I never really got that. You could make the same argument with Dawn because the zombies are always outside the mall and then here comes the bikers that want what they got.
The difference of course with Day is that the human enemies are already inside, and they're the military. Dawn feels more anarchistic to me, whereas Day is about characters trapped within an authoritarian hierarchy. It's as much a critique of rigid power structures and trusted institutions (military and science) as it is human behavior.
Among "interesting" watches there's the 2020 film "History of the Occult", in part staged as the last episode of an Argentinian TV news magazine in the 1980s, setting out to expose links between the corrupt government and a coven.
Good to see that game journalists are as good at reviewing movies as they are at playing games. I have no interest in seeing the movie and it's no doubt pretty meh, but that's such a weird criticism. "This narrative's got too much narrative in it!"
Apologies in advance for long post. I saw the FNAF movie with a buddy of mine last night. Theater was packed. Lots of fat, sweaty, neckbeard Zoomers and even a couple autistic Zoomer chicks here and there.
My expectations weren't high going in, but they pulled me in with a solid first act, and then it totally lost me halfway through. I really hate lost potential in movies, so I wound up disliking it more than I probably need to.
The intro does a solid job of establishing the story: Mike, the main character, is taking care of his kid sister. We find out pretty early on that his brother was kidnapped and never found again. So he constantly invokes the memory of his abduction in his dreams so he can try to remember who took him. I thought this was really well done. The first two(?) nights Mike works at Freddy's are also good with slow building tension.
Theeeeeeen the Joss Whedon written ass girl boss cop shows up and shits up everything. I swear, the film completely falls off as soon as she appears. She's so snarky and smug (which you could say is because she's actually purple guy's daughter and covering for him, but that's also retarded). Everything that happens after she shows up is convoluted and childish.
Like I said, I hate lost potential, and, based on the intro, they clearly had some good ideas. They probably stopped trying partway through because, well, they knew it would make money, so why would they have to try?
The most jarring thing was sitting in the theater and during a big moment when the cop reveals she is William Afton's daughter, everyone starts going nuts. Living Tombstone's 1st FNAF song also plays during the credits, which people started screaming along to and getting hyped about. I'm talking the whole theater except me and my buddy. We just looked at each other like, "Are we the only ones in here who aren't crazy?"
Something else that bothers me is the fact that people who love this movie say, "It's for the fans." But, it's not good. It's like that phenomena people have discussed on the Farms before: fanbases will accept the bare minimum just because it exists. Back in the day, fans used to be the most critical of the franchises they loved. Now, they just eat whatever shit gets laid out for them as long as it has the logo they like slapped onto it. THEY SAID THE THING THAT WAS IN THE GAME SO THAT MEANS IT'S GOOD. I'm sure I'm overthinking this, but it really rubs me the wrong way. Why are you accepting half-baked garbage? If it's a movie for something you really love, shouldn't you want the cream of the crop?
Anyway, don't go see this in the theater unless you want to sit amongst a throng of unwashed retards who will cheer at literally any reference. Marvel films are the standard now.
I said in the other thread, but it break my heart because of how close to great it is. As you said it was an absolutely solid first act, and the recreation of Freddy's was fantastic - real, practical effects with a set that was clearly designed by someone who knew the franchise in and out. You could feel the passion behind it, and then...
...and then...uh...
...I guess it's a movie from that point? Mike and his sister freely leave and revisit the location any time they want, meaning that potential for claustrophobia and threat is immediately gone. Story starts to meander and waffle on, only to start building up to an impressive finale that promises a shower of gore as the money shot - except that too doesn't really happen, and the movie fades out on itself.
I'm just sad about it really. When it poked fun at itself with the Balloon Boy jump scares, and had the animatronics stalking people, it was at its strongest but just didn't have the momentum.
I saw it last night, I think it was the weakest killer animatronic movie out of the three. The main actor was pretty shitty and he in the whole movie. I would have rather seen The Banana Splits again.
I saw it last night, I think it was the weakest killer animatronic movie out of the three. The main actor was pretty shitty and he in the whole movie. I would have rather seen The Banana Splits again.
I saw the film adaption of "The House with a Clock in Its Walls" mentioned and I have to admit, I did not care for it, it came off as a loud, clownish spectacle, and I admit to having been a fan of the original book (and the sequels and John Bellairs' other book series) which I read as a youth which maybe prejudiced me against the film. The book could be the source material for an at least decent adaption, but I don't see that happening.
I recently did a skim through of the book online, never forget the illustrations by Edward Gorey ( (who provided wraparound cover art and frontispieces for some of Bellairs' other books)
John Bellairs and Edward Gorey made a whopping punch of horror for me as a kid and probably the reason I'm in this thread right now.
I'm glad they did the Louis Barnavelt movie instead of massacring my guy Anthony Monday or even Johnny Dixon & Professor Childermass. Sorry Louis.
That movie looked like shit and i won't see it. You don't need a cgi shit storm to make those books into movies, just some good actors, sets and cinematography. Man I'd love to see movies made of 'Eyes of the Killer Robot' or 'Spell of the Sorcerer's Skull' if someone could/would do without trying to turn them into Harry Potter or whatever.
Something else that bothers me is the fact that people who love this movie say, "It's for the fans." But, it's not good. It's like that phenomena people have discussed on the Farms before: fanbases will accept the bare minimum just because it exists. Back in the day, fans used to be the most critical of the franchises they loved. Now, they just eat whatever shit gets laid out for them as long as it has the logo they like slapped onto it. THEY SAID THE THING THAT WAS IN THE GAME SO THAT MEANS IT'S GOOD. I'm sure I'm overthinking this, but it really rubs me the wrong way. Why are you accepting half-baked garbage? If it's a movie for something you really love, shouldn't you want the cream of the crop?
The thing with FNAF fans is that most of them are children. FNAF movie has the same target audience as the Mario movie and the cameos by Matpat and the like only reinforce that this is a kids horror movie.
So for this FNAF movie instead of making costumes that look like animatronic suits which would actually look creepy, they basically just used the terrible looking video game models which look too cartoony for a live action movie?
The show biz pizza bear looks more disturbing than these awful 3d models.
FNAF has always been shit for retarded babies who were given cell phones immediately out of the womb.
