelling of roses. It all ended up just being really sad. This stuff too has been around for donkey's years. Christ, I remember all the fuss about 'Carmageddon' and Crash magazine's cover for 'Barbarian'. Even as a kid I thought the whole thing was stupid.
    Last edited by shootemindehead; 21-Nov-2016 at 08:00 PM. Reason: .
    I'm runnin' this monkey farm now Frankenstein.....

  5. #1085
    Team Rick MinionZombie's Avatar
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    The Mandatorium
    Posts
    24,165
    UK
    Quote Originally Posted by shootemindehead View Post
    On the Grindhouse 'Pieces' blu as well. https://filmschoolrejects.com/grindh...02b#.v9an40269

    Yeh, it's pretty deadpan, but that didn't bother me. I think with a doc like '42nd St Memories' though, the broader range of subject matter plus the huge number of people involved that one could draw upon would allow for more "livelier" content?
    Oh! I had no idea it was on there, too. Good to know. And yeah, the 42nd Street Memories doc is very lively because of the interviewees and their stories and is altogether more raucus. Good use of photographs from the time as well as clips from the movies, too (particularly movies that feature sequences in/around 42nd Street).

    Quote Originally Posted by shootemindehead View Post
    Graham Bright's bill was very much a conservative party drive though, even if the house ratified it. In the face of the overwhelming nonsense that prevailed after Bright floated the motion, they would have found it difficult to reject it and the fallout over a few cheap foreign trash movies just wouldn't have been worth it. But the censorship fervor was very much kicked up by the conservatives, largely because it was a cheap source of being seen to be doing something about something. I was alive then and as a young kid I remember newpaper articles featuring the worst excesses spread across pages and "outrage" spewing forth from the likes of Mary Whitehouse etc. The newspapers was where I first caught sight of 'Cannibal Ferox' and the sight of Zora Kerowa being hung up by her pair of acting talents and a maggot infested corpse from Fulci's masterpiece. I thought those films looked like the greatest things ever! It led to a years long search by me to find a VHS copy of 'Zombie Flesh Eaters'. I finally found an ad in the back of DarkSide magazine by a lad in Northern Ireland who could sell me a pirate copy in the 90's. Utterly ridiculous now I look back on it, especially as (you rightly say) these flicks are available almost everywhere. It's funny to think I could actually torrent the entire list in a few hours if I wanted to. Although having seen every film that was put on the list (or lists), I can't say I'm inclined to. As for the Video Nasties doc, I saw that a couple of years ago. It's pretty good, even if Bright was still pushing his nonsense. IIRC, He at one stage says that the film's were "evil".

    You're correct to in that the drive for censoring something is always there, it's just the context that changes. 'The Walking Dead' came in for some serious negativity with Glenn's baseball act, but I have to admit I'm surprised that there's not more calls for censoring media from the usual suspects in society these days. Perhaps they know, due to the internet, that their opinion is outdated and simply wouldn't gain any real traction.

    With games, though, there is nearly ALWAYS sombody whining and they are usually unconnected with gaming too. The whole Anita Sarkesian/Gamergate thing was a truly lamentable expose on all of that. Neither side coming out of it smelling of roses. It all ended up just being really sad. This stuff too has been around for donkey's years. Christ, I remember all the fuss about 'Carmageddon' and Crash magazine's cover for 'Barbarian'. Even as a kid I thought the whole thing was stupid.
    True, absolutely, it was birthed by the Conservative party back then, I'm just saying that it quickly became cross-party. Hearing tales of how flippin' Mary Whitehouse and her cohorts were showing out-of-context 'worst of' reels in parliament to make her case pisses me off every time I hear it. I'm glad we're beyond that level of stupidity now, for the most part. You still get some of these pearl-clutching whingebags shuffling about complaining about something saucy on telly (e.g. that BBC drama that was on a while ago that featured a fair amount of rumpy pumpy), but for the most part they are, as you say, out-of-date and out-of-step with the rest of society. Time has moved on, although now they've been replaced with social media mobs, often filled out by quite young people (worringly) who get bent out of shape over the tiniest infraction and demand brutal recompense (and, oftentimes, they're fighting on behalf of someone else's offence - the someone else who, if you ask them face to face, are rarely that offended). In some ways we've moved forwards and in other ways there's an even more pernicious landscape out there ... it's chilling.

    Yeah, even the TWD 'fury' passed over pretty damn quick. The world moves fast now, and money talks - those PTA type complainers didn't stand a chance. They probably say the rubbish they do to feel important and to try and get a few donations from deluded worrybags who spend all their free time getting offended and worrying about "the children" while completely ignoring the needs of their own, actual, real, living children that are in their own house birthed from their own shame-filled loins.

    Ah, yes, videogame and video nasty controversy. Yes, I remember the lure of watching/playing something you weren't allowed to. With the video nasties, that was something I discovered in the 90s through movie magazines and I would marvel at pictures of Zombie Flesh Eaters or The Driller Killer - I wanted to see those flicks - so when the BBFC unbunched its panties in '99 I was at the perfect age to reap the benefit of all that. And I didn't turn into a psychopath, just a dedicated film fan. Likewise with videogames, I remember the controversy surrounding Carmageddon - but it was fairly switfly passed 18 uncut (with red blood and all), and I remember my Dad buying me the special edition release (including mouse mat and keyring and add-on pack), and I played it over and over. Hell, I had played the demo (six minutes a turn, IIRC) repeatedly beforehand. I was bought Duke Nukem Forever, too, and remember a friend of mine was not allowed to play it - so any time he wanted to he'd have to install the demo when his parents were out, play it, and uninstall it and hide the disc.

  6. #1086
    Zombie Flesh Eater EvilNed's Avatar
    Zombie Flesh Eater

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    6,302
    Undisclosed
    Since the conversation drifted to Italian sleaze and exploitation, I thought I'd give you guys a tip; Stunningly Savage.

    It's an artist who does much of the artwork for Arrow BluRays and other releases. I ordered a few posters of Fulci films;

     

  7. #1087
    Feeding shootemindehead's Avatar
    Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    4,062
    Ireland
    Quote Originally Posted by MinionZombie View Post
    True, absolutely, it was birthed by the Conservative party back then, I'm just saying that it quickly became cross-party.
    Agreed. But the only reason it became a cross-party agreement was because of the pointlessness in opposing it. Once the media got hold of it and there Daily Mail campaigns and the like, the issue had become one of "good vs evil". It really was as utterly ridiculous as that. So, there were few voices on either side of the political fence willing to raise their heads and speak up for a number of cheap (mostly) Italian gore films, even if they disagreed with the ban in principle. The politcal fallout just wasn't worth it. Even more ridiculous is the the fact that so few of the people called for the video nasties ban had actually seen 'Cannibal Holocaust', 'Zombie Flesh Eaters', or any other film on the bloody list. As people from the period have said, there should have been voices raised against this sort of petty censorship, as the eventual stakes could have proven quite high. But, at the time, the choice was you either supported the bill and saved British society or you were on the side of the most depraved media that was conjured up by Satan himself to rape children's minds.

    Quote Originally Posted by MinionZombie View Post
    Hearing tales of how flippin' Mary Whitehouse and her cohorts were showing out-of-context 'worst of' reels in parliament to make her case pisses me off every time I hear it. I'm glad we're beyond that level of stupidity now, for the most part. You still get some of these pearl-clutching whingebags shuffling about complaining about something saucy on telly (e.g. that BBC drama that was on a while ago that featured a fair amount of rumpy pumpy), but for the most part they are, as you say, out-of-date and out-of-step with the rest of society. Time has moved on, although now they've been replaced with social media mobs, often filled out by quite young people (worringly) who get bent out of shape over the tiniest infraction and demand brutal recompense (and, oftentimes, they're fighting on behalf of someone else's offence - the someone else who, if you ask them face to face, are rarely that offended). In some ways we've moved forwards and in other ways there's an even more pernicious landscape out there ... it's chilling.
    The likes of Whitehouse represents the worst of that curtain twicher type. She had far, far too much influence on politcal affairs, largely because Thatcher was willing to give her the time to vent her spleen on, largely, mickey mouse issues. Even as a small child I recall thinking just how strange that this old lady could be on the tele telling people how bad something was and that she was going to get it shut down. In fact, too much power to control affairs of culture was readily hand over to that "type" of person. For 15 years the BBFC was run by a guy who flat out refused to have certain scenes remain intact in a film, regardless of what that film was! Now, I've no doubt that James Ferman was a man of his convictions and believed he was doing "good", but he's not the kind of guy I would want as the arbiter of my entertainment. In fact, even though I'm Irish, his influence made my video buying days a bloody minefield of nuisance and disappointment. Every single time I bought a video in HMV, Virgin or wherever, the risk that the heart and soul was cut out of it was quite high. Pretty galling when one had to fork out up to £15.99 for a video in the 90's.

    When the whole thing was dredged up again in during the Jamie Bulger case, by the Lib Dems this time, I was again taken aback that politicans/busy bodies were willing to use this appalling incident as a springboard for their own crusade and careers. The films in the target sights this time were even more inoccuous. 'Childs Play' apparently could make kids murder other kids. Luckily that amendment was shot down pretty quickly as it would have led to even more stringent censorship.

    I agree as well, that the old school Mary Whitehouse moral cursader has been replaced by a newer/younger online type. I'm constantlly rolling my eyes at the likes of the alt right and what I call the alt left and the noisy bleating they engage in. Many of whom are "professional offendees" who say and write the most farcical nonsense in the guise of political debate. There's a disturbing rise of single issue identity politics going on as well and while these shouters are usually contained to an online presence, they have enough like minded folk that nod their head in agreement and none of them seem to have a single grasp of what has come before them from a political point of view.

    Quote Originally Posted by MinionZombie View Post
    Yeah, even the TWD 'fury' passed over pretty damn quick. The world moves fast now, and money talks - those PTA type complainers didn't stand a chance. They probably say the rubbish they do to feel important and to try and get a few donations from deluded worrybags who spend all their free time getting offended and worrying about "the children" while completely ignoring the needs of their own, actual, real, living children that are in their own house birthed from their own shame-filled loins.
    I have to admit, sometimes I'm even surprised at how much certain programmes put on the screen these days. 'Westworld', for instance, had a purely gratuitous orgy scene in the middle of one episode that had me scratching my head and saying to myself "really?". But what's achieved by complaining about it? It's something I'll never understand about that kind of mentality. The sheer arrogance that they know better than you with regards to what you should watch or read. It largely seems contained to the US now among conservative Christian types over there. I don't recall any outrage coming from Britain or anywhere else over 'The Walking Dead' or any other modern TV show. Maybe I just missed it, or it's so small as to be negligible.

    Quote Originally Posted by MinionZombie View Post
    Ah, yes, videogame and video nasty controversy. Yes, I remember the lure of watching/playing something you weren't allowed to. With the video nasties, that was something I discovered in the 90s through movie magazines and I would marvel at pictures of Zombie Flesh Eaters or The Driller Killer - I wanted to see those flicks - so when the BBFC unbunched its panties in '99 I was at the perfect age to reap the benefit of all that. And I didn't turn into a psychopath, just a dedicated film fan. Likewise with videogames, I remember the controversy surrounding Carmageddon - but it was fairly switfly passed 18 uncut (with red blood and all), and I remember my Dad buying me the special edition release (including mouse mat and keyring and add-on pack), and I played it over and over. Hell, I had played the demo (six minutes a turn, IIRC) repeatedly beforehand. I was bought Duke Nukem Forever, too, and remember a friend of mine was not allowed to play it - so any time he wanted to he'd have to install the demo when his parents were out, play it, and uninstall it and hide the disc.
    Hilarious to think that stuff happened and how quaint it all was. Being alive during the rise of the web and the fact that one can see the most awful examples that mankind can sink to, it's astonishing to think that during those times the worst parents had to worry about was whether their kid was playing a violent video game. In many ways I was lucky. My folks had me late, in their 40's, and they just didn't know what to do with me a lot of the time, so nearly anything went in my house. I was kind of allowed to find my own level as it were. Now, I'm not saying that's the formula for raising a child, but I do get antsy when I see parents scolding their kid's curiosity about something they themselves find uncomfortable or objectionable and I don't believe that banning things from teenagers works. It just heightens the desire to find out more often resulting in dire consequences.
    I'm runnin' this monkey farm now Frankenstein.....

  8. #1088
    Team Rick MinionZombie's Avatar
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    The Mandatorium
    Posts
    24,165
    UK
    Quote Originally Posted by EvilNed View Post
    Since the conversation drifted to Italian sleaze and exploitation, I thought I'd give you guys a tip; Stunningly Savage.

    It's an artist who does much of the artwork for Arrow BluRays and other releases. I ordered a few posters of Fulci films;

     
    Ah yes, Rick Melton. He doesn't do the covers for Arrow Video anymore (hasn't done for a few years IIRC - his cover for "Inferno" was met with a fair amount of fan controversy - the scene was pretty accurate to a key scene in the film, aside from the rather incongruous nudity in his version). I dig his stuff generally, although some of his covers were a bit hit and miss (the one he did for The House by the Cemetery was pretty rough - with more OTT nudity). I don't mind the nudity at all, but it's when it's used in the wrong context for the film or the scene being depicted ... it's attention grabbing, sure, but it was sometimes not the best route to take while at other times it was (e.g. his cover for Island of Death). So some of his artwork didn't fit at all well, while other artwork was spot on.

    In recent years he's done work for other companies and has produced some fantastic pieces - lots of classic monster or Hammer Horror stuff, for example.

    Quote Originally Posted by shootemindehead View Post
    The likes of Whitehouse represents the worst of that curtain twicher type. She had far, far too much influence on politcal affairs, largely because Thatcher was willing to give her the time to vent her spleen on, largely, mickey mouse issues. Even as a small child I recall thinking just how strange that this old lady could be on the tele telling people how bad something was and that she was going to get it shut down. In fact, too much power to control affairs of culture was readily hand over to that "type" of person. For 15 years the BBFC was run by a guy who flat out refused to have certain scenes remain intact in a film, regardless of what that film was! Now, I've no doubt that James Ferman was a man of his convictions and believed he was doing "good", but he's not the kind of guy I would want as the arbiter of my entertainment. In fact, even though I'm Irish, his influence made my video buying days a bloody minefield of nuisance and disappointment. Every single time I bought a video in HMV, Virgin or wherever, the risk that the heart and soul was cut out of it was quite high. Pretty galling when one had to fork out up to £15.99 for a video in the 90's.

    When the whole thing was dredged up again in during the Jamie Bulger case, by the Lib Dems this time, I was again taken aback that politicans/busy bodies were willing to use this appalling incident as a springboard for their own crusade and careers. The films in the target sights this time were even more inoccuous. 'Childs Play' apparently could make kids murder other kids. Luckily that amendment was shot down pretty quickly as it would have led to even more stringent censorship.

    I agree as well, that the old school Mary Whitehouse moral cursader has been replaced by a newer/younger online type. I'm constantlly rolling my eyes at the likes of the alt right and what I call the alt left and the noisy bleating they engage in. Many of whom are "professional offendees" who say and write the most farcical nonsense in the guise of political debate. There's a disturbing rise of single issue identity politics going on as well and while these shouters are usually contained to an online presence, they have enough like minded folk that nod their head in agreement and none of them seem to have a single grasp of what has come before them from a political point of view.

    Hilarious to think that stuff happened and how quaint it all was. Being alive during the rise of the web and the fact that one can see the most awful examples that mankind can sink to, it's astonishing to think that during those times the worst parents had to worry about was whether their kid was playing a violent video game. In many ways I was lucky. My folks had me late, in their 40's, and they just didn't know what to do with me a lot of the time, so nearly anything went in my house. I was kind of allowed to find my own level as it were. Now, I'm not saying that's the formula for raising a child, but I do get antsy when I see parents scolding their kid's curiosity about something they themselves find uncomfortable or objectionable and I don't believe that banning things from teenagers works. It just heightens the desire to find out more often resulting in dire consequences.
    1) Yeah, the likes of Whitehouse and Ferman - and any modern equivalents - do my head in. In the case of Whitehouse it's that moral crusader bullshit, and moreso when you're decrying a film you've not seen and then, when challenged about that very fact, they say that they don't need to see it to know what's in it. Erm - billy bollocks, sunshine! Ferman was a curious sort judging from the Video Nasty docs I've seen. He seemed to fancy himself as a film editor in some regards, and if the film was 'worthy' it was allowed to slip through and be defended - but the so-called 'low art' films, as he'd regard them, were spat upon and butchered, sometimes in the most silly ways. I've got a severely censored copy of The Evil Dead on video (that was how I first saw it - it was a 4Front releast from the 1990s) and some of the edits are sooooo wonky: skipping soundtrack, even jarring jumps within the frame (e.g. hitting a deadite on the head with a big timber).

    2) Yes, that whole Jamie Bulger instance of it rising up again - the "Ban This Sick Filth!" furore - was a sorry state of affairs. The case itself was just awful, utterly horrendous, but a movie didn't make those kids do what they did - to actually be physically and mentally capable of doing those things, you've got to be a special kind of messed up. Normal people don't do the things those two scumbags did to that little boy. Just sickening ... awful.

    If movies/games/whatever made you a killer, then there'd be a shitload of killers running around murderin' up a storm ... and yet there isn't. I studied these things for a Sociology project during my A-Levels, and the whole 'Video Nasty' thing, citing various bits of research that found that many school kids interviewed at the time were talking rubbish - they'd never seen these movies in many cases, and when confronted with a list of films (to point out the ones they'd seen) they identified film titles that were completely false and made up! Naturally, some kids were seeing this stuff - but it is the responsibility of the people selling the films in shops/renting them in rental shops, and most importantly of all: the parents! I was denied seeing almost all horror movies initially. I had to sort of worm my way into them through other avenues - sci-fi/horror combos like Alien or The Thing (which I was allowed to watch because they were primarily sci-fi). I remember sneaking viewings of films like Halloween, volume way down, door shut, finger hovering over the "STOP" button on the VCR remote. Cherished memories, so they are.

    3) The rise in "populist" and "post-truth" politics is terrifying, frankly. People bang on about wanting to know "the truth", yet seem so willing to swallow absolutely anything they're told by their own side without a single second of critical thought. Then you've got apparent know-it-alls who know sod all. The smartest ones are those who admit they're unsure, that they don't feel they know enough still. This whole 'extreme politics' thing sickens me - there's a cavernous void in the centre ground (where the most people can be catered for in the most reasonable fashion). The political landscape at the moment ... ugh ... "I can't even" as the witch hunters of the twittersphere might say.

    4) Yep, banning anything heightens the desire to have it - just look at prohibition! Remember when there was that murder and "Manhunt" was implicated in it? The game wasn't that great and had slid off the sales charts long ago and was way down there - it got wrapped up in that controversy, there was talk of banning it, and all of a sudden it shot right up to Number One because people wanted a copy of it due to the fury surrounding it and because they wanted a copy in case it was banned! Ridiculous! Never mind that, as it was disovered, the victim was in possession of the game at the time and the crime was motivated by greed and robbery gone wrong. A tragic, awful thing to happen, but the game had sod all to do with it, to be quite frank.

    There's always the curiosity in what you can't see, or aren't allowed to see - or experience etc etc etc - it's in our very nature as humans. Likewise with these 'professional offendees', as you call them, who are seeking to legislate language (as laughably stupid, but worryingly serious as a concept, as the Video Nasties nonsense), it is their very perniciousness that causes people to deliberately say offensive things. Sometimes it's just people being people, telling tasteless jokes, but at its worst it contributes to the rise of extreme political movements. Nobody likes to be nagged, ultimately.
    Last edited by MinionZombie; 22-Nov-2016 at 04:58 PM.

  9. #1089
    Rising
    Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,458
    United States
    Quote Originally Posted by EvilNed View Post


    2/5.

    I'm sorry, but this just hasn't aged well. I know it's a werewolf classic but the deal with it is that it's just not that exciting. The mystery of the Colony and the unraveling of it is a non-starter. It's never that mysterious to begin with and by the end of it there's just not that much of an exploration to begin with except the motly crew of woodfolk shrugging their shoulders and proclaiming "Yeah, we're werewolves". The climactic chase of the werewolves is short and part of it is a thoroughly bland shootout, which is not at all what I want in a horror film.

    There's a good story in there but I just don't think it's executed that well. It is a bit original tho and not just a classic retelling of the Wolfman trope. But for being 90 minutes, maybe a werewolf ought to stick to the classic "I got bitten by a strange wolf, now whats happening to me?"-telling rather than attempt worldbuilding.

    Everything aesthetic about it is great tho. The werewolves look good and the transformation scene is a classic. Comparing this to An American Werewolf in London has been done to death... But I prefer the wolves in this one and the transformation scene in that one.
    I think it has aged quite well. The colony setting was a creepy place, plus I like the suggestion in some parts of the movie that the werewolves can have some type of "telepathic" power to try to influence their intended victims ("Teeeeerry! Oooover here, Terry!") It sure as heck is better than almost all of the werewolf movies that came after it (all The Howling sequels, for example, which were laughable. Not even the presence of a veteran actor like Christopher Lee could have saved any of those sinking ships that started with Howling II.) Not only it has the coolest looking werewolves and one of the best man-to-werewolf transformantions (with no cartoonish CGI involved, thank goodness that the then emerging use of CGI was mostly restricted to sci-fi movies like Tron, where it truly fitted well) but also a bunch of veteran actors in it (Patrick Macnee, Slim Pickens, John Carradine, Kevin McCarthy, Kenneth Tobey, Dick Miller.) That alone by itself makes it impossible to make a remake worthy of the original, since many of these classic actors that gave the movie some of its distinctive charm are now sadly gone. On top of that the "aging" process has made it to have some hilarious quaint 80s flashbacks that nowadays would be virtually incomprehensible to modern audiences, like owning a Mazda being seen as a sign of "opulence":

    "Take it easy pal, you know, not all of us got enough money for a Mazda, some of us have to work for a living, you know what I mean?"

    Friggin' precious! No remake can possibly capture that "quaintness"!
    Last edited by JDP; 23-Nov-2016 at 07:27 AM. Reason: ;

  10. #1090
    Feeding shootemindehead's Avatar
    Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    4,062
    Ireland
    Quote Originally Posted by MinionZombie View Post
    1) Yeah, the likes of Whitehouse and Ferman - and any modern equivalents - do my head in. In the case of Whitehouse it's that moral crusader bullshit, and moreso when you're decrying a film you've not seen and then, when challenged about that very fact, they say that they don't need to see it to know what's in it. Erm - billy bollocks, sunshine! Ferman was a curious sort judging from the Video Nasty docs I've seen. He seemed to fancy himself as a film editor in some regards, and if the film was 'worthy' it was allowed to slip through and be defended - but the so-called 'low art' films, as he'd regard them, were spat upon and butchered, sometimes in the most silly ways. I've got a severely censored copy of The Evil Dead on video (that was how I first saw it - it was a 4Front releast from the 1990s) and some of the edits are sooooo wonky: skipping soundtrack, even jarring jumps within the frame (e.g. hitting a deadite on the head with a big timber).
    My parents never worried about me watching horror films or any films for some reason, even though some did give me nightmares. 'Jaws' scared the bejesus out of me for a long time and the first time I saw 'Alien', I had to give up when that scene occured. When I was very young I used to sneak downstairs and watch films through the open living room door, sitting on the stairs when the old pair thought I was in bed. I reckon they probably knew I was there in anyway. I think I saw a lot of Hammer films that way. However, by 11 or 12 I'd sat through the likes of 'Alien' numerous times, 'The Exorcist', 'Day of the Dead' and also more "serious" non horror stuff like 'Apocalypse Now' and 'Deliverance'. My house had a very laissez faire attitude to books and film, but we never owned video recorder until I'd actually bought one in the 90's. We used to rent one now and again before the mid 90's and I'd get my video fix, but most things I saw were on tele. So, I guess it was a case of my folks thinking if something was on TV it was probably grand. Sex scenes were always cringey though. Something like that pops up on the screen and there'd be some uncomfortable silences from my old folks and one of them would probably get up and put the kettle on. Feckin' gas.

    For 'The Evil Dead', I had to wait a stupid amount of time to see that. By the time I'd got to it, with a group of lads around my mates gaff who'd picked up an uncut VHS, I had built it up in my head as one of the most horrific and horrible films that I'd ever get to see! Imagine my disappointment when it turned out to be merely a bleedin' comedy. I think everyone in the room that night was like WTF? We hated it. In later years, with rewatches, I could see that it was a relatively well made picture from a determined 19 year old Sam Raimi, but it remains one of the biggest let downs and probably only second to 'The Phantom Menace' in sheer deflation. I still don't like the film, or much of Sam Raimi's output TBH, although that's down to taste rather than my initial disappointment with his first effort.

    Quote Originally Posted by MinionZombie View Post
    3) The rise in "populist" and "post-truth" politics is terrifying, frankly. People bang on about wanting to know "the truth", yet seem so willing to swallow absolutely anything they're told by their own side without a single second of critical thought. Then you've got apparent know-it-alls who know sod all. The smartest ones are those who admit they're unsure, that they don't feel they know enough still. This whole 'extreme politics' thing sickens me - there's a cavernous void in the centre ground (where the most people can be catered for in the most reasonable fashion). The political landscape at the moment ... ugh ... "I can't even" as the witch hunters of the twittersphere might say.
    Mmmmm, there's something very troubling about all of that guff alright. Looking at twats like Katie Hopkins or Milo Yiannopoulos spouting their drivel turns my stomach, especially when one realises that these mouthpieces are really just acting a part for the sake of furthering a career. But, they're examples of these types of noisy shouters that are incapable of any real kind of debate. Both the right and the left have these types in their ranks these days and I find more and more people (online anyway) are becoming very polarised in their political views. Also, they seem to share a rather fascistic tendency to want to shut down opposing views. Maybe it is just an online thing, cos I have yet to meet an actual "alt-right" or an SJW person in the real world.

    Quote Originally Posted by MinionZombie View Post
    4) Yep, banning anything heightens the desire to have it - just look at prohibition! Remember when there was that murder and "Manhunt" was implicated in it? The game wasn't that great and had slid off the sales charts long ago and was way down there - it got wrapped up in that controversy, there was talk of banning it, and all of a sudden it shot right up to Number One because people wanted a copy of it due to the fury surrounding it and because they wanted a copy in case it was banned! Ridiculous! Never mind that, as it was disovered, the victim was in possession of the game at the time and the crime was motivated by greed and robbery gone wrong. A tragic, awful thing to happen, but the game had sod all to do with it, to be quite frank.

    There's always the curiosity in what you can't see, or aren't allowed to see - or experience etc etc etc - it's in our very nature as humans. Likewise with these 'professional offendees', as you call them, who are seeking to legislate language (as laughably stupid, but worryingly serious as a concept, as the Video Nasties nonsense), it is their very perniciousness that causes people to deliberately say offensive things. Sometimes it's just people being people, telling tasteless jokes, but at its worst it contributes to the rise of extreme political movements. Nobody likes to be nagged, ultimately.
    It's funny when you think that most people who sought out the video nasties did so simply because they were banned. The majority of them are utter shite, but the list created a series for people to check off and created a largely unjust sensation around most harmless films. It must cheese off the likes of Graham Bright that his crusade had energised a fairly large underground trading market in the 80's/90's and these days original uncut VHS's go for stupid money. His kind are hilariously impotent in the face of the internet and I think that if such a thing had existed in 1984, Bright's bill would have failed miserably. I still find it odd, though, that Britain still has a BBFC that issues cuts to sell through DVD's and Blu rays, when two minutes on the web can get you an uncut copy of any film you wish, whether you pirate it or buy it on Amazon. The BBFC are far more relaxed these days in the face of reality, but it's still puzzling that the exist in a censorious capacity at all.


    BTW, the guys who made 'Video Nasties - Moral Panic, Censorship & Videotape' made a part 2 to that doc. I think it details the trading underground I just mentioned. It's currently going for 20 caps on Amazon though, which is a bit much for a documentary tbh. I might pick it up when the price drops.
    Last edited by shootemindehead; 23-Nov-2016 at 11:57 AM. Reason: .
    I'm runnin' this monkey farm now Frankenstein.....

  11. #1091
    Team Rick MinionZombie's Avatar
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    The Mandatorium
    Posts
    24,165
    UK
    Quote Originally Posted by shootemindehead View Post
    My parents never worried about me watching horror films or any films for some reason, even though some did give me nightmares. 'Jaws' scared the bejesus out of me for a long time and the first time I saw 'Alien', I had to give up when that scene occured. When I was very young I used to sneak downstairs and watch films through the open living room door, sitting on the stairs when the old pair thought I was in bed. I reckon they probably knew I was there in anyway. I think I saw a lot of Hammer films that way. However, by 11 or 12 I'd sat through the likes of 'Alien' numerous times, 'The Exorcist', 'Day of the Dead' and also more "serious" non horror stuff like 'Apocalypse Now' and 'Deliverance'. My house had a very laissez faire attitude to books and film, but we never owned video recorder until I'd actually bought one in the 90's. We used to rent one now and again before the mid 90's and I'd get my video fix, but most things I saw were on tele. So, I guess it was a case of my folks thinking if something was on TV it was probably grand. Sex scenes were always cringey though. Something like that pops up on the screen and there'd be some uncomfortable silences from my old folks and one of them would probably get up and put the kettle on. Feckin' gas.

    For 'The Evil Dead', I had to wait a stupid amount of time to see that. By the time I'd got to it, with a group of lads around my mates gaff who'd picked up an uncut VHS, I had built it up in my head as one of the most horrific and horrible films that I'd ever get to see! Imagine my disappointment when it turned out to be merely a bleedin' comedy. I think everyone in the room that night was like WTF? We hated it. In later years, with rewatches, I could see that it was a relatively well made picture from a determined 19 year old Sam Raimi, but it remains one of the biggest let downs and probably only second to 'The Phantom Menace' in sheer deflation. I still don't like the film, or much of Sam Raimi's output TBH, although that's down to taste rather than my initial disappointment with his first effort.



    Mmmmm, there's something very troubling about all of that guff alright. Looking at twats like Katie Hopkins or Milo Yiannopoulos spouting their drivel turns my stomach, especially when one realises that these mouthpieces are really just acting a part for the sake of furthering a career. But, they're examples of these types of noisy shouters that are incapable of any real kind of debate. Both the right and the left have these types in their ranks these days and I find more and more people (online anyway) are becoming very polarised in their political views. Also, they seem to share a rather fascistic tendency to want to shut down opposing views. Maybe it is just an online thing, cos I have yet to meet an actual "alt-right" or an SJW person in the real world.



    It's funny when you think that most people who sought out the video nasties did so simply because they were banned. The majority of them are utter shite, but the list created a series for people to check off and created a largely unjust sensation around most harmless films. It must cheese off the likes of Graham Bright that his crusade had energised a fairly large underground trading market in the 80's/90's and these days original uncut VHS's go for stupid money. His kind are hilariously impotent in the face of the internet and I think that if such a thing had existed in 1984, Bright's bill would have failed miserably. I still find it odd, though, that Britain still has a BBFC that issues cuts to sell through DVD's and Blu rays, when two minutes on the web can get you an uncut copy of any film you wish, whether you pirate it or buy it on Amazon. The BBFC are far more relaxed these days in the face of reality, but it's still puzzling that the exist in a censorious capacity at all.

    BTW, the guys who made 'Video Nasties - Moral Panic, Censorship & Videotape' made a part 2 to that doc. I think it details the trading underground I just mentioned. It's currently going for 20 caps on Amazon though, which is a bit much for a documentary tbh. I might pick it up when the price drops.
    1) I remember one time watching The Terminator with my whole family, I'd recorded it off the telly, and when it came to the motel sex scene I fast forwarded because it was too cringey to watch it with my folks - it was then kinda funny when my Mum complained about me fast forwarding it (I think she was quite into the film) ... so, weirdly, I was the censor in that instance. That was then, but more recently we all sat down and watched The Wolf of Wall Street - and that kicks off with Leo blowing coke up a hooker's arse. It was still a bit cringey, but at the same time we all laughed our butts off at how ludicrous it all was.

    The Evil Dead - I saw that when I was about 14, IIRC - after my mates had seen it. Some said it was kinda naff and it boiled down to "pencil stabbing" and "green mash potato". I think they were let down a bit by it, but were also viewing it as teenage boys who read Max Power magazine (I remember huddling around those mags during breaks to marvel at the cars but mostly the girls in them ). However, when I first saw it I was blown away - I absolutely loved it and love it to this day. Seeing it uncut a few years later when it finally got through the BBFC unmolested, was also pretty darn awesome.

    2) With extreme views ... I think the Internet brings it out in people and exaccerbates it. I've seen friends of mine indulge in plenty of 'virtue signalling', which always makes me cringe (I got suckered into that whole thing a few years ago about the African war lord with that fancy video, but then I read more about the background to it all - the sheer amount of donated money being spent on these poncy-arsed videos, for example - and felt a right fool, so I can't stand the whole 'virtue signalling' thing whereby people go online to make themselves look good above doing anything or, shock horror, thinking rationally and practically and fairly about any given issue). It's weird, I might often agree with them - but I don't feel the need to boast about a 'progressive view' on some trending subject matter. That's most of what I see, generally ... I know a couple of people on the further corners of the political spectrum on both sides and it's just baffling to me (politics aside they're decent folk) ... anyway ... this extreme post-truth garbage needs to stop, much like the nannying of censorious sufferers of perpetual offence.

    3) Yeah, I think they interviewed Bright in that second documentary and he was still clinging to his guns. He just can't admit he was wrong - then again, he did go on national TV to say these movies would warp the minds of your pet dog as well as your own (!!!). The second doc is good, a nice companion piece. They are pricey (perhaps because they're multiple discs with all the additional content - e.g. like the first one had all the trailers and bits of talk about each film ... the whole thing was like 9 hours in total). Worth seeing if you can pick it up at a reasonable price, though (I got mine for £14.99 IIRC).

  12. #1092
    Feeding shootemindehead's Avatar
    Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    4,062
    Ireland
    Quote Originally Posted by MinionZombie View Post
    2) With extreme views ... I think the Internet brings it out in people and exaccerbates it. I've seen friends of mine indulge in plenty of 'virtue signalling', which always makes me cringe (I got suckered into that whole thing a few years ago about the African war lord with that fancy video, but then I read more about the background to it all - the sheer amount of donated money being spent on these poncy-arsed videos, for example - and felt a right fool, so I can't stand the whole 'virtue signalling' thing whereby people go online to make themselves look good above doing anything or, shock horror, thinking rationally and practically and fairly about any given issue). It's weird, I might often agree with them - but I don't feel the need to boast about a 'progressive view' on some trending subject matter. That's most of what I see, generally ... I know a couple of people on the further corners of the political spectrum on both sides and it's just baffling to me (politics aside they're decent folk) ... anyway ... this extreme post-truth garbage needs to stop, much like the nannying of censorious sufferers of perpetual offence.
    Yeh. While I think the internet is, possibly, the greatest tool mankind has created, it also allows tools a conduit for displaying their opinions and issues unfortunately and in that sphere, a lot of the time, those views are espoused in an echo chamber and not subject to any kind of challenge. Thus, a lot of people never get to test the solidity of their beliefs, which is something I think everybody should be open to. The last few years have been a strange time though with both extremes of left and right shouting at each other and few in the middle actually discussing. As someone who's middle-the-roads politically, it's both funny and scary to see the pot shots from either group fly over my head.

    Quote Originally Posted by MinionZombie View Post
    3) Yeah, I think they interviewed Bright in that second documentary and he was still clinging to his guns. He just can't admit he was wrong - then again, he did go on national TV to say these movies would warp the minds of your pet dog as well as your own (!!!). The second doc is good, a nice companion piece. They are pricey (perhaps because they're multiple discs with all the additional content - e.g. like the first one had all the trailers and bits of talk about each film ... the whole thing was like 9 hours in total). Worth seeing if you can pick it up at a reasonable price, though (I got mine for £14.99 IIRC).
    I'll probably pick it up sometime. With all this yap, my nasties interest has peeked again. I watched 'Ban the Sadist Videos' last night. It contains a lot of what's in the 'Video Nasties' documentary, which came out afterwards, but it's interesting in its own right. But, I'd like more info on the period after the bill's introduction.

    Ha ha, Bright's (maybe not so bright) opinion that dog's minds could be affected by something like 'Zombie Flesh Eaters'. Jesus wept...I ask ya! Incredible to think that people who harbour off the wall opinions like that are in a position of power!
    I'm runnin' this monkey farm now Frankenstein.....

  13. #1093
    Team Rick MinionZombie's Avatar
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    The Mandatorium
    Posts
    24,165
    UK
    Quote Originally Posted by shootemindehead View Post
    I'll probably pick it up sometime. With all this yap, my nasties interest has peeked again. I watched 'Ban the Sadist Videos' last night. It contains a lot of what's in the 'Video Nasties' documentary, which came out afterwards, but it's interesting in its own right. But, I'd like more info on the period after the bill's introduction.

    Ha ha, Bright's (maybe not so bright) opinion that dog's minds could be affected by something like 'Zombie Flesh Eaters'. Jesus wept...I ask ya! Incredible to think that people who harbour off the wall opinions like that are in a position of power!
    Aye, I've seen that other doc as well - pretty good.

    Yeah, I guess the only people with sensible ideas are smart enough - and nice enough - to not want to go into the filthy, vicious world of politics (partly that vicious and filthy because of the public themselves, ironically).

    You mentioned further down the thread about the TWD Season 7 premiere causing a fuss, but not hearing anything more about it - last night I read that Ofcom are going to "investigate" the episode and Fox UK after "thousands" of complaints. I'd like to know how many of those complainants A) Actually watch TWD, B) Actually saw the episode. What's more, Fox UK censored the ruddy episode in the 9pm slot (uncut in the 11pm slot). Several bat swings and that eye bulging sequence were butchered for the 9pm slot. Yeah, it was graphic and shocking and was a harsh episode - but fudge me, as if nothing grotesque and shocking ever happened on TWD before! Some people, geez ... and to go all the way to crying your heart out to flippin' Ofcom. In the words of Marv: "Bunch'a pansies".

  14. #1094
    Feeding shootemindehead's Avatar
    Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    4,062
    Ireland
    I was kind of shocked by the Glenn scene myself, but only because I didn't see it coming. The presumption that somebody thinks they can tell me what my entertainment should be pisses me off no end though. Sure, it's graphic. But, if you don't like it, turn it off. Just don't think you can tell me that I should do the same.

    As for 'The Walking Dead' in general, I find the gore to be rather subdued. Glenn's battering was probably one of the most shocking deaths (even though I know it from the comic) because it didn't pull any punches and showed the effects in clear detail. Something which tends not to happen elsewhere in the show. When people get eaten, for instance, it's normally obscured to some degree or the blood is unrealistically darkened or detail is camouflaged. I've yet to see any zombie attack to rival the clarity of horror that's shown in 'Day of the Dead' for example. Plus, Glenn's death is a very real world death. It's something that can happen today or tomorrow. No body is actually going to be eaten by a zombie though, so there's an added level to Glenn's demise.

    Ultimately, I can understand people being "offended" by the Glenn scene in 'The Walking Dead'. I just wish they'd keep it to themselves.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tv/2016/1...iolent-scenes/

    "The spokesperson also confirmed that there had been a total of 10 complaints about the episode."

    FFS
    Last edited by shootemindehead; 24-Nov-2016 at 10:53 AM. Reason: .
    I'm runnin' this monkey farm now Frankenstein.....

  15. #1095
    Zombie Flesh Eater EvilNed's Avatar
    Zombie Flesh Eater

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    6,302
    Undisclosed
    Guys, if you don't stop derailing the thread I'm going to bring up the Why the zombies in 28 Days Later are proof that Day of the Dead takes place before Land angle again.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •