/horror/ general megathread - Let's talk about movies and shit.

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
GLUE SNIFFER 9000 said:
Was 4 the one with Clint Howard? He’s an amazing character actor. I haven’t seen part 5, but I’ll give it a try. For some reason, I love Christmas themed horror movies. Maybe it’s because they run contrary to the usual Christmas narrative.
Click to expand...
He is in 4 and he has a cameo in 5. Part 5 is great where you have a drunken Mickey Rooney acting like a maniac and killer toys.
 
BrunoMattei said:
Yeah, keep stewing because you got owned by a dead Eyetalian hack director you steroid junkie.
Click to expand...
The only things you own are matlock reruns on VHS, boxes of ensure shakes and adult sized depends, old man.

XYZpdq said:
Transmitted Mind Control Infestations From Space are more zombie than A Clockwork Orange is horror.
Click to expand...
You know what, I'll give you that.
 
Internet War Criminal said:
The only things you own are matlock reruns on VHS, boxes of ensure shakes and adult sized depends, old man.
Click to expand...
That's a very 60's greaser kind of comeback there, sir. Very boomer of you. I bet you have a James Dean coat in your closet and a cheap Rebel Without A Cause reprint poster you bought from a Chinatown shop hanging above your bed too.
 
Watched Velvet Buzzsaw on Netflix.
It said it was a horror, but the only horror was how fucking boring the movie was.
I wish it kept the momentum of the last 15 minutes of the film for the whole 2 hours of the film.

Not very "funny" either but the whole bit bout Morf (Jake Gyllenhaal) roasting the shit out of a dead co-workers funeral was funny.

Maybe not a "horror" but a thriller I recommend is Nightcrawler, another Gyllenhaal movie. THAT was good and scary.
I can't wrap my head around how the director who made nightcrawler made velvet buzzsaw thought, that was a huge step down.
 
GLUE SNIFFER 9000 said:
Nightcrawler was really good, Gyllenhaal really nailed that “off” vibe of his character.
Click to expand...
According to a interview to catch that vibe he was on a kale salad/chewing gum diet and did 15k runs daily. I think he lost about 30 lbs or something during that?

How did he not win for that performance I just want to know.
 
Before Blade Stephen Norrington directed the 1994 release Death Machine which is a nice low-budget blast even though it has minor features like "characters whose names are references to other movies/directors" and a character named "Raimi" who has the line "Go fax yourself." However it also features a creepy (of course) Brad Dourif as Dante, a genius weapon designer who dresses like someone who never grew out of their early 1990s "skateboarding mallrat teen" phase who does not take it well when the company he works for gets a new CEO who was sent into to clean up the mess and her reaction is "seriously, you've allowed this obvious insane person who designs killer war machines that go berserk continue to work here?" Plus there's his newest prototype the "Frontline Morale Destroyer" which is a fast-moving clanking monster that locks onto the "fear" people give off.



 
I finally saw Titane. Massively overrated film. Although, it has a cool concept and moments. My big problem with it is that nothing makes any sense and shit just happens because the plot dictates it. Now, before you accuse me -the spaghetti horror guy- of being hypocritical, keep in mind that even in some of the most batshit insane Eurohorror that there's still motivations and logic for why characters do things. Our protagonist fucks a car, which the logistics aren't explained, and it's literal and not metaphorical or inside her head or anything like that. Okay, but how? Never explained. Our protagonist is also a serial killer. Okay, but why? What is the motive? Never explained. Our protagonist fucks up and decides to pretend to be a missing boy, luckily the father of the boy takes her in without questioning anything or requesting a DNA test. Plot convenience. Oh, and he figures out she's not who she say's she is and so does his ex-wife but everyone keeps going along with it. Plot convenience.

You still have to explain why shit is happening in some capacity. You can't hide behind the "I'm a progressive female director." No, fuck you. And I saw her previous film Raw which I thought was okay but the logic behind that one made much more sense.

The director really wants to be Cronenberg but has forgotten that Cronenberg always had some kind of logic in his films. Example: The Brood. How are the mutant children created and what are they? They are the physical manifestations of rage brought on by medical experiments. Got it. It makes some kind of sense.*

Your mileage may vary but I would not recommend Titane.

Best recent horror film for me is still Brandon Cronenberg's Possessor.

*Edit: okay, there's Naked Lunch but there is a consistency. It remains consistently surreal unlike Titane. It's not like there's just that one scene where Peter Weller talks to a bug and the rest of the movie is fairly conventional. Plus it was set up with the main character being an exterminator and using bug powder.
 
Last edited:
In compliance with the "and shit" specification of this thread, Bram Stoker's Dracula must go down as the worst vampire movie ever made. Sure, there are far cheaper, worse-scripted, more poorly acted examples of vampire cinema, but none of them manages to pull of the amazing feat of incompetence Francis Ford Coppola does by making Van Helsing a much scarier character than Dracula.

Minus 5 stars.
 
Yeah I avoided Titane specifically because I was afraid of what you said about it. Gonna steer clear from it.

I'm almost with you with Possessor, I don't think it's the best one I've seen, but it's definitely in the top 5/top 10 since it came out
Obie said:
In compliance with the "and shit" specification of this thread, Bram Stoker's Dracula must go down as the worst vampire movie ever made. Sure, there are far cheaper, worse-scripted, more poorly acted examples of vampire cinema, but none of them manages to pull of the amazing feat of incompetence Francis Ford Coppola does by making Van Helsing a much scarier character than Dracula.

Minus 5 stars.
Click to expand...
Of fuck off, it has its flaws but it's still a good movie.

Also you might not know, Coppola has a winery and makes Pinot Noir. They know what they are doing at the Coppola winery. thefamilycoppola.com
 
Also you might not know, Coppola has a winery and makes Pinot Noir. They know what they are doing at the Coppola winery. thefamilycoppola.com
Click to expand...
According to news reports, they ran out of stock during the making of the movie.
 
Obie said:
In compliance with the "and shit" specification of this thread, Bram Stoker's Dracula must go down as the worst vampire movie ever made. Sure, there are far cheaper, worse-scripted, more poorly acted examples of vampire cinema, but none of them manages to pull of the amazing feat of incompetence Francis Ford Coppola does by making Van Helsing a much scarier character than Dracula.

Minus 5 stars.
Click to expand...
:story:
A film adaptation of Twilight exists, as does the BloodRayne movie.

Your argument is invalid.

Shitposting aside, as much as I like the 1992 Dracula, it's very much a "love it or hate it" movie nowadays.

Part of why it's so unusual is because Coppola was trying to create a Dracula movie that was more faithful to the book while also trying to be like a hammy Victorian stage show. Initially Coppola wanted to have it be a literal stage play on film.

While the movie's not 100% faithful to Stoker's novel, it's the closest any Hollywood production has ever gotten. Most of the deviations from the book come from what Coppola added in as opposed to what was taken out.

When you realize that Coppola wanted the movie to feel like a very overwrought melodramatic play from the Victorian era, a lot of the more peculiar elements of the movie make a lot more sense.

Except for Keanu Reeves's terrible attempt at a British accent. That's something I still don't seem to understand outside of the fact Keanu smoked a lot of weed back in the 90's.

IIRC, Keanu Reeves as Harker was more of a studio executive choice than Coppola's first pick. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong.

With all that being said, Near Dark and The Lost Boys will always be the two best vampire movies of all time in my book.
 
Last edited:
Syaoran Li said:
:story:
A film adaptation of Twilight exists, as does the BloodRayne movie.

Your argument is invalid.

Shitposting aside, as much as I like the 1992 Dracula, it's very much a "love it or hate it" movie nowadays.

Part of why it's so unusual is because Coppola was trying to create a Dracula movie that was more faithful to the book while also trying to be like a hammy Victorian stage show. Initially Coppola wanted to have it be a literal stage play on film.

While the movie's not 100% faithful to Stoker's novel, it's the closest any Hollywood production has ever gotten. Most of the deviations from the book come from what Coppola added in as opposed to what was taken out.

When you realize that Coppola wanted the movie to feel like a very overwrought melodramatic play from the Victorian era, a lot of the more peculiar elements of the movie make a lot more sense.

Except for Keanu Reeves's terrible attempt at a British accent. That's something I still don't seem to understand outside of the fact Keanu smoked a lot of weed back in the 90's.

IIRC, Keanu Reeves as Harker was more of a studio executive choice than Coppola's first pick. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong.

With all that being said, Near Dark and The Lost Boys will always be the two best vampire movies of all time in my book.
Click to expand...

I believe that Coppola's Dracula is the overall best adaptation of the book. It takes some liberties but the scale, production value, music, makeup, Gary Oldman, all are top notch. It's the most epic adaptation that you can do and it's happy to brandish that R rating. There's definitely some flaws mostly relating to Keanu and some cheese here and there but it really is like a mega budget Eyetalian horror movie. Which is fitting because Coppola was inspired by Mario Bava when he did it and it is like if Bava had 50 million dollars to make Black Sunday it would look like this...

As opposed to Argento's Dracula which could charitably be described as an abomination.


Obligatory:


My favorite vampire flick would be Tony Scott's The Hunger.

 
The best and most faithful adaptation of the book was the 1977 BBC film featuring Louis Jordan as Count Dracula, Frank Finlay as Professor Van Helsing, and the scrumptious Judi Bowker as Mina.

en.wikipedia.org

Count Dracula (1977 film) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

www.imdb.com

Count Dracula (TV Movie 1977) - IMDb

Count Dracula: Directed by Philip Saville. With Louis Jourdan, Frank Finlay, Susan Penhaligon, Judi Bowker. The vampire count leaves his Transylvanian home to wreak havoc across the world.
www.imdb.com www.imdb.com

The best vampire movies ever made were and still are Count Yorga and The Return of Count Yorga, simply because they were tense and terrifying, especially for their day. The vampires in those movies have a veracity about them. They look like they could actually exist. When vampires literally go bats or morph into half-human, half-demon creatures, the horror ends and the comedy begins.

Now, if we're talking the most entertaining vampire movies ever made, as opposed to the scariest, these are my top five:

1. The Legend of the 7 Golden Vampires

2. The Lost Boys (might have given it first place if Jami Gertz, who is utterly terrible, wasn't in it)

3. The Night Stalker

4. Fright Night

5. Vampire Circus
 
Last edited:
So I watched Army of the Dead and Army of Thieves and all I have to say is.... meh?

They are not terrible movies, the second one doesn't actually qualify as horror even if there are moments with actual zombies... They are just.. boring? I mean I can see what Zack Snyder went for, but it feels like it should have been a couple of episodes of Z Nations, not movies with huge budgets.

2/5 watch only if you got a lot of beer and you are bored
 
I thought Army of the Dead was fun in a turn off your brain kind of way. Big problem I had with it is that it ripped off Aliens and these people who are essentially just mercenaries were way too eager to sacrifice themselves for the team. You can do that in Aliens because the Marines have been around each for a long time and have developed comradery. You can't do that with a bunch of rando's. I've never seen Army of Thieves and have no interest.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom