|
Post by lazario on Oct 8, 2008 9:05:50 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by tsmooth31 on Oct 9, 2008 4:50:27 GMT -5
i always wanted to check that out but i hate tobe hooper and is overated crap movies so i never did
|
|
|
Post by lazario on Oct 9, 2008 5:48:59 GMT -5
Tobe Hooper is not overrated, T. Most people think he's a bad director. Therefore, he cannot be overrated. He clearly lost some of his mojo after Poltergeist because of the whole Steven Spielberg debacle. But before Lifeforce, his record was pretty fucking impressive. Salem's Lot - one of the scariest and best made-for-TV horror movies of all time. Poltergeist - a very effective blockbuster spookfest with some very scary and fun moments. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre - probably the 3rd greatest horror film in the history of the entire genre. And, though they're not perfect, Eaten Alive and The Funhouse had their moments.
|
|
shunty
SERIAL KILLER
????#???? ?
Posts: 537
|
Post by shunty on Oct 9, 2008 16:43:30 GMT -5
what spielberg debacle?
|
|
|
Post by lazario on Oct 9, 2008 17:51:18 GMT -5
Poltergeist. The one people think Spielberg directed just because he was on the set so often.
|
|
|
Post by tsmooth31 on Oct 10, 2008 18:39:32 GMT -5
i started to watch feast 2 but it was so bad and boring i had to stop midway through, now that is a rare thing for me to do, i usually watch even the worst movies untill the end, i dunno if i just wasnt in the mood for it, but it just felt like a rehash of a bunch of different horror movies, and a very boring one at that, i only watched just over half of it and cant say one good thing about it and will prob never watch the rest
|
|
|
Post by lazario on Oct 10, 2008 21:51:08 GMT -5
Most horror movies coming out this decade feel like rehashes. There isn't much difference between a sequel, a direct-to-video movie, and the shit that gets released in the theaters. You name it, any movie element - the transition from low budget to the mainstream is no noticable difference.
|
|
|
Post by tsmooth31 on Oct 11, 2008 4:14:07 GMT -5
while that is true for most movies, most of the time i can atleast deal with them, this one just had nothing going for it, ontop of feeling like i have seen it many times, it had all annoying or uninteresting characters, and didnt even have any gore to keep me hooked, atleast not in the first 50 mins or so
|
|
|
Post by lazario on Oct 11, 2008 11:24:57 GMT -5
T - your opinion will change once you get older and have seen this thing (trend) in more and more movies. You'll have less tolerance for the films you thought you could get through before and you'll see how many of them are cut from the same cloth as all the rest of today's garbage. Anyway, the last movie I watched: Not knowing what to expect, I found the movie a fairly uncomfortable half-and-half of good, smart, ambitious, ironic stuff, and slasher movie stupidity and sleaze. So, when something's this much in the middle, you look for: what tips the scales? The fact that at least two scenes in the movie scared THE CRAP OUT OF ME! At 26 years old (my Birthday was yesterday), nothing gets me to jump. This one did.
|
|
|
Post by malbowski13 on Oct 11, 2008 16:17:05 GMT -5
The Tripper : Good first film for David Arquette. Some good killings and the writing was decent.A little too much hippie-shit for my tastes but watchable all the same. 6 1/2 /10
The Longest Yard : This is Sandler at his finest IMO. His character isn't too over-the-top and he brings some emotion to the table. Any fan of football should dig this. 7 1/2 / 10
|
|
|
Post by tsmooth31 on Oct 11, 2008 18:19:55 GMT -5
T - your opinion will change once you get older and have seen this thing (trend) in more and more movies. You'll have less tolerance for the films you thought you could get through before and you'll see how many of them are cut from the same cloth as all the rest of today's garbage.
nah if it was gona change it would have already, ill be 25 soon and have been watching horror for most of those years, i can tolerate just about anything, no matter how bad it is, the thing is when it comes to micro budget films i can tolerate anything because i realize they dont have the money and resources the bigger budget movies have, and those are the movies i usually watch, even all these torture movies that have been coming out, most are just like hostel or tcm or whatever, they they all do something a little new and are at least entertaining to watch, this one had absolutly nothing going for it tho
|
|
|
Post by malbowski13 on Oct 11, 2008 21:37:22 GMT -5
Just like that old line, " The rich get richer, the poor get poorer" which is a textbook defeatist attitude, I am also not willing to slam all new movies simply because they are different from older ones.
|
|
|
Post by lazario on Oct 12, 2008 4:56:28 GMT -5
my last watch: God was this fucker awful! And I was really excited to see it again, especially since I just found out who's in it (I didn't know who these people were when I was a kid): John Ryan (It's Alive), Pam Grier, Stacy Keach, Malcolm McDowell! And the director made Firestarter, which wasn't great, but it was at least okay. This is bad. And I mean really bad. Like, everything is stupid and cliched. REALLY stupid and cliched. I can't even believe they ripped off the way they did. Stealing right from: Westworld, The Terminator, Robo Cop, and Phantasm. This is a complete waste. The only good thing about it is one scene where someone is pulled through a wall. Just like that old line, " The rich get richer, the poor get poorer" which is a textbook defeatist attitude, I am also not willing to slam all new movies simply because they are different from older ones. That was a highly stupid reply, Mal. In more ways than one. nah if it was gona change it would have already, ill be 25 soon and have been watching horror for most of those years Age doesn't matter, maturity is important. I'm actually not trying to knock you when I say this, I'm just telling the truth: you're incredibly immature and puerile. So you're not seeing things completely clearly. I'm not saying it matters, just trying to tell you that the way you see movies does in fact change the more you learn. i can tolerate just about anything, no matter how bad it is, the thing is when it comes to micro budget films i can tolerate anything because i realize they dont have the money and resources the bigger budget movies have, and those are the movies i usually watch, even all these torture movies that have been coming out, most are just like hostel or tcm or whatever, they they all do something a little new and are at least entertaining to watch, this one had absolutly nothing going for it tho Well I agree it was pointless. But you don't give a fuck about meaning and substance anyway. Not honest, true meaning and substance. You should truly have known how bad Jack Frost could have been. Just rent a Children of the Corn movie for goodness' sake, and you'll see. If you're looking. Anyway like I said, I thought Jack Frost was bad too when I first saw it, but I was probably in junior high when I saw it. I've grown up quite a bit since then. And I've also learned that age doesn't mean shit.
|
|
|
Post by malbowski13 on Oct 12, 2008 12:58:09 GMT -5
That quote actually didn't fit into the argument so I will retract it. I'm reading a book on being accountable for your own life and not looking for handouts. Want the title?
|
|
shunty
SERIAL KILLER
????#???? ?
Posts: 537
|
Post by shunty on Oct 12, 2008 19:20:16 GMT -5
so alone in the dark was good? i've wanted to see that for a while. it has sleaze too? nice.
|
|
|
Post by lazario on Oct 13, 2008 9:05:03 GMT -5
so alone in the dark was good? i've wanted to see that for a while. it has sleaze too? nice. Yeah, Alone in the Dark was pretty good. Thing to remember is- not your average horror movie in any wayshapeform. It starts off feeling pretty cliched but it's also making references to the Book of Revelations (which I know nothing about). It's kind of made with the big stars in mind, Jack Palance and Martin Landau's performances especially. Don't look for them to give performances the same as they would in their 'serious' films. But try to pay attention to what the story does. I hope you like it. Remember that it gets better as it goes along. And it gets a lot scarier later too. It's all about what the loonies do when they get out of the asylum. That quote actually didn't fit into the argument so I will retract it. I'm reading a book on being accountable for your own life and not looking for handouts. Want the title? I don't need it. But you should probably be reading books about how ignorance kills and try taking responsibility for your political confusion instead. ;D
|
|
|
Post by malbowski13 on Oct 13, 2008 11:17:38 GMT -5
Don't be so close-minded.
|
|
|
Post by tsmooth31 on Oct 13, 2008 13:54:56 GMT -5
dont mention alone in the dark, anytime i hear that i think of that god awful uwe boll movie
|
|
|
Post by malbowski13 on Oct 13, 2008 15:48:29 GMT -5
King Kong (2005) : Let's start with saying that this is one of those "could've been shorter" films. The lost tribe in the beginning was cool and Jack Black also put in a great performance. Kong and the "insects" looked great but I really felt that the dinosaurs had no place in this. The side-storyline of the orphan-kid was also unnecessary and pointless. Kong dying was effective and brought a little bitty tear to my eye.Better than I thought. 7/10
|
|
shunty
SERIAL KILLER
????#???? ?
Posts: 537
|
Post by shunty on Oct 13, 2008 16:57:26 GMT -5
oh yah, uwe boll sucks bolls.
|
|