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

  • ⚙️ Performance issue identified and being addressed.
  • 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
Lone Star said:
I saw The Nun II and it was...about what one would expect.

Same sorts of scares, with characters wandering off alone into creepy dark hallways and needlessly creepy parts of buildings that have no windows or lightbulbs despite being in 1950s France. Then there's silence, the character looks around or slooowly walks towards something that caught their eye and...OOGA BOOGA BIG LOUD ROAR AND MUSICAL SCORE RAAAGH! Same jumpscare setups that anyone that's watched any horror movie could see coming from miles away. Also the priest from movie is just dead of some sickness, and I feel like it was for diversity reasons. The good nun's sidekick this time is some random black nun that forces herself into the plot and basically accomplishes nothing. Reeked of needing brownie points so a black female lead was thrown in. In fact, the only prominent male character is Frenchie, who is possessed and needs saving. I can't help but look at movies through this bullshit political lens, and I'm just stating what I saw.

Also this is the second time in the timeline that Valak totally certainly died, but also just survives because ??? reasons. I guess if he can survive the Blood of Christ, he can survive anything. Valak's powers are of course really vague, like he lifts up a priest in the opening and burns him into a crisp within seconds. Yet he can't do it to the main cast. He actually tried to do it to the good nun, but she just sort of made him...stop...somehow. And he also kills off this random kid and the head of the boarding school that the film mostly takes place in for no real reason. The head mistress is actually killed by the ghost of her son and he literally beats her to death with a thurible and it made me laugh out loud.
Click to expand...
Just left the cinema. I greatly enjoyed it. Except for
that Valak escaped again??? That was retarded. Why would Irene make the same mistake again? Also, Valak was there for Saint Lucy's eyes. The movie clearly stated that in the library. That's why Maurice went there, driven by Valak. Why the girl with the shoulder stab wasn't in great pain is a more important question because that one has no answer. Again back to Valak, we learned in conjuring 1 that Maurice was still possessed by Valak, right? So Valak is just randomly hiding again until Lorraine shows up on his radar? How does Valak end up in the UK?
 
The Penultimate Warrior said:
After the pleasant surprise that was Demons I watched the sequel, but unfortunately it was a case of diminishing returns. On the plus side, the makeup is good and the savage nature of the creatures is unsettling (silhouetted figures with glowing eyes will always be creepy to me.) The problem is that it's the exact same as the first film, just set in a different location and even more nonsensical. The idea of a cursed film or mask from the original is at least believable, but here it's a movie on tv that only possesses one person. They also reuse the punks in a car subplot, but whilst in the first they were a plot device to let the infection spread outside, here they just crash into someone and are never heard from again. Or the end demon suddenly being blind for...reasons? So whilst entertaining, still a bit of a disappointment
Click to expand...
I finally got around to watching Demons 2 myself. I might have liked it better if I hadn't seen the original. It's fine and all, but can't match the original's pace and craziness, and it brushes off the ending of the first movie in a disappointing way. It's like Demons 2 should have been the original, and Demons 1 would be a prequel that kicks everything up to the next level. I liked the little puppet monster though.

Some interesting similarities with Evil Dead Rise and Ring, though. Probably coincidental in Ring's case... but maybe not?
 
Calandrino said:
I finally got around to watching Demons 2 myself. I might have liked it better if I hadn't seen the original. It's fine and all, but can't match the original's pace and craziness, and it brushes off the ending of the first movie in a disappointing way. It's like Demons 2 should have been the original, and Demons 1 would be a prequel that kicks everything up to the next level. I liked the little puppet monster though.

Some interesting similarities with Evil Dead Rise and Ring, though. Probably coincidental in Ring's case... but maybe not?
Click to expand...
I think Demons 2 is a very inferior sequel. Not quite Zombi 3 levels of bad when it comes to sequels to Eyetalian genre pictures (best legitimate sequels would easily be Argento's Inferno or Escape From the Bronx) but not good either. It does have moments and the premise is decent but it's a waste in a lot of ways. A big contributing factor was that it was rushed out the door and it was agreed between Argento and Lamberto Bava to tone down the gore to get the Italian equivalent of a PG-13 (European PG-13 movies are essentially soft R-rated movies that will have some tits and gore).

Lamberto Bava also said he was inspired by J.G. Ballard's High Rise but the inspiration only goes so far as setting it inside a giant building. He also bullshitted that the movie had a message about TV watching us... Okay.

There's a reason why fans not so effectionally refer to Lamberto Bava as LAMEberto. He only directed two good films: Demons and Macabre. That's it. Blastfighter is a fun action movie with First Blood influences but it still works as an entertaining action film. Everything else LAMEberto has made is pretty embarrassing including a ripoff of the Saw movies called The Torturer that came out around 2005.
 
BrunoMattei said:
Not quite Zombi 3 levels of bad when it comes to sequels to Eyetalian genre pictures (best legitimate sequels would easily be Argento's Inferno or Escape From the Bronx) but not good either.
Click to expand...
Now that you mention it I can't even recall another Italian horror movie that's actually a direct sequel to another one. Even Inferno is pretty loose. Demons 2 beats out Mother of Tears or "Demons 3": The Ogre in my book. It didn't make me angry, and sometimes that's about all you can hope for. Well, maybe a little angry, about there being no payoff with the baby, we all know how that should have gone.
 
Calandrino said:
Now that you mention it I can't even recall another Italian horror movie that's actually a direct sequel to another one. Even Inferno is pretty loose. Demons 2 beats out Mother of Tears or "Demons 3": The Ogre in my book. It didn't make me angry, and sometimes that's about all you can hope for. Well, maybe a little angry, about there being no payoff with the baby, we all know how that should have gone.
Click to expand...
There have been a few:

Inferno and Mother of Tears. Also a sort of official sequel directed by Luigi Cozzi called The Black Cat.

Zombi 3 is an official sequel (sadly). But not Zombi 4 AKA After Death and Zombi 5 AKA Killing Birds was never released anywhere as Zombi 5 until Media Blasters/Shriek Show released it on DVD. That's a thing you can do if you license a flick, you can just call it whatever the fuck in some cases.

Absurd is a "spiritual sequel" to Anthropophagus. Same basic idea with 1 throwaway reference to the 1st.

After that you have more "spiritual sequels" like What Have They Done To Your Daughters and Red Rings of Fear following What Have They Done to Solange? And Fulci's zombie quartet (don't get me fucking started about assholes calling it the Seven Gates Trilogy).

Edit: the Thunder Warrior trilogy is another one.

Ironically, the Eyetalians made more unofficial/ripoff sequels than official sequels.
 
Last edited:
BrunoMattei said:
Zombi 3 is an official sequel (sadly). But not Zombi 4 AKA After Death
Click to expand...
I never really understood this. Zombi 4 was directed by Claudio Fragasso who wrote Zombi 3 (I'm personally convinced he served as a director on Zombi 3, but nobody seems to agree with me on this), and unlike "Zombi 5" it actually came out after Zombi 3. There's no continuity between 3 & 4, but there's no real continuity between 2 & 3 either. It's not like any of that ever mattered anyway since Zombi 2 bears zero resemblance to Dawn of the Dead. On that note, 4 is a lot closer to 2 than 3 is. At least the zombies are voodoo zombies. 4 isn't any good, but it's at least marginally better than 3, and the theme song is pretty great.
 
So I bought a ticket for Saw X and I'm about to watch it next Friday. Hoping that it's so retarded that it's fun.
 
Ged! said:
I never really understood this. Zombi 4 was directed by Claudio Fragasso who wrote Zombi 3 (I'm personally convinced he served as a director on Zombi 3, but nobody seems to agree with me on this), and unlike "Zombi 5" it actually came out after Zombi 3. There's no continuity between 3 & 4, but there's no real continuity between 2 & 3 either. It's not like any of that ever mattered anyway since Zombi 2 bears zero resemblance to Dawn of the Dead. On that note, 4 is a lot closer to 2 than 3 is. At least the zombies are voodoo zombies. 4 isn't any good, but it's at least marginally better than 3, and the theme song is pretty great.
Click to expand...
I don't know why the wops didn't like making direct and unambiguous sequels 99% of the time. It must be a weird Euro-trash filmmaker thing.
 
Does anyone else see Vacancy as an underrated gem? It came out during the late 2000s when the success of Saw led to a number of horror films that coined the term "torture porn". Vacancy, on the other hand, kept it's violence to a minimum especially with the footage from the snuff films. And while the main characters started out as not really likeable, you grow to sympathize with them and they don't fall into the "characters make stupid decisions" trope.
 
I could add Beyond the Door 1-3, which I think are official but again have nothing to do with one another.

BrunoMattei said:
I don't know why the wops didn't like making direct and unambiguous sequels 99% of the time. It must be a weird Euro-trash filmmaker thing.
Click to expand...
They have too much artistic integrity to cheapen a coherent, self-contained story by continuing it unnecessarily for a quick buck.
 
The Nothingness said:
Does anyone else see Vacancy as an underrated gem? It came out during the late 2000s when the success of Saw led to a number of horror films that coined the term "torture porn". Vacancy, on the other hand, kept it's violence to a minimum especially with the footage from the snuff films. And while the main characters started out as not really likeable, you grow to sympathize with them and they don't fall into the "characters make stupid decisions" trope.
Click to expand...
That was the last film my parents saw together as a couple.

They thought it was shit.
 
Lone Star said:
With October around the corner, anyone got any slasher recommendations? In the mood for that genre. Not the ones that everyone knows about and has seen like Halloween, Friday the 13th, or Scream.
Click to expand...
Try to go on Tubi to find some watchbait horror movies about sharks, exorcism or Amityville houses
 
Just finished watching No One Will Save You and it was probably one of the better movies I've seen in awhile. To me, it has a Signs meets Home Alone feel that doesn't fuck around. The Pope's Exorcist was pretty metal as well and the thought that Russel Crowe's character drove from the Vatican to Spain on a little Vespa gave me a good laugh.
 
Lone Star said:
With October around the corner, anyone got any slasher recommendations? In the mood for that genre. Not the ones that everyone knows about and has seen like Halloween, Friday the 13th, or Scream.
Click to expand...
Black Christmas (74 and the 2006 remake). The original is a classic of subtle and nuanced horror. The first remake is the complete opposite but it goes hard in being absolute slasher trash so I recommend it on a trashy level. Ignore the Blumhouse remake. Speaking of trash...

Pieces. The mother of all so bad it's good slashers. Think: the Troll 2 or Plan 9 From Outer Space of slashers. It's hilariously inept, the gore is nasty and there's a kill every 5 minutes, it has an awesome Eyetalian soundtrack on top of that AND it has the guy who played Bluto from the Robin Williams Popeye!

My Bloody Valentine. Just make sure it's the uncut version of the original. It's a classic 80's slasher.

Bay of Blood. Witness the origin of the slasher as only the Eyetalians can do. Some very good gore but the pace is slow-ish.

Hell High. I love this one, it's a highschool slasher with a twist. It's one of the more unique slashers of the genre especially for the 80's. Bonus: there is a Joe Bob Briggs commentary for this one.

Nightmares in a Damaged Brain AKA Nightmare. A classic of the serial killer genre. Makes a great double or triple feature with Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer and Maniac.

Either version of Maniac comes highly recommended but the remake is slightly better.

The Final Terror. A more obscure entry but a favorite of mine because it goes more for realism with the added element of the campfire tale origin of the killer. No nudity. Very little blood. But it makes up for that with atmosphere and realism. Don't go into it expecting a masterpiece and you'll be fine. Same with Rituals (1977). Rituals is kind of similar and the premise is basically Deliverance minus the male-on-male rape.

Sleepaway Camp trilogy. Just stay away from part 4 or that other movie calling itself part 4 and you're fine. Most people love the first but I prefer part 2. Part 3 is okay but there's an uncut fan-edit that combines the workprint gore footage and that cut elevates the movie by a point or so.
 
Last edited:
BrunoMattei said:
Black Christmas (74 and the 2006 remake)
Click to expand...
The original '74 movie is an underrated horror classic. It's weird to think that a director of A Christmas Story happened to direct it. The 2006 remake was very interesting. Its gore level is more on the lines of Saw and Hostel. I liked it for what it's worth. The 2019 Blumhouse remake is absolute dogshit.
 

The Future of ‘Halloween’ – Miramax Currently Shopping the Rights for Film & TV [Exclusive Report]​

Last Halloween season marked the release of Halloween Ends, the final film in a three-film trilogy from director David Gordon Green. Billed as the FINAL battle – really, this time! – between Laurie Strode and Michael Myers, Halloween Ends wrapped up not only Gordon Green’s sequel trilogy but also Universal and Blumhouse’s time with the iconic horror franchise.

The sequel trilogy was produced by Blumhouse Productions and released into theaters by Universal Pictures as part of a pact with Miramax, and the ball is now back in Miramax’s court.

So what’s next for the Halloween franchise? Bloody Disgusting can exclusively report that Miramax is actively shopping the rights to the Halloween franchise around Hollywood.

From what we understand, there is a massive bidding war going on right now, with several different parties interested and vying for the chance to bring Michael Myers back to life.

Bloody Disgusting’s sources have also indicated that Miramax is open to both film and television projects, and they’re currently taking offers from studios and streamers alike.

Everything is on the table at this time, and it’s ultimately up to Miramax to field pitches and decide what is most appealing to them in the wake of Gordon Green’s sequel trilogy.

Last year’s Halloween Ends was the thirteenth installment in the Halloween franchise, which to date has never made its way onto the small screen. Could Michael Myers return with a television series? Or is another feature film reboot next up on the menu? Only time will tell.

Stay tuned for more on all things Halloween as we learn it. In the meantime, comment down below us and let us know what YOU would like to see next from the Halloween franchise.

Only one thing is certain. Michael Myers WILL be back…

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom