Most overated horror movies...

[shootemindehead]

In no particular order...

1. Don’t Look Now

One word. Boring. Unbelievably tedious so called horror film, that has managed to earn itself an incredible reputation, mostly due to its ending, which I personally found laughable. But, love or hate the ending, the viewer has to trudge though a ridiculous amount of tedium to get to the punch line.

2. Night of the Hunter

Utterly ridiculous “classic” where Robert Mitchum chews up the scenery and featuring some of the worst lines of dialogue in movie history. Some people say Laughton filmed it deliberately this way. I don’t care. It still makes for an awful film. Laughton’s only director effort…thank god.

3. Halloween

For some people, the most horrifying film they ever saw. Or, at least that’s what they say. It may claim to be the first slasher (it’s not, ‘Psycho’ is), but that still doesn’t stop it from being simply an OK film. The performances are generally ok too, the two main stars being the best, but it still feels twice the length of it’s 90 minute running time, because so little happens.

4. Rosemary’s Baby

Another bore fest. A “horror” film with no horror. While competently directed, it’s still a terribly boring film and ends up being somewhat laughable at its conclusion. Notoriously devoid of shocks or creepiness, Polanski (himself incredibly overrated) should have taken a leaf out of his own book and made the film more like ‘The Tennant’, or the earlier ‘Repulsion’.

5. The Blair Witch Project

Brian Griffin summed it up very well. “Nothing’s happening, nothing’s happening, nothing’s happening…it’s over. A lot of people in the audience look really pissed.” One of the greatest gimmicky films, since ‘The Tingler’. William Castle would have been proud. I’m happy the guys who made this (on a shoestring budget) made a ton of money from it, but really, it’s fans would make you old.

6. The Ring

Oh dear…Asian horror as a whole is one of the most overrated genres ever. Most of the films generally follow the “nothing happens for an hour, then bam” rule and they are tedious in the extreme. This film, which sparked the current cycle, takes that rule to its heart. It contains one genuine shocking scene early on and then nothing for ages. But, its worst sin is its villain. A girl that comes through the telly and frightens people…ha ha…fuck off.

7. Phantasm

Another OK movie that has managed to garner a reputation that’s all out of proportion to what it deserves. While not an awful film, it certain doesn’t deserve the laurels that it has gained.

8. Scream

Oh, where to start with this. Wes Craven must have popped his eyes out of his head when the zeitgeist on this got a hold. I’ve never understood the popularity of this incredibly tame flick. It’s slasher-lite and boring as hell, featuring two non-entities as its starring roles. Just…rubbish…and what’s worse is it spawned sequels!

9. The Hills Have Eyes

Another Wes Craven failure that again has managed to get a word of mouth reputation as a gory and horrifying horror film. Banned in some countries, I’ve never been able to figure out why. It’s completely inept and notable ONLY for introducing the world to Michael Berryman. Part II is even worse! Craven, actually, has managed to gain a lucrative horror career on the back of some of the most overrated films in the genre, beginning with ‘The last House on the Left’, itself a terribly overrated film right up to the awful ‘Scream’ franchise. Mind boggling, when you consider that his only really good film was ‘A Nightmare on Elm Street’.

10. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre

THERE! I said it!

Actually, I love this film, but again it’s a movie that has been elevated to a status totally unbecoming of its content. It contains some truly stupid scenes and some rubbish, rubbish makeup (Grandpa anyone?). Some of the acting is beyond a joke, even for a film of its type (Franklin) and the worst crime is that it simply doesn’t deliver the goods promised by the eye-catching title. On saying that, it does feature one of the most memorable movie monster introductions ever filmed and when Sally gets hung on a meathook, its hard not to squirm. Problem is, it goes rapidly downhill when the rest of Leatherface’s family are introduced.


Special mention should go to the following…’Witchfinder General’, ‘The Amityville Horror’, ‘The Evil Dead’, ‘Donnie Darko’, ‘The Thing (1958), ‘Hellrasier’, ‘Friday the 13th’ , 'Hostel' , ‘The Birds’ and any Universal / Hammer film or Corman’s Poe movies.

[SRP76]

I've never even heard of the top 2 on your list. How overrated can they be? Wouldn't they have to be famous?

Totally agree with a couple of them. Texas Chainsaw Massacre was pointless, and Rosemary's Baby made me want to punch someone. I also thought The Ring was a total miss, but at least I don't hear as much hype about it as, say, Texas Chainsaw Massacre.

[EvilNed]

So is there anything you DO like? :p

Anyway, I agree on some of them. Rosemary's Baby, The Ring and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Neither of them really stuck with me.

[SymphonicX]

I really wouldn't say Donnie Darko should be on a list of over rated horror movies - even if it is a special mention. It's no where near a horror film.

Texas chainsaw is a great film, from start to finish I love it. It's brutal and psychological and in places just ffffin creepy. Great movie IMO.

The rest I think you're pretty much spot on with!

[shootemindehead]

I've never even heard of the top 2 on your list. How overrated can they be? Wouldn't they have to be famous?

Totally agree with a couple of them. Texas Chainsaw Massacre was pointless, and Rosemary's Baby made me want to punch someone. I also thought The Ring was a total miss, but at least I don't hear as much hype about it as, say, Texas Chainsaw Massacre.

You've never heard of 'Don't look Now'? It may have a different title overseas.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_Look_Now

'Night of the Hunter' I understand. It's fairly old now. I dont consider it a horror film by any means, but it's classed as such in some quarters. Besides being consdiered a "great horror film", it's also classed as a "great film". Mind boggling to me.

[Tricky]

The Friday the 13th series should be in there as well!

[MikePizzoff]

It seems like you're basically saying you hate any horror movie that gets mass distribution. I also feel like a good amount of those movies aren't over-rated. Then again, we're in two different countries.

I'm not sure if I'd cal Psycho a slasher flick - there are only 2 kills in the whole movie. It feels like more of a thriller/mystery, to me at least.

[bassman]

Let The Right One In...

[DjfunkmasterG]

In no particular order...

1. Don’t Look Now

One word. Boring. Unbelievably tedious so called horror film, that has managed to earn itself an incredible reputation, mostly due to its ending, which I personally found laughable. But, love or hate the ending, the viewer has to trudge though a ridiculous amount of tedium to get to the punch line.

2. Night of the Hunter

Utterly ridiculous “classic” where Robert Mitchum chews up the scenery and featuring some of the worst lines of dialogue in movie history. Some people say Laughton filmed it deliberately this way. I don’t care. It still makes for an awful film. Laughton’s only director effort…thank god.

3. Halloween

For some people, the most horrifying film they ever saw. Or, at least that’s what they say. It may claim to be the first slasher (it’s not, ‘Psycho’ is), but that still doesn’t stop it from being simply an OK film. The performances are generally ok too, the two main stars being the best, but it still feels twice the length of it’s 90 minute running time, because so little happens.

4. Rosemary’s Baby

Another bore fest. A “horror” film with no horror. While competently directed, it’s still a terribly boring film and ends up being somewhat laughable at its conclusion. Notoriously devoid of shocks or creepiness, Polanski (himself incredibly overrated) should have taken a leaf out of his own book and made the film more like ‘The Tennant’, or the earlier ‘Repulsion’.

5. The Blair Witch Project

Brian Griffin summed it up very well. “Nothing’s happening, nothing’s happening, nothing’s happening…it’s over. A lot of people in the audience look really pissed.” One of the greatest gimmicky films, since ‘The Tingler’. William Castle would have been proud. I’m happy the guys who made this (on a shoestring budget) made a ton of money from it, but really, it’s fans would make you old.

6. The Ring

Oh dear…Asian horror as a whole is one of the most overrated genres ever. Most of the films generally follow the “nothing happens for an hour, then bam” rule and they are tedious in the extreme. This film, which sparked the current cycle, takes that rule to its heart. It contains one genuine shocking scene early on and then nothing for ages. But, its worst sin is its villain. A girl that comes through the telly and frightens people…ha ha…fuck off.

7. Phantasm

Another OK movie that has managed to garner a reputation that’s all out of proportion to what it deserves. While not an awful film, it certain doesn’t deserve the laurels that it has gained.

8. Scream

Oh, where to start with this. Wes Craven must have popped his eyes out of his head when the zeitgeist on this got a hold. I’ve never understood the popularity of this incredibly tame flick. It’s slasher-lite and boring as hell, featuring two non-entities as its starring roles. Just…rubbish…and what’s worse is it spawned sequels!

9. The Hills Have Eyes

Another Wes Craven failure that again has managed to get a word of mouth reputation as a gory and horrifying horror film. Banned in some countries, I’ve never been able to figure out why. It’s completely inept and notable ONLY for introducing the world to Michael Berryman. Part II is even worse! Craven, actually, has managed to gain a lucrative horror career on the back of some of the most overrated films in the genre, beginning with ‘The last House on the Left’, itself a terribly overrated film right up to the awful ‘Scream’ franchise. Mind boggling, when you consider that his only really good film was ‘A Nightmare on Elm Street’.

10. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre

THERE! I said it!

Actually, I love this film, but again it’s a movie that has been elevated to a status totally unbecoming of its content. It contains some truly stupid scenes and some rubbish, rubbish makeup (Grandpa anyone?). Some of the acting is beyond a joke, even for a film of its type (Franklin) and the worst crime is that it simply doesn’t deliver the goods promised by the eye-catching title. On saying that, it does feature one of the most memorable movie monster introductions ever filmed and when Sally gets hung on a meathook, its hard not to squirm. Problem is, it goes rapidly downhill when the rest of Leatherface’s family are introduced.


Special mention should go to the following…’Witchfinder General’, ‘The Amityville Horror’, ‘The Evil Dead’, ‘Donnie Darko’, ‘The Thing (1958), ‘Hellrasier’, ‘Friday the 13th’ , 'Hostel' , ‘The Birds’ and any Universal / Hammer film or Corman’s Poe movies.

I personally would remove Halloween and Scream, Hostel deserves a place in the top ten more than those two films.

Some of the others are up for debate... such as... The Ring, if you're talking about the US version I highly agree, if it is RINGU you are talking about then I would disagree.

My personal Top Ten would be...

1. The Blair Witch Project
2. Paranormal Activity
3. Texas Chainsaw 4
4. The Omen remake
5. Dance of the Dead
6. Maniac
7. Phantasm
8. Land of the Dead
9. Drag Me To Hell ----> Changed to Halloween 2007
10. Survival of the Dead


EDIT.... Drag me tot Hell gets a pass, the new #9... is now offcically associated with Halloween 2007

[JDFP]

"Scream" in a list of horror films? I always pictured it as a comedy with horror undertones myself, and as a comedy with horror undertones I enjoy it (at least the first one) for picking fun of the cliches within horror films that get people killed especially ("I'll be right back!" for example -- running up the stairs, etc.). Plus who can go wrong with a comedy/horror with a character by the name of Cotton Weary? With that type of name, you're basically destined to be a messed up person when you grow up.

I personally loved "The Ring" (American version) as I think Samara is terrifying. I like how the film never gave too much away about her or the demonic/evil presence within her. Never saw any of the Japanese films this is based on ("Rasen"/"Ringu"/"Ragu"/"Ravioli" whatever else they are called). I've never been able to get into J-horror at all really, I guess it's just a cultural thing for me in not being able to enjoy it (just as some folks can't get into giallo or classics).

"The Blair Witch Project" is a completely polarizing film. People either absolutely love it (like I do) or they absolutely hate it. It's one of those films that just has that type of reaction with people -- I think it's great myself, one of my favorite flicks from that decade. The second one was pure shite t hough (as, generally speaking, mose sequals are).

I liked "Halloween" -- both Carpenter's and Zombie's, but wouldn't call either of them necessarily great (like Carpenter's "Christine" or "The Thing" for example which are both masterpieces in my book). :)

j.p.

[shootemindehead]

It seems like you're basically saying you hate any horror movie that gets mass distribution. I also feel like a good amount of those movies aren't over-rated. Then again, we're in two different countries.

I'm not sure if I'd cal Psycho a slasher flick - there are only 2 kills in the whole movie. It feels like more of a thriller/mystery, to me at least.

Didn't mention anything about hate, or mass distribution. It's over-rating I'm on about. Films that are rated (by critics and audiences) as classics or great examples of the genre that don't live up to their laudation.

And while 'Psycho' certainly wasn't / isn't marketed as a "slasher" flick (Then again, nothing is), it did influence them greatly.


I personally would remove Halloween and Scream, Hostel deserves a place in the top ten more than those two films.

Some of the others are up for debate... such as... The Ring, if you're talking about the US version I highly agree, if it is RINGU you are talking about then I would disagree.

I think 'Halloween' and 'Scream' have been way more overrated than 'Hostel', even if it's only by virtue of the fact that they've been around much longer. The former films have also reached a much wider audience. Don't think 'Hostel' even got a cinema release over here.

It's the Japanese 'Ring' I'm on about. Boring as hell.

[AcesandEights]

"Scream" in a list of horror films? I always pictured it as a comedy with horror undertones myself, and as a comedy with horror undertones I enjoy it (at least the first one) for picking fun of the cliches within horror films that get people killed especially ("I'll be right back!" for example -- running up the stairs, etc.). Plus who can go wrong with a comedy/horror with a character by the name of Cotton Weary? With that type of name, you're basically destined to be a messed up person when you grow up.

I completely agree! The films were meant to be fun, tongue-in-cheek and the like, and I quite enjoyed the original and the first sequel.

They're more like...Slashomedies...err...yeah, that's it. :shifty:

[bassman]

Yeah, I agree with Scream being a "fun" slasher film. It's tongue in cheek horror with some genuine laughs. Kinda like An American Werewolf in London.

[MikePizzoff]

Didn't mention anything about hate, or mass distribution. It's over-rating I'm on about. Films that are rated (by critics and audiences) as classics or great examples of the genre that don't live up to their laudation.


Well things must be much different over there because I've never heard anyone citing Scream, The Hills Have Eyes, Phantasm, or The Ring as classics. I've never heard anyone even TALK about Don't Look Now or Night Of The Hunter. So how could those 6 (out of 10) movies be over-rated?

Your list is extremely flawed, in my eyes.

[shootemindehead]

Well things must be much different over there because I've never heard anyone citing Scream, The Hills Have Eyes, Phantasm, or The Ring as classics. I've never heard anyone even TALK about Don't Look Now or Night Of The Hunter. So how could those 6 (out of 10) movies be over-rated?

Your list is extremely flawed, in my eyes.

You've NEVER heard talk of 'Don't Look Now'? Really? It's even on Bravo's list of 100 scariest moments... :p

pUlASfXWiGA

Ditto 'Night of the Hunter'

3X2mxAMMvKQ

Maybe it's an age thing. I have about 10 years on ya.

[bassman]

You've NEVER heard talk of 'Don't Look Now'? Really? It's even on Bravo's list of 100 scariest moments... :p


You watch Bravo?!?:stunned::p

[shootemindehead]

No, but it's the same list as Channel 4's.

:p yourself

:D

[bassman]

Bravo is the one that has all those reality show about millionaires, hair cuts, fashion models and all that, right?

Anyway....I was just messing with you. I'm surprised they had a top horror film list.



Keeping with the subject of the thread....I'm going to be the bad guy that throws this one out there: Dawn of the Dead.:shifty:

[shootemindehead]

Bravo is the one that has all those reality show about millionaires, hair cuts, fashion models and all that, right?

Anyway....I was just messing with you. I'm surprised they had a top horror film list.

Keeping with the subject of the thread....I'm going to be the bad guy that throws this one out there: Dawn of the Dead.:shifty:

Haven't a clue Bass. Don't get Bravo here. At least i don't think we do. Don't watch much TV. I'd say it would be the British version of Bravo though, if we do.

'Dawn of the Dead'? Yeh, I agree. Not a patch on the original... :p

[darth los]

Bravo is the one that has all those reality show about millionaires, hair cuts, fashion models and all that, right?

Anyway....I was just messing with you. I'm surprised they had a top horror film list.


I actually saw that one year. Look out for it around halloween.

:cool:

[bassman]

'Dawn of the Dead'? Yeh, I agree. Not a patch on the original... :p

Actually....I meant the original. It's a bit overrated, imo. I love it in a so-bad-its-fun kind of way, but I really think it gets more attention than it deserves. The only real attention it deserves is that it set the bar for "modern" zombie films. Until Day, that is. Day still has it's bar set firmly in place.

[shootemindehead]

Actually....I meant the original. It's a bit overrated, imo. I love it in a so-bad-its-fun kind of way, but I really think it gets more attention than it deserves. The only real attention it deserves is that it set the bar for "modern" zombie films. Until Day, that is. Day still has it's bar set firmly in place.

Yeh I know, I was messing with ya

[JDFP]

Actually....I meant the original. It's a bit overrated, imo. I love it in a so-bad-its-fun kind of way, but I really think it gets more attention than it deserves. The only real attention it deserves is that it set the bar for "modern" zombie films. Until Day, that is. Day still has it's bar set firmly in place.

Oh I agree with you, not every zombie/horror film can be the greatest horror film ever made like "Day of the Dead" is, but I still think that "Dawn" 78' is a very good horror flick. I've hung out with several friends before that really enjoyed everything about it except for the clothing of course ("Dear God man, is that polyester they are wearing while running? The horror man! The horror!" -- this from a girl I was 'hanging out' with (ahem) there for awhile).

j.p.

[darth los]

Oh I agree with you, not every zombie/horror film can be the greatest horror film ever made like "Day of the Dead" is, but I still think that "Dawn" 78' is a very good horror flick. I've hung out with several friends before that really enjoyed everything about it except for the clothing of course ("Dear God man, is that polyester they are wearing while running? The horror man! The horror!" -- this from a girl I was 'hanging out' with (ahem) there for awhile).

j.p.


I think that most of what turns people off about dawn 78' are the effects. It's a great story and ,imo, if the film were remade shot for shot with today's technology it very well might be the greatest horror/zombie film of all time.

But as it stands, i agree, day has set the bar. It's remarkable how well that film has aged. I've said it before, it's embarrassing that it has better effects than Land, a film that was made 20 years later.

:cool:

[shootemindehead]

True.

And when I do my "Underrated" list. It'll be at the top. :D

[JDFP]

I think that most of what turns people off about dawn 78' are the effects. It's a great story and ,imo, if the film were remade shot for shot with today's technology it very well might be the greatest horror/zombie film of all time.



I get what you're saying and I agree if DONE right, it could be one of the greatest horror films of all time (I think the original one is anyway). The problem is, I don't think it could be done right in today's time and age. For one, a director could be tempted to throw in entirely too much CGI (personally, I'd say little to no CGI at all, I usually hate most CGI) which will just take away from the realism of the picture. Then if you get someone like Michael Bay you'd just throw the story to the wind and have a bunch of helicopter chasing scenes and blowing stuff up and scantily clad girls running around for 2 hours. Second, could they cast the actors they needed to play the roles based on their talent or because they sell movie tickets? Good God, could you imagine us having a re-make with some busty blonde with no acting ability playing Frannie? Or George Clooney as Stephen or Laurence Fishburne as Peter? They'd want to cast some big names that wouldn't necessarily be effective in the roles (although, the one 'bigger' actress that I think would do a great job as Frannie would be Naomi Watts, I think she's better than sliced bread).

I just don't know that a really great horror gem like "Dawn" would be given the time of day by most major studios today. Sure, it could still be made, but you'd have to go with an independent production studio/distributor in order to do it and would have a hell of a time coming up with the budget in order to do it right. Sadly, most major studios have given up on attempting to make good horror films (much less good films in general, IMO) that are character-driven stories instead of CGI and gore and brutality replacing story and characters.

j.p.

[Legion2213]

The Texas Chainsaw Masacre has some genuinely disturbing scenes in it IMO (like when the boys are trying to get their dead father to bash that girls brains out with a hammer...that is really messed up).

The original Dawn is a bit campy in parts (Peter busting out at the end to the "hero" music is fucking hilarious and not grim/horrific/tense in any way shape or form). That said, I still love this movie and it is still my favorite GAR film. The effects don't matter to me to be honest, the film pulls me in and demands that I watch it.

[shootemindehead]

Yeh. I think the grandpa stuff is dreadful, even for the time and the budget. It's laughable.

Laughable too is the end of 'Dawn of the Dead', I had friends rip the piss out of me during a viewing of that, like I directed the bloody thing. Personally, I would have ended the film with Peter and Fran blowing their heads off.

The piefight too is bloody terrible.

It's why 'Day of the Dead' is the greatest thing he ever did. Entirely straight, no crap.

Why audiences didn't like it, I have no idea. People booed according to Lori Cardille.

Morons.

[wayzim]

In no particular order...

1. Don’t Look Now

One word. Boring. Unbelievably tedious so called horror film, that has managed to earn itself an incredible reputation, mostly due to its ending, which I personally found laughable. But, love or hate the ending, the viewer has to trudge though a ridiculous amount of tedium to get to the punch line.

2. Night of the Hunter

Utterly ridiculous “classic” where Robert Mitchum chews up the scenery and featuring some of the worst lines of dialogue in movie history. Some people say Laughton filmed it deliberately this way. I don’t care. It still makes for an awful film. Laughton’s only director effort…thank god.

3. Halloween

For some people, the most horrifying film they ever saw. Or, at least that’s what they say. It may claim to be the first slasher (it’s not, ‘Psycho’ is), but that still doesn’t stop it from being simply an OK film. The performances are generally ok too, the two main stars being the best, but it still feels twice the length of it’s 90 minute running time, because so little happens.

4. Rosemary’s Baby

Another bore fest. A “horror” film with no horror. While competently directed, it’s still a terribly boring film and ends up being somewhat laughable at its conclusion. Notoriously devoid of shocks or creepiness, Polanski (himself incredibly overrated) should have taken a leaf out of his own book and made the film more like ‘The Tennant’, or the earlier ‘Repulsion’.

5. The Blair Witch Project

Brian Griffin summed it up very well. “Nothing’s happening, nothing’s happening, nothing’s happening…it’s over. A lot of people in the audience look really pissed.” One of the greatest gimmicky films, since ‘The Tingler’. William Castle would have been proud. I’m happy the guys who made this (on a shoestring budget) made a ton of money from it, but really, it’s fans would make you old.

6. The Ring

Oh dear…Asian horror as a whole is one of the most overrated genres ever. Most of the films generally follow the “nothing happens for an hour, then bam” rule and they are tedious in the extreme. This film, which sparked the current cycle, takes that rule to its heart. It contains one genuine shocking scene early on and then nothing for ages. But, its worst sin is its villain. A girl that comes through the telly and frightens people…ha ha…fuck off.

7. Phantasm

Another OK movie that has managed to garner a reputation that’s all out of proportion to what it deserves. While not an awful film, it certain doesn’t deserve the laurels that it has gained.

8. Scream

Oh, where to start with this. Wes Craven must have popped his eyes out of his head when the zeitgeist on this got a hold. I’ve never understood the popularity of this incredibly tame flick. It’s slasher-lite and boring as hell, featuring two non-entities as its starring roles. Just…rubbish…and what’s worse is it spawned sequels!

9. The Hills Have Eyes

Another Wes Craven failure that again has managed to get a word of mouth reputation as a gory and horrifying horror film. Banned in some countries, I’ve never been able to figure out why. It’s completely inept and notable ONLY for introducing the world to Michael Berryman. Part II is even worse! Craven, actually, has managed to gain a lucrative horror career on the back of some of the most overrated films in the genre, beginning with ‘The last House on the Left’, itself a terribly overrated film right up to the awful ‘Scream’ franchise. Mind boggling, when you consider that his only really good film was ‘A Nightmare on Elm Street’.

10. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre

THERE! I said it!

Actually, I love this film, but again it’s a movie that has been elevated to a status totally unbecoming of its content. It contains some truly stupid scenes and some rubbish, rubbish makeup (Grandpa anyone?). Some of the acting is beyond a joke, even for a film of its type (Franklin) and the worst crime is that it simply doesn’t deliver the goods promised by the eye-catching title. On saying that, it does feature one of the most memorable movie monster introductions ever filmed and when Sally gets hung on a meathook, its hard not to squirm. Problem is, it goes rapidly downhill when the rest of Leatherface’s family are introduced.


Special mention should go to the following…’Witchfinder General’, ‘The Amityville Horror’, ‘The Evil Dead’, ‘Donnie Darko’, ‘The Thing (1958), ‘Hellrasier’, ‘Friday the 13th’ , 'Hostel' , ‘The Birds’ and any Universal / Hammer film or Corman’s Poe movies.

One problem we have is a generation gap, and the fact that a couple of these movies rely on atmosphere to get you through. Secondly, there are folks who go to movies and those of us who love movies, so 'Don't Look Now. " works quite well in that regard.
The same with Rosemary's Baby, which unfortunately has become dated, but on an elemental level is still quite effective.
Both Hills and Texas Chain Saw succeeded, again it's the times, in pressing certain primal buttons in the audience. I like the latter one somewhat better, especially after we're dragged into the house along with our heroine and Hooper keeps pressing in on her reaction to the lunacy around her.
Phantasm ... is a silly fun film, with far too many sequels, and a memorable villain in Angus Scrimm (haven't met another tall man quite like him )but it's such an over the top goof you can't help but enjoy it.
In regards to Psycho being the first slasher film, possibly, but Halloween clearly molded the way that films were packaged for almost twenty years after (notice the difference in execution and the level of graphic violence between the original Halloween and it's first sequel )
Psycho is still amazing, and oddly enough the Tony Perkins produced sequels weren't too shabby.
Scream was too slick and self indulgent for me, like a movie buddy who keeps nudging you in the ribs at key moments "You see that? You get the joke? "
Yah, Wes, we get it.
Now, Blair Witch, is not a film to be separated from the hype, since it was the whole package (Internet, two Sci Fi specials, a Showtime special, and several books ) which made it fun and added a level of credibility to the project. The second movie even did something unexpected ( and fairly cool. ) which was to goof on the whole reality vs fiction aspect of the first film. This pisses some folks off ... which makes me smile.
If you really want to see the witch, rent Darkness Falls ( stupid movie, ultimately. )
Oh, and everytime someone says 'This is a Horror Film, this isn't a Horror Film.' (like all Sci Fi is Space Ships and Ray Guns. )I always recommend this little tome from 1992 entitled 'Horror Writers on Horror Film; Cut! ' as Clive Barker waxes eloquently on how hopelessly narrow our definitions are, and how other types of films might actually be pretty Horrific (Marathon Man was one of his favorites )
But like with any genre of film, if you take it too seriously, that's when your enjoyment of it goes down hill pretty fast.

Wayne Z

[rongravy]

Everything there can suck it, except Phantasm. It's kind of cheese, but the sequel was pretty dang sweeet.

[shootemindehead]

One problem we have is a generation gap, and the fact that a couple of these movies rely on atmosphere to get you through. Secondly, there are folks who go to movies and those of us who love movies, so 'Don't Look Now. " works quite well in that regard.

You've made interesting points there Wayne, as has everyone. This is turning into a fairly lively discussion. I'll address a few of them.

I agree about there generation gap and I undertsand others points about the overseas gap too. But the list purely personal and based on how films have been recieved by the general public and critics. Films relying on atmosphere is not the issue for me. One of the best genre films, to me anyway (and to general approval it seems) is 'The Haunting' and that's pure based on atmosphere. Also, it's the folk "who love movies" who generally form a concensus on a particular rating of a film. In other words, whether it's truly great example or not. 'Don't Look Now' is the perfect example of a film that's rated very highly by most "lovers" of film. But this lover of film thinks that it's way overrated. BTW, this film was actually on TV last night! yes, Roeg's film is atmosphere based, but the actual film contains very little after the death of the little girl in the red dress, up to it's finale 2 hours later. Where it's classic status has come from is extremely difficult to say.


The same with Rosemary's Baby, which unfortunately has become dated, but on an elemental level is still quite effective.

I think even at the time I would have viewed 'Rosemary's baby' as laughable. I just don't think it's a terribly interesting film and certain not something that I would consider a showcase of the genre.


Both Hills and Texas Chain Saw succeeded, again it's the times, in pressing certain primal buttons in the audience. I like the latter one somewhat better, especially after we're dragged into the house along with our heroine and Hooper keeps pressing in on her reaction to the lunacy around her.

Well, yes, they succeeded, but that's not the issue. Films succeeding or not is no indication of whether a film is a classic of the genre or wther they are over or under rated. 'Day of the Dead' didn't succeed, but certainly IS a classic and sadly generally under-rated.


In regards to Psycho being the first slasher film, possibly, but Halloween clearly molded the way that films were packaged for almost twenty years after (notice the difference in execution and the level of graphic violence between the original Halloween and it's first sequel )
Psycho is still amazing, and oddly enough the Tony Perkins produced sequels weren't too shabby.

According to Carpenter, he says 'Psycho' was a direct influence on his production, so that's good enough for me. But, as I said, there really is no such thing as a slasher film. Nothing has ever been marketed using that term. But, as far as fitting within the bracket...I think 'Psycho' slots in. The difference in violence is a direct result of the negative reviews it recied when first released. People called it boring and lacking a sense of rhythm. It's only when kids started going in droves and word of mouth got going that the film did well. But the "boring" thing got ot Carpenter, it seems. Hence, the upping of violence in 'Halloween II'. Not a project Carpenter wanted to do BTW.


Scream was too slick and self indulgent for me, like a movie buddy who keeps nudging you in the ribs at key moments "You see that? You get the joke? "
Yah, Wes, we get it.

I'm still untter bemused at the films popularity. I'm sure Craven was at the time too.


Now, Blair Witch, is not a film to be separated from the hype, since it was the whole package (Internet, two Sci Fi specials, a Showtime special, and several books ) which made it fun and added a level of credibility to the project.

Blair Witch, I actually enjoyed the run up to. I thought the campaign was very good and I was even OK with the film when I first saw it. My problem is how the film is rated today. Strip away all the bells and whistles and what's left is something that really isn't that good, or memorable. Except for the last scene, I cannot remember a single frame...and I've seen it about 5 or 6 times now.


Oh, and everytime someone says 'This is a Horror Film, this isn't a Horror Film.' (like all Sci Fi is Space Ships and Ray Guns.) I always recommend this little tome from 1992 entitled 'Horror Writers on Horror Film; Cut! ' as Clive Barker waxes eloquently on how hopelessly narrow our definitions are, and how other types of films might actually be pretty Horrific (Marathon Man was one of his favorites )

Agreed. But, it's part of the human condition to put everything into their little boxes. Horror, is extremely difficult to get right and what's horrifc to a person changes with age. I'm more frightened now by mortgages, than I am vampires or werevolves. That doesn't mean that a movie of that sort wouldn't scare or disturb me. In the right hands, it would (to a degree). Although it's been so long since I've felt genuine tension in a scene and few films have achieved what I believe the great horror movies do and that's a chill down the spine for the entire running time. 'Jaws', 'The Exorcist' and 'Day of the Dead' being three examples of such films. I think the last scene in a film that genuinely had me on edge was in David Lynch's 'Mulholland Drive'. Although not a horror movie, one scene involving a tramp at the back of Winkie's fast food joint, has been one of the few scenes which has got my heart going. I've looked at the scene several times and it still creeps me out.

[Trin]

Actually....I meant the original. It's a bit overrated, imo. I love it in a so-bad-its-fun kind of way, but I really think it gets more attention than it deserves. The only real attention it deserves is that it set the bar for "modern" zombie films. Until Day, that is. Day still has it's bar set firmly in place.
I get what you're saying. But Dawn was the height of horror in the 80's. What you are calling overrated today is a shadow compared to the love it got back then. If you brought up horror movies people would jump in with Dawn like slashdot posters typing First. So I guess that even if it seems overrated today I think it earned the right to be.

A few I'd drop into the list:
Hellraiser
Nightmare on Elm Street
Anything with Jason in it
Jaws

[blind2d]

I agree with you picks there. Also, I didn't think Scream was all that great, besides the gut-spilling bit.

[wayzim]

Special mention should go to the following…’Witchfinder General’, ‘The Amityville Horror’, ‘The Evil Dead’, ‘Donnie Darko’, ‘The Thing (1958), ‘Hellrasier’, ‘Friday the 13th’ , 'Hostel' , ‘The Birds’ and any Universal / Hammer film or Corman’s Poe movies.

A special word about Roger Corman ... DA Man, which the spoilt kids don't get. He worked largely in that camp which Grindhouse paid homage to ... The Exploitation Film, started the careers of many a future successful director/producers, and on occasion cranked out some gems among the countless films he made.
Among them, a nice little supernatural take on reincarnation, The Undead (57) has a crazy shrink send a streetwalker back to a past life in the dark ages where she's to hung for witchcraft ( it stars the original 50 ft woman, allison hayes, best bust among the B-Movie queens )
Masque of The Red Death(67)was the better of his Poe films, more colorful than his darker attempts, and benefited from the presence of Hazel Court.
worth a look see.
While he often worked with next to no money and seriously tight time constraints, Corman still turned out inventive and competent product. Which is why there's little about the man that's over-rated.

Wayne Z

[shootemindehead]

Well neither a) a kid or B) spolit,

I am well aware of what Corman had to work with and what he produced. I still, however, consider his Poe run of films to be generally overrated by critics. I actually liked "Masque of the Red Death" (1964 by the way), which was shot by Nick Roeg, director of 'Don't look Now' (another one on the list). I sought it out after reading a gushing review of it many years ago. I found it to be a somewhat confused mish-mash of several different Poe stories and it didn't really work, but still looks lovely. The vibrant use of that 60's false colour was seldom put to better use.

However, as a "horror" film it's a failure.

It's probably the best of Corman's 8 Poe pictures, but IMO, that ain't saying much.

In saying that, I think Corman was better when he was tackling the less heady heights of the likes of 'Battle Beyond the Stars', or 'Death Race 2000'.

[Trin]

... of the likes of 'Battle Beyond the Stars', or 'Death Race 2000'.
I love both those two movies, btw. I saw Battle Beyond the Stars at a drive-in when it was brand new.

[shootemindehead]

I love both those two movies, btw. I saw Battle Beyond the Stars at a drive-in when it was brand new.

:cool:

Johnboy in Space.

[CooperWasRight]

One problem we have is a generation gap, and the fact that a couple of these movies rely on atmosphere to get you through. Secondly, there are folks who go to movies and those of us who love movies, so 'Don't Look Now. " works quite well in that regard.

Before I finished reading the thread and got to your post I was pretty much thinking the same thing. I think you pretty much nailed it.

I have had many conversations with my younger friends raised on the films that pay homage or in most cases out and out ripped off Carpenter's, Hitchcock's, Polanski's, Craven's, Friedken's, Hooper's and Romero's work (to name a few) and most of them prefer the streamlined contemporary give it to me now,show it all on camera, Subtext...? I don't think my phone gets those kind of text approach of what is so called modern horror. Most of them do not seem capable of appreciating the historical relevance of the "Old" films.

[wayzim]

The Texas Chainsaw Masacre has some genuinely disturbing scenes in it IMO (like when the boys are trying to get their dead father to bash that girls brains out with a hammer...that is really messed up).

The original Dawn is a bit campy in parts (Peter busting out at the end to the "hero" music is fucking hilarious and not grim/horrific/tense in any way shape or form). That said, I still love this movie and it is still my favorite GAR film. The effects don't matter to me to be honest, the film pulls me in and demands that I watch it.

I just realized something as I reread this thread. You could almost substitute the A-Team theme( the series, not the movie ) for the Hero theme in Dawn. I started playing both in my head ... that's mess up.

Wayne Z
"You're not just messin with your Life, you're messing with mine. "
Dawn of The Dead

[bassman]

Created by Phillyswat...

wOu15I20Ku8&hl=en_US&fs=1&

[darth los]

I just realized something as I reread this thread. You could almost substitute the A-Team theme( the series, not the movie ) for the Hero theme in Dawn. I started playing both in my head ... that's mess up.

Wayne Z
"You're not just messin with your Life, you're messing with mine. "
Dawn of The Dead


Not exactly, but the "spirit" is the same. I can see where someone would think they're similar.

A team: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wyz_2DEah4o

Dawn: Go to the 3 minute mark:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G68LnrTO-Z0

:cool:

[JDFP]

I've always found that "heroic music" there at the end of "Dawn" to be a bit... well... strangely placed. I like it because it's Peter kickin some zombie tail, but it's just a bit awkward all the same.

"Yay, Peter decided not to kill himself and knocks out some ghouls on the way to the ladder, cue heroic music!" :shifty:

As far as overrated movies go, I have one to add: "Suspiria" -- see my other thread on this film for details.

j.p.

[LouCipherr]

I just realized something as I reread this thread. You could almost substitute the A-Team theme( the series, not the movie ) for the Hero theme in Dawn. I started playing both in my head ... that's mess up.


I don't know why, but this made me lmao when I read it. :lol:

[fulci fan]

Can we still put our list up? :shifty:

1. Friday the 13th - All of them
2. Nightmare on Elm St.- All of them
3. Halloween- All of them.

I guess that is more than eleven. That is about 100 movies if you add them all up, right? :D

[bassman]

1. Friday the 13th - All of them
2. Nightmare on Elm St.- All of them
3. Halloween- All of them.


AYE! I thought I was the only one. I don't care for any of these series, either. I've seen most of them and they're okay to watch, but quickly forgotten soon after.

I do like the Halloween remake, though. It's better than the original, imo.

[Trin]

AYE! I thought I was the only one. I don't care for any of these series, either. I hate all those movies too. I hate to call them horror. I think it diminishes the term. I think of them as "slasher" movies and don't let them in the horror door.

[fulci fan]

I just don't get why people are obsessed with silly American slasher movies. The reason why they were made was to entertain nit wit teeny boppers. I can really only stand these films near Halloween. :rolleyes:

[darth los]

I hate all those movies too. I hate to call them horror. I think it diminishes the term. I think of them as "slasher" movies and don't let them in the horror door.

And their cousin torture porn was making a comback there in recent years as well...

:cool:

[Mr.G]

I do like the Halloween remake, though. It's better than the original, imo.

Holy shit! There is help out there for people like you! ;)

---------- Post added at 06:20 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:19 PM ----------




as far as overrated movies go, i have one to add: "suspiria" -- see my other thread on this film for details.

J.p.

amen!

[bassman]

The original is just random people getting killed by a random guy for no explanation. The remake gave the characters depth. Redneck depth....but it worked. :lol:

I love a few of Carpenter's flicks, but most of them are garbage. His real gem is The Thing.

[Crappingbear]

The original is just random people getting killed by a random guy for no explanation. The remake gave the characters depth. Redneck depth....but it worked. :lol:

I love a few of Carpenter's flicks, but most of them are garbage. His real gem is The Thing.

The Thing is at the top, but I think Big Trouble in Little China is his best. Kurt's scenery chewing is so over the top that its great.

[JDFP]

Christine kicks all of Carpenter's films asses. Second greatest horror film ever made (right after "Day of the Dead").

I can't freaking wait for Christine to come out on Blu-Ray. I never spend money for actually purchasing films for myself (I can get them extremely cheap to rent so why buy? Most films aren't worth buying anyway).

The scene in Christine when Arnie is looking at the wrecked and destroyed '58 Autumn red Plymouth Fury (dear Christine) and he says: "Okay, show me." and the headlights come on to Carpenter's soundtrack in that film -- ah hell, I get goosebumps just thinking about it!

j.p.

[Bruiser235]

1. Don’t Look Now (Never heard of it. I can't say.)

2. Night of the Hunter (Never saw it. Again I can't say.)

3. Halloween (Maybe a little overrated. Influential, definitely. I enjoy the second and 4th one moderately. The less said about part 5, part 6 and Resurrection, the better.)

4. Rosemary’s Baby (Haven't seen it.)

5. The Blair Witch Project ( I concur 1000000000%. I hated it when I saw it the one and only time when it came out on tape. Not DVD, tape. God I'm old.)

6. The Ring (I found the American remake boring. Same goes for the Grudge. Never saw the original.)

7. Phantasm (I agree mostly. I like the second and third ones myself. The fourth one was odd.)

8. Scream (Yeah I agree. This one was enough.)

9. The Hills Have Eyes (Never saw it.)


10. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre(Again, never saw it.)

Here's my personal top 10 overrated horror films:

1) Dog Soldiers

2) The Ring (American remake)

3) Ginger Snaps

4) The other Scream movies

5) The Birds

6) Near Dark (Bleh. Boring and uninteresting. It's cool it has a cult following and all, but just not my cup of tea. I'm more of a Lost Boys fan.)

7) The Exorcist

8) Friday the 13th (original and series. I don't deny they're influence for good or ill.)

9) I Am Legend (not sure if this is really horror or not. More Sci-fi post apocalyptic. I hated it personally. Nothing like the book. Not even close. Will Smith was better than expected. The producers sacrificed substance for style and spent their budget on a weak script propped up with excellent production value and crappy CGI creatures. If you want good entertainment read the original Mark Protosevich script. Again, not faithful to the book, but a good action yarn and would have been cool to see on the big screen.)

10) The Grudge (American remake)

[DubiousComforts]

Laughable too is the end of 'Dawn of the Dead', I had friends rip the piss out of me during a viewing of that, like I directed the bloody thing.
Perhaps you either a.) need better friends or b.) not care so much about what they think. I wish that I could so easily convince people that I'd directed Dawn of the Dead.


I personally loved "The Ring" (American version) as I think Samara is terrifying. I like how the film never gave too much away about her or the demonic/evil presence within her. Never saw any of the Japanese films this is based on ("Rasen"/"Ringu"/"Ragu"/"Ravioli" whatever else they are called). I've never been able to get into J-horror at all really,
Oh really? It's nearly a shot-for-shot (albeit pointless) remake of the original which is simply titled RING. So while you can't get into "J-horror" (which us dummies used to just call "horror"), it's pale American cousin works just fine? Fantastic!


My personal Top Ten would be...

7. Phantasm
Don Coscarelli never really intended to be a horror film director, certainly because of threads like these.

[JDFP]

Oh really? It's nearly a shot-for-shot (albeit pointless) remake of the original which is simply titled RING. So while you can't get into "J-horror" (which us dummies used to just call "horror"), it's pale American cousin works just fine? Fantastic!


Hey Dubious, the J-Horror version of "The Ring" might be great, but I just don't care for the style they use. Plus, I have a hard time telling the difference between one character and another as they all look alike to me. This isn't mean to be racist against Asian people (I don't have anything against any Asians), I just have a difficult time of telling them apart as they all look very similar to me. They may have the same issue with us Westerners looking all the same with big noses and big eyes. :)

j.p.

[DjfunkmasterG]

Yeh. I think the grandpa stuff is dreadful, even for the time and the budget. It's laughable.

Laughable too is the end of 'Dawn of the Dead', I had friends rip the piss out of me during a viewing of that, like I directed the bloody thing. Personally, I would have ended the film with Peter and Fran blowing their heads off.

The piefight too is bloody terrible.

Morons.


Perhaps you either a.) need better friends or b.) not care so much about what they think. I wish that I could so easily convince people that I'd directed Dawn of the Dead.

While I gave DubCom a tongue lashing in another topic I have to agree with his statement here, but I am going to say you go with option B. Not everyone is going to like DAWN. To some, when watching it this day,it feels dated, but that doesn't bother me... with all its flaws, DAWN has comfortably sat in my top 2 Zombie films (Switching Positions 1 & 2 on and off) since I made my list of Top 5.

Don't know what it is about DAWN or the original trilogy for me, but goddamn those are some fun movies to enjoy viewing after repeated viewing.

Thankfully though all my friends enjoy DAWN of the DEAD... most of them enjoy the remake and original, most prefer the original. :D

[DubiousComforts]

Hey Dubious, the J-Horror version of "The Ring" might be great, but I just don't care for the style they use. Plus, I have a hard time telling the difference between one character and another as they all look alike to me.
That's just the point--it's the same movie. Almost exactly the same. Ditto the remake of Ju-on better known as The Grudge. They even filmed it in Japan among all those similarly-looking Asian peoples. :p

Besides, you don't have to worry telling the characters apart in a Japanese horror film. You'll be too busy reading the English subtitles to notice.


While I gave DubCom a tongue lashing in another topic
That's okay. I'd have been disappointed if I didn't get one.

[shootemindehead]

While I gave DubCom a tongue lashing in another topic I have to agree with his statement here, but I am going to say you go with option B. Not everyone is going to like DAWN. To some, when watching it this day,it feels dated, but that doesn't bother me... with all its flaws, DAWN has comfortably sat in my top 2 Zombie films (Switching Positions 1 & 2 on and off) since I made my list of Top 5.

Don't know what it is about DAWN or the original trilogy for me, but goddamn those are some fun movies to enjoy viewing after repeated viewing.

Thankfully though all my friends enjoy DAWN of the DEAD... most of them enjoy the remake and original, most prefer the original. :D

Ah sure, it's not like I give a toss about drunken mates having a laugh at my expense (for liking a film). They like it too, but the ending is terrible. The music I mean. It was such a bad piece.

It's very dated in parts too, I agree. But there is still enough in it to keep me coming back on occasion.

[wayzim]

I don't know why, but this made me lmao when I read it. :lol:

So I guess this is the next crossover fan fic?:eek:

A-Team vs Dawn of The Dead?

Wayne Z

"If you have a problem with The Living Dead, maybe you can hire the A-Team. "

[LouCipherr]

So I guess this is the next crossover fan fic?:eek:

A-Team vs Dawn of The Dead?


A-Team VS. Zombies! YES! This would make a kickass film! Lets take it even a step further:

*ahem*

"In 1972 a crack commando unit was sent to prison by a military court for a crimes against zombies they didn't commit. These men promptly escaped from a maximum security stockade to the Los Angeles underground. Today, still wanted by the government and zombies alike, they survive as soldiers of fortune. If you have a problem with the living dead, if no one else can help, and if their brans haven't been eaten, maybe you can hire..... the A-Team." :lol:

Now THAT is a parody film I'd watch. :D

[Trin]

5) The Birds

The Birds is pretty awesome. Consider that it's a survival horror movie, with people stranded in a place with no help coming. It might as well have been the prelude to Night of the Living Dead. I don't know how it can be considered overrated.



7) The Exorcist

Exorcist was just piss-ya-pants scary at the time.

Tapped into religious/afterlife fears? Check.
Based on a true story? Check.
Lead actress couldn't appear in public cause she scared people? Check.

Dawn of the Dead overrated? No ya did-unt. I'm not hearin that!

[LouCipherr]

I don't know, The Exorcist never did anything for me either. I saw it as a teen and to this day I wonder what all the fuss was about. :shifty:

[DjfunkmasterG]

I don't know, The Exorcist never did anything for me either. I saw it as a teen and to this day I wonder what all the fuss was about. :shifty:

Some teen chick shoving a cruifix up her snatch doesn't make you wanna sit and say... hmmmmm, this might be interesting

[JDFP]

Some teen chick shoving a cruifix up her snatch doesn't make you wanna sit and say... hmmmmm, this might be interesting

Gary, I didn't know you were at the same Goth club I was at the other night...

:stunned:

:p

j.p.

[LouCipherr]

Some teen chick shoving a cruifix up her snatch doesn't make you wanna sit and say... hmmmmm, this might be interesting

It does, and it did, but then I watched it and was pretty much bored by it.

I'm just not into the demon/posession kinda flicks. I haven't found one yet that I really liked.

[clanglee]

For me . . .the Catholic symbolism was a big part of the scare in the Exorcist. I do find that Catholics, parents, and very religeous people seem to be the groups most effected by the Exorcist.

[bassman]

The Exorcist is a perfect example of the "less is more" horror we were talking about in another thread. The tension and spooks that film creates within the first 2 acts without any effects or "monster" reveals is amazing to me. By the time you get to Regan's full transformation and the exorcism you're ready to believe anything.

Fantastic film, imo.

[Mr.G]

The Exorcist is a perfect example of the "less is more" horror we were talking about in another thread. The tension and spooks that film creates within the first 2 acts without any effects or "monster" reveals is amazing to me. By the time you get to Regan's full transformation and the exorcism you're ready to believe anything.

Fantastic film, imo.

Agreed and I also think The Exorcist 3 is very underrated and a great film with excellent atmosphere.

[shootemindehead]

I think the main reason why 'The Exorcist' works is because the whole crew involved takes it incredibly seriously. It's a hokey story on the face of it, but everyone involved plays it very straight.

Far too often, modern "horror" films inject stupid and completely un-necessary humor into a film. I have no idea why to be honest, it almost universally never works.

[Danny]

That's just the point--it's the same movie. Almost exactly the same. Ditto the remake of Ju-on better known as The Grudge. They even filmed it in Japan among all those similarly-looking Asian peoples. :p


See, the ju-on remake gets a bad rep for being a remake like so many other "horror updates". But the grudge is a case the same to the evil dead 2. its the same director going back to his own film with money to make alterations. Honestly i like them both but the original hasn't aged well and the movie is far, far too long for the one trick subject matter. Not only did i find his second attempt a more competent film in terms of cinematrography, but a scarier film. It's a shame some of the story didnt make the culture translation too well.

But then i don't remember samara in the ring being a psychic hermaphrodite whos came from the sea either so...


-As for the original post, yeah, texas chainsaw is so overrated. for one thing its got the worst pacing of any "cult" horror film. By the time the girls tied to the chair at the family dinner table i could not give a fuck what happened to here and got bored and wanted to leave.
-that would probably explain the numbers of people running from the cinema :lol: its just too long and gets boring.

as for blair witch you like it or dont because of its fps nature, you put yourself into there shoes and only get out of the experience as much as you put in.

[DubiousComforts]

The Birds is pretty awesome. Consider that it's a survival horror movie, with people stranded in a place with no help coming. It might as well have been the prelude to Night of the Living Dead.

Bingo! You might as well call the original King Kong overrated if you can't give it up for The Birds at this point. Just wait, they'll besmirch it with a CGI remake.


See, the ju-on remake gets a bad rep for being a remake like so many other "horror updates". But the grudge is a case the same to the evil dead 2. its the same director going back to his own film with money to make alterations.
It's more like a low-budget Japanese director jumping aboard the cash-rich Hollywood/J-Horror gravy train.

Ju-on was originally a very low-budget (even for Japan) made-for-TV movie which included a sequel. It was made because Ring was such a huge breakout hit, although ghost stories in Japan have always been popular. Just prior to that time, there had been a series of haunted school films, Gakko no Kaidan, though the emphasis was less on horror and more on the supernatural.

Anyhow, when the made-for-TV versions did well enough, the director received a larger budget to lens a feature version. This is where he truly fine-tuned the concept and made his alterations. The subsequent Hollywood remake with Sarah Michelle Geller is just a bad copy.

[Mike70]

the blair witch project. nothing else even remotely comes close. the most over hyped piece of dung that has come down the pike in a long time.

yeah, it's scary alright - if you are 7 fucking years old.

what a profoundly stupid, stupid movie.

[JDFP]

the blair witch project. nothing else even remotely comes close. the most over hyped piece of dung that has come down the pike in a long time.

yeah, it's scary alright - if you are 7 fucking years old.

what a profoundly stupid, stupid movie.

It's a polarizing film, no doubt about that. People either love it or hate it. I personally love it and think it's a great work of film-making (the documentary filmed along with it on the DVD where they interview 'family' members, etc., should be watched along with the film as I think it goes along with it for a more complete story). One of the main reasons I love "Blair" so much is because it is open-ended -- was it a bunch of pissed-off rednecks that did them in? Was it an escaped convict? Was it the witch who had come back for vengeance? You never know -- and they don't attempt to cheapen the film by showing some silly CGI monster which would have ruined the film or slap some "explanation" onto the end of it. It is what it is. What works best about "Blair" is that you just don't know, and this is why I appreciate it as much as I do. Often times a horror film can be frightening up to the moment the monster/creature/etc. is shown -- and then it stops being scary.

I will say the second one ("Book of Shadows") is not very good though -- although the goth chick in that flick is extremely attractive.

j.p.

[Mr.G]

I will say the second one ("Book of Shadows") is not very good though -- although the goth chick in that flick is extremely attractive.

j.p.

I agree with you on the original but not the sequel. I thought it was a quality film. IMO if it was called anything besides BW2 it would have done better.

[LouCipherr]

I will say the second one ("Book of Shadows") is not very good though -- although the goth chick in that flick is extremely attractive.

Kim Director... *drool*

http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e104/LouCipherr/Forum%20Pics1/KimDirector.jpg

I think even though I didn't care too much for the 2nd Blair Witch, it was much better than the first. I find it hard to believe they spent as much as they did on the first film to run around in the woods with a camera. Hell, Dj makes feature length films for half the cost (possibly even less than that) with more locations and actors, so I'm not impressed. Especially considering what was in the film. They could've done that movie for the cost of the camera alone over a few weekends. :p

I will say this though: kudos to them for accomplishing what they did with BW, it's just, I guess I don't "get it" or it just didn't grab me like it did others.

Either way, BW2 was more entertaining and much more coherent (which says a lot considering the content of the flick) than the first. Not to mention it's the first time I got to see Jeffrey Donovan in action. Now I see him every week on Burn Notice - dude makes a kick-ass spy. :D

[bassman]

She's purddy. Although her eyes kinda freak me out a bit. It's like she's looking into my soul!! :p

Blair Witch 2 left no mark on me at all. I saw it once or twice and I can't remember a damn thing about it. However, the first film is still memorable. I guess it came along at just the right time or something, because I really liked it and that's kind of carried on.

Although it's easy for me to see how it's 50/50 and that negative 50% really hate it. I can understand that. Maybe my liking it has something to do with camping a lot as a child? I dunno...

[LouCipherr]

She's purddy. Although her eyes kinda freak me out a bit. It's like she's looking into my soul!! :p

....

Maybe my liking it has something to do with camping a lot as a child? I dunno...

Yeah, her eyes are creepy, aren't they? Something about blue eyes and dark/black hair really makes them stand out and feel like they can burn you just by staring at you. :D

I dunno, I'm an avid camper from youth 'till today - still didn't find BW scary. *shrugs shoulders* It's just "one of those movies" I guess. That 50/50 thing. ;)

[bassman]

Kind of ironic that Joblo.com posted THIS (http://www.joblo.com/arrow/index.php?id=22751) article today while we're talking about this.

[Mr.G]

Kind of ironic that Joblo.com posted THIS (http://www.joblo.com/arrow/index.php?id=22751) article today while we're talking about this.

This clarifies my position much better. I'm also glad I'm not alone!

[Neil]

The Shining... I just never got it!

[bassman]

Redrum...what's not to get? :p

Seriously though.....I don't hear much negative talk about that one. You're referring to the Kurbick film with Jack Nicholson and not the TV version made years later, right?

That film scared the hell out of me as a kid and still does to this day.

[AcesandEights]

That film scared the hell out of me as a kid and still does to this day.

Yeah, that film can still make me shudder under the right circumstances.

[LouCipherr]

The Shining... I just never got it!

I never did either - the movie that is. While I think Jack Nicholson makes a FANTASTIC Jack Torrance (I can't stress that enough), I think Kubrick's version missed most of the point of the book. It's a decent movie, but the book was way better as it let you "in" on a lot of the shit Kubrick decided to leave out - ie: intergal parts of the story that help make it make some kind of sense.


Redrum...what's not to get? :p

Seriously though.....I don't hear much negative talk about that one. You're referring to the Kurbick film with Jack Nicholson and not the TV version made years later, right?

What's sad is, King's miniseries followed the book much better than Kubrick's, however, not having Nicholson as Jack kinda just ruined it for me. If King had put Nicholson in there, his miniseries would've blown the movie out of the water - that is, if you're looking for something that follows the novel.


King's miniseries = better telling of the story vs. the book
Kubrick's movie = better actors, but much more of an incoherent story

[DubiousComforts]

I personally love it and think it's a great work of film-making (the documentary filmed along with it on the DVD where they interview 'family' members, etc., should be watched along with the film as I think it goes along with it for a more complete story). One of the main reasons I love "Blair" so much is because it is open-ended -- was it a bunch of pissed-off rednecks that did them in?

The "documentary" footage which ended up in the MTV special was actually part of the film until the filmmakers got cold feet and removed all of it. I agree that it's very effective and furthers the creepy In Search Of... atmosphere they were shooting for.

The ending isn't entirely open-ended. The main characters wind up in serial killer Rustin Parr's house which had been burned down many years earlier, so obviously there is an element of the supernatural at play.

[bassman]

Lou - le'ts be real here. NOTHING is better than Stanley Kubrick. :p

I only saw part of that miniseries, but what I did see of it was pretty awful...

[Trin]

King's miniseries = better telling of the story vs. the book
Kubrick's movie = better actors, but much more of an incoherent story
That's a failing of King. He's great with the book but his translation to screenplay is rigid and formulaic. He sticks very closely to his plot which makes it very true to the original but his cinematic skills and pacing are weak. He portrays events well but does poorly conveying mood.

I'm not a huge fan of The Shining movie, but if you weigh Kubrick's sense of place, score, and casting... that movie is just good. He builds an immense sense of isolation and dread through visuals and music. Was it better than the miniseries? Better than the book? No. It was just better in different ways.

[LouCipherr]

Lou - le'ts be real here. NOTHING is better than Stanley Kubrick. :p

I dunno about that, the guy is pretty fucked in the head. :lol: One read of The Shining then a view of his movie version will make that perfectly clear. :D


I saw part of that miniseries, but what I did see of it was pretty awful...

Well, I think it depends on what you want out of the movie. What I personally wanted was a telling of the book in movie form. Kubrick got the "main points" of the book (Torrance watching over the Overlook, the 'shining' aspect) but missed so many things that made the story coherent. The movie is just all over the place compared to the book.

It sucks I'm such a fan of King and his novels 'cause as far as I'm concerned, the only movies that are based on King stories that turn out good are either done by Darabont or King himself. Otherwise they all suck. :lol:

[Danny]

I didn't care too much for the 2nd Blair Witch, it was much better than the first.


http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y91/khazrak/1277410281718.jpg

[bassman]

Oh my god you just posted a picture of Robby Rotten from Lazy Town. How do you even know about that show?!?:lol:

[darth los]

I saw it once or twice and I can't remember a damn thing about it.

All I can remember is the naked redhead. But in the end that's all i need. :D

:cool:

[Danny]

Oh my god you just posted a picture of Robby Rotten from Lazy Town. How do you even know about that show?!?:lol:


I once had a stoner roommate who tivo'ed it. :lol:

[LouCipherr]

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y91/khazrak/1277410281718.jpg

:lol: :lol:

Hellsing, you owe me a keyboard since mine is now covered in soda! :p



All I can remember is the naked redhead. But in the end that's all i need. :D

Damn right! I mean, I liked the goth chick, but the redhead got naked, so she gets bonus points. :lol:

[DjfunkmasterG]

Damn right! I mean, I liked the goth chick, but the redhead got naked, so she gets bonus points. :lol:

Any redhead who gets naked gets bonus points with you Lou... :p

[darth los]

Any redhead who gets naked gets bonus points with you Lou... :p

What else can be said other than he's a "RED CARPET" kinda guy. :lol:

:cool:

[LouCipherr]

What else can be said other than he's a "RED CARPET" kinda guy. :lol:


Yeah, what he said! I can't help it if I like being on the red carpet all the time. :p :lol:

[Neil]

Redrum...what's not to get? :p

Seriously though.....I don't hear much negative talk about that one. You're referring to the Kurbick film with Jack Nicholson and not the TV version made years later, right?

That film scared the hell out of me as a kid and still does to this day.

Yeh, just never did it for me... Maybe I need to revisit it...

[major jay]

Yeh, just never did it for me... Maybe I need to revisit it...

I think this movie works much better as a drama than as a staight up horror movie. To me it's all about Jack Torrance, an alcoholic who cheats on his naive wife at every oppurtunity, hates his child who he has severely traumatized though extreme beatings, and is just one nudge away from becoming a complete psycho.

So basically, to me, this movie is about one huge piece of shit of a human being.

[Danny]

i think ive said before how i saw the shining when i was 7 and looked like Danny does, same stupid hair, same awesome name. So those twins going "play with us danny, forever and ever..." shat me up and still does a little to this day.

[major jay]

i think ive said before how i saw the shining when i was 7 and looked like Danny does, same stupid hair, same awesome name. So those twins going "play with us danny, forever and ever..." shat me up and still does a little to this day.

I think anyone who has been through a divorce can relate to what's going on in this movie, to some degree, as well.

[Neil]

who cheats on his naive wife at every opportunity
I don't recall anything about that in the movie?

[major jay]

I don't recall anything about that in the movie?

He was fired from his last job due to his rampant drinking or maybe even sexual harassment. He rubbernecks to watch as female staff exit on the closing day of the hotel atop committing an act of infidelity during the feature. Some of this is subtle stuff, but I took it as meaning he'd cheat on her at any given opportunity. He certainly doesn't give a shit about her.

[Mr.G]

He was fired from his last job due to his rampant drinking or maybe even sexual harassment. He rubbernecks to watch as female staff exit on the closing day of the hotel atop committing an act of infidelity during the feature. Some of this is subtle stuff, but I took it as meaning he'd cheat on her at any given opportunity. He certainly doesn't give a shit about her.

I'm sure that has nothing to do with her being fuck ugly. :lol: (My favorite line fron Shaun!)

[clanglee]

I think this movie works much better as a drama than as a staight up horror movie. To me it's all about Jack Torrance, an alcoholic who cheats on his naive wife at every oppurtunity, hates his child who he has severely traumatized though extreme beatings, and is just one nudge away from becoming a complete psycho.

So basically, to me, this movie is about one huge piece of shit of a human being.

Wow . . . .no. I didn't get that at all. Jack is a regular husband and father with a severe drinking problem. It controls him even when he isn't drinking. I felt that he loves his family but he is overstessed and he takes it out on those he loves. The house works on him to the point where he may not love his family anymore. . . .but that isn't the way it started out. Not the way I see it. . . . . .That is the one main failing of Jack Nicholson as Jack Torrance. Nicholson does crazy really well. But he portrayed Torrance as somewhat one dimensional. There was no real breakdown or change in the character. Nicholson played him like "a little crazy to balls to the wall/spoon in his ass crazy" So I guess I see where you got what you did from the movie. . . but I don't think that was the intent, just a failing in the portrayal.

[krakenslayer]

I have to agree with Neil, I just didn't find The Shining very scary or exciting. It was a nice looking film, but it just seemed kind of dull, cold and sterile, like so many of Kubrick's films.

In fact, the only one of his films I really enjoyed was 2001, and then only on second viewing after having read the Arthur C. Clarke novel.

[Neil]

I have to agree with Neil, I just didn't find The Shining very scary or exciting. It was a nice looking film, but it just seemed kind of dull, cold and sterile, like so many of Kubrick's films.

In fact, the only one of his films I really enjoyed was 2001, and then only on second viewing after having read the Arthur C. Clarke novel.

Spartacus? Please tell me you rate that :eek:

[clanglee]

I have to agree with Neil, I just didn't find The Shining very scary or exciting. It was a nice looking film, but it just seemed kind of dull, cold and sterile, like so many of Kubrick's films.

In fact, the only one of his films I really enjoyed was 2001, and then only on second viewing after having read the Arthur C. Clarke novel.

Clockwork Orange? Full Metal Jacket?!?!?! Really? No love for those films?

[AcesandEights]

it just seemed kind of dull, cold and sterile, like so many of Kubrick's films.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_FVFdgYGb6to/St_GHKKJRCI/AAAAAAAAAEo/sKEDMZ3vfHY/s640/nascido+para+matar.jpg

Private Krakers, you must think you're some kind of comedian!

[darth los]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_FVFdgYGb6to/St_GHKKJRCI/AAAAAAAAAEo/sKEDMZ3vfHY/s640/nascido+para+matar.jpg

Private Krakers, you must think you're some kind of comedian!

Full metal Jacket is the type of movie that if people don't like it I seriously wonder about them. :confused:

And it doesn't matter if the person doesn't like war movies. That's no excuse.

I can't stand sappy romance dramas, however, I have to acknowledge that Titanic is one of the greatest films of all time. :shifty:

:cool:

[DjfunkmasterG]

I have to acknowledge that Titanic is one of the greatest films of all time. :shifty:

:cool:



Don't you mean disaster film of all time?

I only like Titanic from Chapter 26 on (original DVD release)

However, only JC could put a shoot out in the middle of a movie about a ship sinking into freezing N. Atlantic waters.

[bassman]

Titanic is a good film. The quicker guys can hang up their "i'm too macho" hats and accept it, the better.:D

[clanglee]

Titanic is a good film. The quicker guys can hang up their "i'm too macho" hats and accept it, the better.:D

http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/jdu/lowres/jdun511l.jpg

[bassman]

:lol:

Perhaps. I just get tired of people claiming "Oh TITANIC didn't need the love story!". WTF else were they gonna do for 2-3 hours? Besides....EVERY SINGLE ONE of James Cameron's films are love stories. Think about it.

[clanglee]

:lol:

Perhaps. I just get tired of people claiming "Oh TITANIC didn't need the love story!". WTF else were they gonna do for 2-3 hours? Besides....EVERY SINGLE ONE of James Cameron's films are love stories. Think about it.

Aliens?

[darth los]

Don't you mean disaster film of all time?



No, I think I got it right the first time.

Just like I don't Put the original dawn in a genre when I talk about it. That film is one of the all time greats as well.

So is Land of the Dead.

GOTCHA!! :lol:

:cool:

[bassman]

Aliens?

Whaaa? You don't see the love story in Aliens? Newt? Ripley? Mother, Daughter?

The entire second half of the film hinges on that relationship...

[clanglee]

Whaaa? You don't see the love story in Aliens? Newt? Ripley? Mother, Daughter?

The entire second half of the film hinges on that relationship...

I thought about that as soon as I posted. . .but I don't see that as a love story. There is some love there. . but not the kinda love that you think of when you think of a love story. Same thing with T2. Besides. . they are just elements thrown into the Action story to widen it's scope. I would not say that the movie Aliens is about a woman trying to protect the little girl that she loves. It's about a group of people trying to survive. That's like saying Dawn of the Dead is a buddy picture because the first half focuses largely on the relationship between Roger and Peter. Meh. . . I think you're stetching my friend.

[major jay]

Wow . . . .no. I didn't get that at all. Jack is a regular husband and father with a severe drinking problem. It controls him even when he isn't drinking. I felt that he loves his family but he is overstessed and he takes it out on those he loves. The house works on him to the point where he may not love his family anymore. . . .but that isn't the way it started out. Not the way I see it. . . . . .That is the one main failing of Jack Nicholson as Jack Torrance. Nicholson does crazy really well. But he portrayed Torrance as somewhat one dimensional. There was no real breakdown or change in the character. Nicholson played him like "a little crazy to balls to the wall/spoon in his ass crazy" So I guess I see where you got what you did from the movie. . . but I don't think that was the intent, just a failing in the portrayal.

I understand what you're saying. The next time I watch it I might end up seeing it your way, but that's what I like about Kubricks flicks (besides the awesome visuals) there aren't any easy answers.

[bassman]

I thought about that as soon as I posted. . .but I don't see that as a love story. There is some love there. . but not the kinda love that you think of when you think of a love story. Same thing with T2. Besides. . they are just elements thrown into the Action story to widen it's scope. I would not say that the movie Aliens is about a woman trying to protect the little girl that she loves. It's about a group of people trying to survive. That's like saying Dawn of the Dead is a buddy picture because the first half focuses largely on the relationship between Roger and Peter. Meh. . . I think you're stetching my friend.

I can see what you're saying. If you want to put the mother/daughter thing aside you can, but I think it's right up in your face. All of the decisions made from the time she meets Newt are as a mother protecting her "daughter". We would have never seen the queen if Ripley said "fuck it...kids dead" and left with Bishop and Hicks.

Not to mention if you watch the extended cut, the mother theme plays even more heavily. The scene about her real daughter's death and all.

If you ask me....Aliens is very much a love story about children and doing what you have to in order to protect them.

And T2 is a love story between the boy and a father figure. Seriously.

[LouCipherr]

:lol:

Perhaps. I just get tired of people claiming "Oh TITANIC didn't need the love story!". WTF else were they gonna do for 2-3 hours?

That's simple, sink the ship in real time. The love story is what brought that film to the bottom of the ocean in the first place.

The only good parts to Titanic where when the ship hit the ice 'till when it finally sank. The rest is all BS that wasn't necessary. If you're going to name it "titanic" make it about the titanic. If you're going to make the movie about the love story, call it "Bullshit Love Story on the Titanic" :D

[bassman]

That's like saying Gone With The Wind should have been Atlanta burning for 4 hours....

If you have no way to connect with the characters, you don't care when they're in danger. Through Jack and Rose's perspective we get to "know" several of the passengers on the ship. Then when their time comes, its all the more hard to take.

[LouCipherr]

That's like saying Gone With The Wind should have been Atlanta burning for 4 hours....

I fail to see the problem with that, either. What's your point?

[bassman]

I fail to see the problem with that, either. What's your point?

:lol:

And to think you've helped DJ's flicks along. If this is all we got, the genre and movies in general are fucked.:p

[LouCipherr]

And to think you've helped DJ's flicks along. If this is all we got, the genre and movies in general are fucked.:p

Apparently, it's working, so perhaps you should re-think your position. :p

At least in Dj's movies, we don't have 30 minutes of awesomeness surrounded by 2 hours of a bullshit love story that has nothing to do with the premise of the flick. :lol:


If you're gonna call it "Titanic" make it about the Titanic. If you're going to call a movie "Deadlands: The Rising" or "Deadlands 2: Trapped" you make it about zombies.

Seems like one group of us got it right and the other failed miserably.

Next!


:lol:

[bassman]

If you're gonna call it "Titanic" make it about the Titanic. If you're going to call a movie "Deadlands: The Rising" or "Deadlands 2: Trapped" you make it about zombies.


How is it NOT about the Titanic? The love story plays out ENTIRELY on the ship. Through that we get to see the ship, how it was operated, and the class system. We're familiar with the ship and when it sinks, it's like losing a character.

So if we were to get picky with it...the film is in fact about the ship. It's almost the only set piece. But maybe it would've been more to your liking if the ship was completely empty? "No passengers. Just start at the collision and lets watch some shit get wet!" :confused:

[DjfunkmasterG]

Ok, first off lets leave my films out of it. You cannot compare a $10k and $6k zombie flick to a $200,000,000 film about one of the scariest disasters in the last 100 years. :D

However, I am not against the Jack and Rose love story in Titanic, it's just that I just wanted to know about the ship sinking and I think JC could have easily re-created all of it without the Love Story. Just my opinion.

---------- Post added at 09:10 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:09 AM ----------


How is it NOT about the Titanic? The love story plays out ENTIRELY on the ship. Through that we get to see the ship, how it was operated, and the class system. We're familiar with the ship and when it sinks, it's like losing a character.

So if we were to get picky with it...the film is in fact about the ship. It's almost the only set piece. But maybe it would've been more to your liking if the ship was completely empty? "No passengers. Just start at the collision and lets watch some shit get wet!" :confused:

They could have also just told the story from a survivors POV without all the mushy stuff.

[LouCipherr]

You enjoy your mushy love story, bassman, and I'll enjoy the 30 minutes of awesomeness that is the ship sinking. Then you can go back to crying in your popcorn about leo and friends. :p


Ok, first off lets leave my films out of it. You cannot compare a $10k aned $6k zombie flick to a $200,000,000 film about one of the scariest disasters in the last 100 years. :D

Actually Dj, we can in this case, and here's why: your title accurately describes your flick. Had TITANIC accurately describe itself, it would've been, as I said, "Bullshit Love Story on a Big Boat Named Titanic.


They could have also just told the story from a survivors POV without all the mushy stuff.

My point exactly.

[bassman]

You enjoy your mushy love story, bassman, and I'll enjoy the 30 minutes of awesomeness that is the ship sinking. Then you can go back to crying in your popcorn about leo and friends. :p


You know....it's not so much the love story itself that I enjoy(although it is well done), but the way the ship is shown to the audience during that time. As Jack and Rose go through their little adventures, we're also being shown different portions of the ship and how it worked. Including a lot of the historically accurate characters.

That's what I enjoyed most about the first half of the film. Actually seeing what it was like to be on the ship BEFORE it started to go down.

[DjfunkmasterG]

You know....it's not so much the love story itself that I enjoy(although it is well done), but the way the ship is shown to the audience during that time. As Jack and Rose go through their little adventures, we're also being shown different portions of the ship and how it worked. Including a lot of the historically accurate characters.

That's what I enjoyed most about the first half of the film. Actually seeing what it was like to be on the ship BEFORE it started to go down.

again, this could have been done without all the goddamn mushy stuff.

Now anytime Kate Winslet wants to show her tits and Bush... there are plenty of her other "R-RATED" films I can watch. :D

[bassman]

again, this could have been done without all the goddamn mushy stuff.


Could it even be called a movie with it removed? It just would've been a documentary...

[DjfunkmasterG]

Could it even be called a movie with it removed? It just would've been a documentary...

A decent writer could have made a movie out of it.

It could have been narrated from the captains log, something.

[Trin]

The story in Titanic is the loss of people, not the loss of a ship. Without the characterization there is no emotional hook. You see who the people are and get a feel for their mindset. That setup is crucial setup for the harsh transition to tragedy and death.

If you want a factual depiction of the tragedy itself watch the History Channel's series on the Titanic. The one with John Chatterton is amazing and timely. It shows several snapshots of the people who were on board at the time, interviews with survivors, and really explores how the ship went down and how the way it went down likely affected the people's emotions on board. The technical detail behind the scientifc speculation as to the ship's demise is fantastic. On the whole, it's way better than any dramatization of it.

And DJ - we will compare everything you do from movies to postings to turds you leave in the bowl if we wish to and even if it makes no sense at all we'll draw conclusions and sling opinions. :moon::hyper::eek::p;)

[LouCipherr]

The story in Titanic is the loss of people, not the loss of a ship.

I think it's both. The Titanic was the largest passenger steamship in the world at the time - and it was on it's maiden voyage it sank. Yes, I agree the loss of life is more imporant than the loss of the ship, but the ship's stature and importance plays a massive role in the story.

[DjfunkmasterG]

Great things about Titanic as it sits now

Kate Winslet
Kate Winslet naked
Billy Zane - he did do a great job at playng the snob
The ship hitting the burg, sinking and peril in which the passengers went through. I have to say that JC nailed the tension and fear in that last hour of the movie pretty well even I admit I was on the edge of my seat... and I knew what would happen.

[Trin]

I think it's both. The Titanic was the largest passenger steamship in the world at the time - and it was on it's maiden voyage it sank. Yes, I agree the loss of life is more imporant than the loss of the ship, but the ship's stature and importance plays a massive role in the story.
I agree with that. It's very similar to the Mall in Dawn '78. The Mall was a character in the movie. The way the place affected the plot and characters made it something you cared about. I think the ship in Titanic was the same. To that end you have to spend some time on it, give it depth, show how it relates to the story. Just like Dawn '04 didn't do with the mall.


...fear in that last hour of the movie pretty well even I admit I was on the edge of my seat... and I knew what would happen.I was soooo surprised when it sunk at the end. Man, I never saw that coming!!

[shootemindehead]

I think it's both. The Titanic was the largest passenger steamship in the world at the time - and it was on it's maiden voyage it sank. Yes, I agree the loss of life is more imporant than the loss of the ship, but the ship's stature and importance plays a massive role in the story.

It should have been JUST the ship, sans the crappy romance that was tacked on. i could have done without the 2 hours of Leo and Katie making eyes at each other and cut the iceberg.

[LouCipherr]

It's very similar to the Mall in Dawn '78. The Mall was a character in the movie. The way the place affected the plot and characters made it something you cared about. I think the ship in Titanic was the same. To that end you have to spend some time on it, give it depth, show how it relates to the story. Just like Dawn '04 didn't do with the mall.

Agreed, I just wish they story JC wrapped around the ship wasn't such a mush-fest. I guess that's what brings in the people (well, certain people), but I would've been just as happy to have the story told from the POV of one of the other survivors, or have it narrated by the ships' captain or one of the crew, know what I mean? I think that would've made it relate more to the ship itself than the love story. That shit just gets in the way. I would be a lot more engaged if it was a crew member reflecting on WTF happened and how things went down from his pov.

Bassman, that's sort of what I was trying to get at. There could've been a better story wrapped around the story of the ship sinking. Something with more substance and/or something more engaging to myself than the love-fest between leo and kate. That does nothing for me but make me want to turn it off.

If I wanted mushy love stories, I'd go watch the Lifetime channel on cable. I don't want to see a 200 million dollar love story, I want to see 200 million dollars worth of "this is what happened to the Titanic"

Cameron even did that special on the Titanic, didn't he? Some documentary or something? Ghosts in the Abyss - isn't that what it was called? Shit man, put the $200 million into THAT, not into leo & kate. He could've done the leo & kate love story on Dj's Deadlands budgets. :lol:

[DjfunkmasterG]

"STOP BLOWING HOLES IN MY SHIP!" :lol::lol:

[darth los]

Bassman, that's sort of what I was trying to get at. There could've been a better story wrapped around the story of the ship sinking. Something with more substance and/or something more engaging to myself than the love-fest between leo and kate. That does nothing for me but make me want to turn it off.

There's no doubt the flick was heavy on the estrogen. :lol:

:cool:

[JDFP]

Agreed, I just wish they story JC wrapped around the ship wasn't such a mush-fest. I guess that's what brings in the people (well, certain people), but I would've been just as happy to have the story told from the POV of one of the other survivors, or have it narrated by the ships' captain or one of the crew, know what I mean? I think that would've made it relate more to the ship itself than the love story. That shit just gets in the way. I would be a lot more engaged if it was a crew member reflecting on WTF happened and how things went down from his pov.

Bassman, that's sort of what I was trying to get at. There could've been a better story wrapped around the story of the ship sinking. Something with more substance and/or something more engaging to myself than the love-fest between leo and kate. That does nothing for me but make me want to turn it off.

If I wanted mushy love stories, I'd go watch the Lifetime channel on cable. I don't want to see a 200 million dollar love story, I want to see 200 million dollars worth of "this is what happened to the Titanic"

Cameron even did that special on the Titanic, didn't he? Some documentary or something? Ghosts in the Abyss - isn't that what it was called? Shit man, put the $200 million into THAT, not into leo & kate. He could've done the leo & kate love story on Dj's Deadlands budgets. :lol:

Lou,

You should see "A Night To Remember" which is a film made about the Titanic back in the 50's which actually has amazing special effects (even for 50's standards) and just an all around incredible film. It's far superior in every way except for special effects to Cameron's "Titanic". It really is a stunning film.

"A Night To Remember" is fantastic about attempting to capture the perspective/thoughts of various different people on the ship and how they dealt with it and lived (or didn't) through the circumstances. It's a highly powerful film well worth watching if you have the opportunity.

j.p.

[LouCipherr]

"A Night To Remember" is fantastic about attempting to capture the perspective/thoughts of various different people on the ship and how they dealt with it and lived (or didn't) through the circumstances. It's a highly powerful film well worth watching if you have the opportunity.

j.p.

Now that's what I think would be more interesting. Thanks for the tip.. I will check that out in the near future.

[DjfunkmasterG]

WTF are we talking about TITANIC in a horror movie topic?

[LouCipherr]

WTF are we talking about TITANIC in a horror movie topic?

Because the "Titanic" love story is horrific in and of itself, so therefore I think it qualifies. :p

***edited to add - my friend here at work pointed out there are more dead bodies in Titanic than there are in most horror films. Just because they don't get up and eat brains doesn't mean it's not horror. :lol:

[darth los]

Because the "Titanic" love story is horrific in and of itself, so therefore I think it qualifies. :p

***edited to add - my friend here at work pointed out there are more dead bodies in Titanic than there are in most horror films. Just because they don't get up and eat brains doesn't mean it's not horror. :lol:

The fact that i can't stand the ending where he basically kills himself so she can get the floating wood (is there a pun in there somewhere? :lol: If there is I'll bet lou can find it. :lol:) is no big secret.

What's horrific in itself is that every man here has basically had to co sign that shit when asked by their significnt other whether or not they would sacrifice themselves in the same manner.

:cool:

[clanglee]

I can see what you're saying. If you want to put the mother/daughter thing aside you can, but I think it's right up in your face. All of the decisions made from the time she meets Newt are as a mother protecting her "daughter". We would have never seen the queen if Ripley said "fuck it...kids dead" and left with Bishop and Hicks.

Not to mention if you watch the extended cut, the mother theme plays even more heavily. The scene about her real daughter's death and all.

If you ask me....Aliens is very much a love story about children and doing what you have to in order to protect them.

And T2 is a love story between the boy and a father figure. Seriously.

And I can see what you are saying, but I see the "love" portion of the story as a subplot to move things along rather than the actualy driving force of the entire movie. Just because there is a love story in the movie, does not mean the movie is a love story itself. Hell there were some funny parts in Aliens too. . . .is it a romantic comedy?

[DjfunkmasterG]

The fact that i can't stand the ending where he basically kills himself so she can get the floating wood (is there a pun in there somewhere? :lol: If there is I'll bet lou can find it. :lol:) is no big secret.

What's horrific in itself is that every man here has basically had to co sign that shit when asked by their significnt other whether or not they would sacrifice themselves in the same manner.

:cool:

Speak for yourself mutherfucker.

I told my ex-wife if that happens to us... Good Luck bitch. :lol:

[darth los]

Speak for yourself mutherfucker.

I told my ex-wife if that happens to us... Good Luck bitch. :lol:


FINALLY ! TRUTH !

Just keep it real. That's all I'm saying.

That would be a normal human reaction.

Forfeiting your life for some piece of ass you just met is far from normal. That guy should have a 730 exam.

:cool:

[DjfunkmasterG]

FINALLY ! TRUTH !


:cool:

Let's be honest here... I think most guys would give their life for a child before some piece of snatch they just met. I know if it was between saving my ass and the life of a child I would give my life for the child, but for a piece of pussy i just met on The Love Boat... no fucking way, I can always find more pussy. :D

[Mr.G]

Speak for yourself mutherfucker.

I told my ex-wife if that happens to us... Good Luck bitch. :lol:

I'm shocked she is your EX-wife you sensitive man! ;):p

[LouCipherr]

I know if it was between saving my ass and the life of a child I would give my life for the child, but for a piece of pussy i just met on The Love Boat... no fucking way, I can always find more pussy. :D

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::D

[DjfunkmasterG]

I'm shocked she is your EX-wife you sensitive man! ;):p

Really? No one else is.

:lol::lol::lol::lol::p:sneaky:

[LouCipherr]

I'm shocked she is your EX-wife you sensitive man!

Yeah, I mean, I don't get it. Dj is the nicest guy and SO easy to get along with - I have no idea why he'd end up divorced. :shifty:


:lol: :lol: :lol:

[DjfunkmasterG]

Yeah, I mean, I don't get it. Dj is the nicest guy and SO easy to get along with - I have no idea why he'd end up divorced. :shifty:


:lol: :lol: :lol:

Because she was a lazy good for nothing bitch that wouldn't work and just laid around all day playing The Sims Online. :lol:

[Trin]

Because she was a lazy good for nothing bitch that wouldn't work and just laid around all day playing The Sims Online. :lol:
She didn't like Deadlands did she? It's okay. Need a hug?

[DjfunkmasterG]

She didn't like Deadlands did she? It's okay. Need a hug?

we divorced before it was made. Why yes I do need a hug. :D