|
Post by lazario on Sept 23, 2008 4:19:37 GMT -5
Inspired, sharp, clever, edgy, really funny satire. There were a whole slew of these kinds of movies in the late '90s / early new-millennium. And when I blind-bought this, I was hoping to like it a little. Well, I didn't really like the "documentary" approach at first. I did like that it was less sleazy and paper-thin as the other films. This one is definitely a lot smarter than Teaching Mrs. Tingle, Sugar & Spice, Jawbreaker, Gossip, and The In-Crowd. So it gets points for that. And it always did. Not to mention, the aim of the satire is too broad, so they fall into a few cheap jokes. But when it's all put together, it's brisk and freaking hilarious! Even on my 4th viewing of this film, I laugh at things I don't think I ever laughed at before. Alison Janney is a genius! Brittany Murphy is unbelievably funny, especially during the question-and-answer scene. The whole cast either makes you like them or like to hate them. And it makes excellent use of the "body count" humor sub-genre. "This pageant is like a roach motel - girls check in but they don't check out." By default it's an excellent movie. Certainly the ending is phenomenal. It's just more than a little confusing. But admittedly, there are a few stupid directorial choices (people speaking in Italian with no subtitles- HELLO? Even The Exorcist was smart enough to know we need subtitles to read what people in a foreign language are saying). And the pacing is so amazingly slow, that I'm sure this will lose quite a few people along the way, or they will plain-old stop caring. It's good at getting your attention, but doesn't do much with it once it's gotten you. Hmm... This one is pretty hard to describe. It's a horror comedy... About a movie crew making a "true story" horror movie while the killer is "still out there," but some of it's real and some of it's not. Good luck figuring it all out. As for how good it is... Well, it's half bad and half good. The first half, about the movie crew making the movie pretty much sucks altogether. Why do all horror parodies almost always suck? I've only seen one that wasn't completely terrible. Then it starts to get a little more serious. And it does get better then, but the death scenes are terrible. Like a similiar high-school horror comedy, Cutting Class. But, then it gets good. When, for instance, Maureen McCormack (Marsha Brady from the original Brady Bunch television series!), who is playing a cop, starts... going nuts! She starts rubbing blood all over herself and talking like finding dead bodies is giving her sexual pleasure. From there, it gets less cliched and a little more fun. The ending plays with a lot of cliches. Like- reality isn't reality anymore, the double-"wake up, you're having a nightmare" thing, the "he's not the killer, I am!" thing, the interesting final twist, and whether or not you should trust the last hunky guy standing - "are you crazy?" I was surprised. At the time when I was least expecting it, the movie improved. Which also, oddly enough, now makes it one of the best horror parodies I've seen. Go figure.
|
|
|
Post by malbowski13 on Sept 23, 2008 5:48:55 GMT -5
Also newbie George Clooney makes an appearance. I'd like to see him in more horror movies. Other than From Dusk Till Dawn, he hasn't really done anything in/for this genre.
I liked Horror High. 3/4 STARS
|
|
|
Post by malbowski13 on Sept 25, 2008 5:49:13 GMT -5
Mother of Tears : Good job. The music for this film is on par with Argento's best films. Asia is as beautiful as ever and shows off some good acting skills as well. By far, Argento's goriest film and , to quote DreadCentral.Com, " Argento's best since Suspiria!" 8 1/2 /10
|
|
|
Post by lazario on Sept 25, 2008 11:20:56 GMT -5
Oh, there's no WAY it's better than Opera. I'm sorry but I'm putting my foot down. Good luck getting it up.
|
|
shunty
SERIAL KILLER
????#???? ?
Posts: 537
|
Post by shunty on Sept 25, 2008 15:03:46 GMT -5
i think mother of tears is not only argento's worst, but also one of the worst horror movies ever.
|
|
|
Post by lazario on Sept 25, 2008 15:50:54 GMT -5
You think it's worse than Phantom of the Opera (1998)?
And, what about From Beyond? You never got back to me on that one.
|
|
|
Post by malbowski13 on Sept 25, 2008 18:26:52 GMT -5
Worst ever??? WOW! I think this tops anything Uwe Boll(whatever) has accomplished.Or post-Shocker Craven for that matter.
Next to Suspiria, this is my favorite Argento. Phenomena is 3rd. It is certainly better than Inferno. A big Argento fan like you should have seen this by now,Laz. Or this weekend tops.
One part made me jump right off my couch and I don't do that often, unless Mom orders KFC! (which she doesn't anymore after some cunt sent her an E-mail saying that the chickens they use have no heads,feet,etc.)
Look at good quality veal. Those little guys don't move period and that meat is some of the most tasty around.
|
|
shunty
SERIAL KILLER
????#???? ?
Posts: 537
|
Post by shunty on Sept 26, 2008 0:39:36 GMT -5
talking about from beyond, i thought it was just alright. not as good as some of Gordon's others. talking about Mother of Tears, MOTHER OF GOD that was bad! what the fuck? how can you like it? by the time the asian ghost mother started wresting with the guy who was on fire, i almost rolled on the floor laughing from its stupidity!
|
|
|
Post by tsmooth31 on Sept 26, 2008 1:32:43 GMT -5
mother of tears was OK, there were a few good scenes, and some good gore, but overall it was very average with a bad ending
|
|
|
Post by lazario on Sept 26, 2008 8:11:12 GMT -5
talking about from beyond, i thought it was just alright. not as good as some of Gordon's others. Well, The Black Cat was ehhh (until the really bad CGI which sunk it altogether), and Dreams in the Witch-House was just plain awful. I've seen Dolls and it was atmospheric, but the story did not work at all. I saw Re-Animator and... I really think that thing is HUGELY overrated. I will admit that maybe I don't "get" it, that maybe I don't understand it. I will never understand what people see in that movie. But it's definitely overrated, I mean I'm sorry, but any movie that rips off or copies something really significant or important from another classic horror movie the way Re-Animator did (the Bernard Herrman score from Psycho) - that cannot be forgiven. I have Dagon on my Netflix queue, so I'll see that on... It should arrive on Tuesday. And after that, what's left? There's just Castle Freak (which most people say is not good), Stuck, Pit and the Pendulum, and King of the Ants. Again, none of them get that much attention or credit or even much good word of mouth online. Compared to everything I've seen of Gordon, From Beyond SLAYS his other films. It's just incredible. Like I said, that last half hour of the movie is on par with most of Gordon's not-great work, but the first 55 minutes are without question, the best Stuart Gordon has done in the horror genre. Worst ever??? WOW! I think this tops anything Uwe Boll (whatever) has accomplished. Or post-Shocker Craven for that matter. He said Worst-ARGENTO, Mal. And as for Craven - Shocker was crap. Scream was a masterpiece. And nobody mentioned Craven, just so you know. Next to Suspiria, this is my favorite Argento. Well, I like Troll 2 better than John Carpenter's Halloween and George A. Romero's Dawn of the Dead, but who gives a crap what I like? Now, I'm inclined to agree with Shunty on this one. But it's because Argento's style has totally changed. You have to be careful when it comes to comparing his later films with his earlier masterpieces. Phenomena is 3rd. It is certainly better than Inferno. Phenomena is my favorite Argento film. It's definitely a very strong film, making people either like it or dislike it a lot, not just a little. Inferno is a very good Argento film, it's just doesn't do very much. And Keith Emerson's score has its' moments but can't sustain a full 106-minute Argento film. One of his epics. He should have done what he did with Deep Red, mix classical compositions with Goblin's / Claudio Simonetti's (or like with Opera, Brian Eno) great experimental rock/electronic music. A big Argento fan like you should have seen this by now, Laz. Or this weekend tops. There hasn't been much need for me to see anything he did after Phantom of the Opera, clearly Argento's all-time low. I want to see Sleepless a lot, but fucking Artisan/Lionsgate fucked it up with a fullscreen transfer and haven't BOTHERED to widescreen it. But if Lionsgate ever re-releases in widescreen (instead of just releasing 400,000 more editions of the shitty Saw series), I will pick it up immediately. But, I now have a chance to see The Card Player and Do You Like Hitchcock? for free. So I will. But as for me being an Argento fan, I did think Jenifer was really good and it was. But even that was so far from why I love Argento's amazing films. Gordon's movies are rarely great, but they are ALWAYS highly entertaining. i admit that dagon and pit & the pendulum aren't great movies, but i personally love them for various reasons. castle freak isn't very good but it has one very nasty scene in it. most of Gordon's movies have just one particular very nasty scene in them. i wonder if anyone else has noticed that strange pattern. also, i think the black cat is better than 90% of regular horror films. Well, again, I'll see Dagon in time. But with the exception of Dolls' atmosphere and From Beyond's first 55 minutes, Stuart Gordon's films in my opinion are not very entertaining. Nasty isn't rewarding if the movie it's in is flat. re-watched: And hey, it was less boring than I remember it. And a lot more professionally directed. I really underestimated this one. There are a few problems, though. The ending (the last 13 minutes) is a complete joke and the heavy insistance on narration grows a bit tiring. But pacing-wise, style-wise, content-wise, and in terms of technical talent, Serpent is better than average. And then, for the first time, another Carpenter horror flick: My reaction to this one was mixed at first. The first 10 or so minutes are excellent. The music was repetitive, but the mood grabbed you right off the bat. Then, Victor Wong starts laying in the foundation of the film's philosophical-science angle and... it starts to get stupid. Then the unbelievably hunky moustache-man beds the redhead with his amazing card-tricks and their dialogue gets even a bit more stupid. Then, we see the class of students group up, and everyone goes into the church. That's when things get supremely stupid. So, that's Prince of Darkness. It's stupid. But, some of the death scenes and special effects are very good, admittedly. However, they can't work if the characters are unlikable, the dialogue is stupid, and the entire plot is a bloated laugh-fest. And the movie was so lame, I found it impossible to laugh. Not to mention, this film is just too much like The Thing and Halloween. I noticed several touches that were right out of those films. But... it moved very fast. So... if you cover your ears, it wouldn't be so bad. But it is bad. Though, Alice Cooper doesn't have any lines. I found that interesting and against my original prediction. Now there's just BODY BAGS left and I'll have seen almost every Carpenter horror film. Either way, there's no question that this guy really lost it after The Fog.
|
|
shunty
SERIAL KILLER
????#???? ?
Posts: 537
|
Post by shunty on Sept 26, 2008 16:57:42 GMT -5
Gordon's movies are rarely great, but they are ALWAYS highly entertaining. i admit that dagon and pit & the pendulum aren't great movies, but i personally love them for various reasons. castle freak isn't very good but it has one very nasty scene in it. most of Gordon's movies have just one particular very nasty scene in them. i wonder if anyone else has noticed that strange pattern. also, i think the black cat is better than 90% of regular horror films.
|
|
|
Post by malbowski13 on Sept 26, 2008 17:02:29 GMT -5
Hellraiser :Inferno - Ho hum. What to say. Cool story, shitty-looking cenobites, and a Pinhead that is as frightening as a trip to the local zoo. 6/10
|
|
|
Post by lazario on Sept 30, 2008 15:16:46 GMT -5
finally got to see Stuart Gordon's And what can I say? It was REALLY WORKING surprisingly well for the first hour and 10 minutes. And then... they fucked up big time. CGI, a Rosemary's Baby twist, and an even dumber twist (which I won't give away) sink this ship like it was the Titanic. It goes down hard. Too hard to get back up again. This very low star rating is meant to reflect just how much the movie had going for it before the ending. Sorry, Stuart, you lose again.
|
|
|
Post by tsmooth31 on Oct 4, 2008 3:57:58 GMT -5
i just saw blindness in the theaters, it was pretty terrible
long and slow and not much happened, felt like a zombie movie only with no zombies and very little action, the end was also dumb and there was no explanation for why anything happened
cool idea, terrible movie
|
|
|
Post by lazario on Oct 4, 2008 23:25:34 GMT -5
Hmm... I don't really know what to say. Maybe I'll think of something overnight.
|
|
|
Post by malbowski13 on Oct 5, 2008 10:04:23 GMT -5
That movie is boss.
|
|
|
Post by lazario on Oct 6, 2008 6:33:10 GMT -5
No. It was okay at best.
|
|
|
Post by malbowski13 on Oct 6, 2008 18:43:15 GMT -5
Boss.
|
|
shunty
SERIAL KILLER
????#???? ?
Posts: 537
|
Post by shunty on Oct 8, 2008 2:08:10 GMT -5
i agree with okay at best. clive barker did much better with hellraiser
|
|
|
Post by lazario on Oct 8, 2008 4:28:21 GMT -5
|
|