|
Post by lazario on Oct 31, 2008 8:42:41 GMT -5
No, you need to be a better horror fan. This is a horror message board. If you can't show the genre some respect, I think you know what you can do.
|
|
|
Post by malbowski13 on Oct 31, 2008 14:07:06 GMT -5
Well, I like Argento's work so I must be retarded.
You shit on everything "horror" from the last decade so maybe you should have some more respect.
Hoffa : Probably Nicholson's best work that I have seen. DeVito is good as well. 8 1/2 /10
|
|
|
Post by lazario on Oct 31, 2008 22:23:32 GMT -5
Well, I like Argento's work so I must be retarded. After your recent string of idiot comments, I wouldn't be surprised if you just borrowed the DVDs from someone else and skipped to the death scenes. I don't know. But that would make sense. You shit on everything "horror" from the last decade so maybe you should have some more respect. I do. That's WHY I call today's horror what it really is. It's all being made by stupid "hot shot" 20-somethings right out of film school or lame fanboys. The horror of most of the 1990's (90-96) and the 60's, 70's, and 80's were made by intelligent directors who actually know about art, psychology, intellectual ideas, and have a brain in their heads. This decade is all about Asian Horror and everyone knows it. Please tell me where I've said that Asian horror isn't delivering.
|
|
|
Post by malbowski13 on Nov 1, 2008 11:21:05 GMT -5
I probably have a better Argento collection than you do, first off. Secondly, I hate Asian stuff but I don't shoot you down for liking it.
Feast 2 : Has some of the magic of the 1st one but not much. Some good kills but also some really bad CGI. Watchable. 7/10
|
|
|
Post by tsmooth31 on Nov 1, 2008 19:03:22 GMT -5
Saw 5 - Cha-ching! Much better than I thought it would be. Easily better than part 2 or 3. The score is lacking a bit but the signature "saw tune" still comes through at the end. Good ending and some really mean kills.One of the things I like about the Saw franchise is that they primarily use "real blood" as opposed to CGI poop. 8/10
i saw it last night, it was better then part 4 but not 3, part 3 is my second fav after the original
and laz go suck on a dick maybe you will feel better, ur bullshit is getting old, time for you to grow the fuck up, some says something about a movie you dont agree with and you take it as some personal insult, that shit is old, u shit on every movie made in the last decade yet you havent even seen most of them, like i said go put a dick in ur mouth and keep quiet, EVERYONE is tired of ur bullshit, no1 wants to hear you rave on about how great u are, and how u see more then us and know more then us, you wanna talk like that go find some elementary school board
|
|
|
Post by lazario on Nov 2, 2008 14:11:35 GMT -5
T, you have no brain. You have no idea what you're talking about. As usual. So why don't you go lick a titty or something? Seriously, you make sexual comments because you have no higher understanding of Anything. Who's tired of who's bullshit here? You're the one who has to make homophobic comments everytime I say something you don't like. You're the one who needs to grow up. Or graduate from Kindergarten. I probably have a better Argento collection than you do, first off. I'm a fan of his movies, I buy his DVD's. I have over a dozen. So? You're still the one bitching about how a movie from 1981 isn't "shocking." And for your information, I watched it with a person younger than you are and that transformation scene was so effective on her that she started screaming before Christopher shot Eddie toward the ending because she was so grossed out or scared from the first one. Next time you want to criticize a classic, try to have some observations more complex than "it's not shocking." What the fuck is "shocking" supposed to be? Horror just works or it doesn't. Labeling it as "brutal" or "shocking" is fucking stupid. And then you start a supremely idiotic post about the Saw franchise. Maybe if those worthless movies had been shocking, I'd have been able to enjoy them. But if you consider those shocking, you're a moron. Seriously. Shocking compared to what? A Jonas Brothers music video? Anyway, because I like to educate as well as slay retarded comments (I'm finished with the latter, it's time for the former) : shocking and scary in the horror genre are extras, bonuses, luxuries. Whether or not someone will find a certain movie those things depends on their outlook, background, mood, several determining factors. Which is probably why great horror does more than just shocks or scares. That's why I had to zap you, because what you were saying wasn't very smart. Maybe you're smarter than that viewpoint and you just lost sight of the big picture. The best horror movies have a lot more than simple shock value. And The Howling has that. It has ambition, an amazing music score, a lot of style, interesting special effects (some really good, some not so), great transformation scenes, decent acting (great in Dee Wallace's case). When I watch it, I go back and forth on whether I like it, but I can still recognize quality when I see it. As for genres doing what people expect, well I've always thought it's better to be different, be smarter, and defy expectations. To sit there and map out a film and what it has to be is a little too jaded for a movie lover. Do you only watch comedies to laugh? If you watch horror movies to be scared or shocked, and I assume you watch a lot of horror movies - why then do you bother to watch a lot of horror movies? With too much of anything, the short term affect wears off. If you're a real horror fan, you have to care about more than just "shock" value. Plus, all movies are basically about storytelling. It's great when one genre can get us to do something (cry, laugh, scream, whatever). But you can't count on it. Be smart. See the movie for all it is, not just a single component. And one more thing about your attitude and the genre- well, actually: didn't you know what to expect from The Howling before you saw it? In fact, what the hell DID you expect? You can't blanket-expect to be shocked by every single horror movie, nor every single horror movie with a reputation. Or big-name value and a following, etc. Different horror movies do different things. You should know what to expect from a famous horror film before you see it. Do research online, it pays every time. Oh, and... I really wish Dave would show up to hear what you said about that movie. Fuck, he ripped my head off just because I said Dante's Piranha was superior to Howling. I hate Asian stuff but I don't shoot you down for liking it. I like it because it's the only truly great horror this current decade. Make it all about like or dislike like T does (who can't see the forest for the trees on this issue), but I can't believe a real horror fan would prefer the Saw films over so much quality product from an entire nation. A nation that has actually managed to hit all the important buttons with horror that America and France have failed to - intelligence, style, good writing, incredibly shocking and brutal material but most importantly material that delivers on more than one level and really makes an impact. Jesus Christ- Suicide Club fucking picks its' teeth with little pieces of shit like Saw.
|
|
|
Post by malbowski13 on Nov 3, 2008 20:46:24 GMT -5
The Howling is friggin peanuts compared to An American Werewolf in London. THAT was a classic! Other than a good ending, I felt that the rest of The Howling was boring.
Once again, I am talking about the evolution of FX when I talk about "shock value". You have to admit that for audiences back in the 70's, Exorcist probably made them shit themselves. TCM probably made people faint or throw up or leave or whatever. We, the horror fans, have become so desensitized to this that we need something more today to be shocked than pea soup or a whiny chainsaw. That's all I'm saying.
Suicide Club was good but I didn't feel the music scene in the bowling alley(I think) fit.
As far as theater releases go, the Saw movies run the show. I have said it before and I will repeat that the best Horror films today are direct to DVD. Going back to variety being the spice of life, I don't want to watch an artsy-fartsy artistic impression-piece all the time. The Saw movies are gory and also have some substance to them(back-story,twists,etc.).
Casino Royale- Probably the best Bond I have seen.I don't like those movies to begin with but this was entertaining. 8/10
|
|
shunty
SERIAL KILLER
????#???? ?
Posts: 537
|
Post by shunty on Nov 4, 2008 1:05:42 GMT -5
i agree that the best horror today is direct to dvd. most of the crap in the theater is just so formulaic.
|
|
|
Post by lazario on Nov 4, 2008 5:54:29 GMT -5
Wasn't Chaos direct to DVD? Ugh... The Howling is friggin peanuts compared to An American Werewolf in London. THAT was a classic! Other than a good ending, I felt that the rest of The Howling was boring. Yeah, The Howling failed to grab me too a bit at first. But I'll tell you what eventually did it, what changed the movie for me - THAT MUSIC. Pino Donaggio is in my opinion the greatest scoring artist in horror history. Even outdoing Goblin, though not by much. But the MGM DVD also brings out a lot of the style that John Hora (the movie's director of photography) intended. Joe Dante says that his style was like a style of painting and that's exactly what it is. And that scene with Terry exploring Marsha's shack/cabin is amazing. Not only is the music working overtime in that scene, but look at the FOG! Every second of that scene is perfectly timed, pitched, edited, paced, and effective. In every way. Like I said, I do go back and forth though. That part of the ending in that barn with Marsha going over the top and all that... that didn't work in my opinion. Until Christopher shows up with the silver bullets and he's killing them and they don't even believe they're dying. Then that final scene at the news station and the bar - one of the best horror endings I've ever seen. A lot of people felt let down by the American Werewolf in London ending. Generally speaking, I think American Werewolf is better too. But it's not atmospheric. It doesn't really set you in any particular place that you should fear or feel creepy in. And so, do you remember any place in that movie feeling scary? Not unless you sat back down to watch it. And most of the American Werewolf music was a little boring. Some of the pieces were great, but- most? Not really. American Werewolf gets the edge more than anything because of how it mixes werewolf and zombie sub-genres. And because you never know what's real and what isn't, without the movie slipping into Videodrome or Nightmare on Elm Street territory. The things that could be imagined rather than are definitely there. But then there's the transformation scene showdown. The Howling completely wins. Because the werewolf there is clearly angrier, scarier, darker, as is the transformation scene itself. American Werewolf shows everything off in bright lights and- are you scared of that werewolf? I sure as heck wasn't. That scene was more about showing David in pain as he transformed. Not about how scary the monster was. In The Howling, that was a damn werewolf to fear. Once again, I am talking about the evolution of FX when I talk about "shock value". You have to admit that for audiences back in the 70's, Exorcist probably made them shit themselves. So? The Exorcist is still a great movie and it works. But why should I be impressed simply because the FX were good? The Exorcist is 2 hours long. Take out the FX, and you probably still have 90 minutes. What's left? What else shocks if the FX are gone? What else works, what else redeems, what else makes the movie worth watching? Take the FX out of The Howling and you still have an interesting movie with great music and a creepy atmosphere. TCM probably made people faint or throw up or leave or whatever. We, the horror fans, have become so desensitized to this that we need something more today to be shocked than pea soup or a whiny chainsaw. That's all I'm saying. Hey buddy, I'm just as jaded as you are. And you know what? Saw isn't extreme. It's pathetic. Every one of those movies are still more talky than showy. And their TALK is bullshit. They couldn't write anything worth listening to. Because it's all the same as Se7en and I already saw that movie. It was pretty good. More stylish than the Saw franchise, smarter too. Maybe if it really was all about the deaths, I might have found something entertaining in it. Or if aside from the deaths, there had been some intelligence or something. No luck. Suicide Club was good but I didn't feel the music scene in the bowling alley(I think) fit. Because of the English lyrics? The Bowling Alley scene pissed me off when I saw it. I thought they were ruining the movie. But more happens there than just the music, so I had to change my mind. And the music itself was creepy, so hell, I kind of gave the movie more credit for adding yet another level to itself. Now, that was shock. And far more extreme than anything in any of the Saw movies. As far as theater releases go, the Saw movies run the show. I have said it before and I will repeat that the best Horror films today are direct to DVD. Going back to variety being the spice of life, I don't want to watch an artsy-fartsy artistic impression-piece all the time. The Saw movies are gory and also have some substance to them (back-story, twists, etc.). Well, I don't feel any pressure to defend any kind of releases of horror movies in North America this decade. A tiny few worked. Hostel was the last decent one that I saw, that unlike the Saw movies knew how to actually manipulate the pathetic victims you see in these torture movies (Saw could really have taken some pointers from Hostel) so that there was an actual point. The Saw series isn't gory enough, and they waste SO MUCH time with police interrogations, side story BULLSHIT, and their idea of substance and writing is nothing. It's completely void of intelligence. You KNOW you're smarter than these movies. So, why defend their idiocy?!
|
|
|
Post by malbowski13 on Nov 4, 2008 20:29:42 GMT -5
Call it a guilty pleasure, then.
|
|
|
Post by lazario on Nov 5, 2008 7:16:40 GMT -5
What's pleasurable about it??
|
|
|
Post by malbowski13 on Nov 5, 2008 21:41:21 GMT -5
OK. You don't like it. We get it. Are you done???
|
|
|
Post by lazario on Nov 6, 2008 2:31:00 GMT -5
Um, Mal - what is your FUCKING PROBLEM? You apparently listened before. But you're choosing NOW to start freaking out? I posted one fucking line, a question. What was so unbearable about that for you? Are you going to make it? Are you okay? Should I call a paramedic?
I'm so sorry you can't be a grown up and hear something you don't like. Boo friggin' hoo. You poor thing! How could anyone put you through this much suffering? You're so brave. What can I do to ease the pain I've caused you?
As I've said before and now have to say YET AGAIN, this isn't about liking a movie or not liking a movie. It's a fact - Saw and the franchise sucks - that you're ignoring for your own personal reasons. I would very much love to know why. Maybe then we would not have a problem. Understanding begets tolerance. I can be more tolerant if I know why. IS THAT SO MUCH TO ASK??! T couldn't be a grown up about this. For the love of the perception of Christ, can't you be? Just think, all you have to do is answer a simple question. Not all that hard. You're not afraid to think- are you?
|
|
|
Post by tsmooth31 on Nov 6, 2008 14:55:12 GMT -5
it sucks in your opinion, why dont you grow up and cry to someone who will listen, oh thats right no1 will listen to you, you get banned and suspended everywhere else yo go because you play this bullshit on everyone, do you now realize the whole " im right and your wrong no matter what" sttitude gets old very fast and no1 feels like hearing it, you didnt like saw so what, its one of the better horror movies i have seen in a long time and MANY other people like it, no1 cares or is gonna agree with what you say so just end it
|
|
|
Post by lazario on Nov 7, 2008 6:48:27 GMT -5
I'm sorry, T, did you say something? I'm trying not to make any schedules this month. I almost always play everything by ear. But I wanted to watch a lot of non-horror movies this month. Since it's November, I felt like maybe rekindling my childhood a little bit and watching some movies I remember from way back when. The most important criteria for me with non-horror movies is that I have something that interests me carrying me through the movie. This is a pathetic idea for a period piece, because it's really soap-opera-y and melodramatic. Hard to tackle in just 100 minutes material as heavy as this, so they soon assign everyone stereotypes and move things along as quickly as they can. It's a pretty superficial treatment almost all around except that the music is great if you can stomach a combination of 80's and older styles and Jennifer Gray plays this like it's the last movie she'll ever do. And I guess that's true since people didn't want to cast her anymore because she hated her trademark nose so much that she had surgery and from then on, nobody recognized her onscreen again. Anyway, it works overall because it's about two sides of the tracks. One does look really dorky and one looks really cool and sexy and blah blah blah. The music, dancing, and sensuality really enhance the intimate quality of the story. If you just imagine the blanks are filled and disregard the outside world in this story as much as possible, the melodrama is believable enough to enjoy. Hell, there's a reason that line "nobody puts Baby in a corner" is so famous the world-over, people did identify with the Francis character. I think the reason why is suspension of disbelief. This movie allows for a lot of that. Oy-freaking-vay! If this thing isn't the saddest, most delusional, and overproduced turkey to ever find bigtime success with movie-goers... what is? Alright, let's get it right out in the open, most critics have already revealed that the best thing about this film is Stockard Channing. You're probably going - "who?" right now. She's Rizzo, the mean-spirited Pink Lady character with a heart of gold. Who thinks she's pregnant because she did it with Kenickie without a condom. False alarm! But because she tells her mouthy best friend, the whole school finds out and they spread rumors that she's a slut. This leads her to sing "There Are Worse Things I Could Do," and it's the single best moment in the whole movie. Because she's the movie's only truly brave character. She won't let what other people think about her change who she is. But apart from her, this movie is downright scary. All the greaser characters in the movie, including the girls, have a really "Mtv" oriented idea about sexuality, talking a lot about getting it and possibly giving it away. But the nice girl Sandy won't make kissy-face at the drive-in and calls Danny's car a "sin wagon" because she thinks he doesn't respect her. So already the movie's getting an attitude about sexuality- "you're going to screw everything up if you get fresh." Fine fine, I don't care who's puritan and who isn't. But don't attempt to bash me over the head with it, movie. That's not the only atrocity this movie commits. We have to sit there are listen to 1950's greasers making lude comments about tits and pussy and getting off their rocks. While all the adults seem to be so-shocked. Oh, and the guy with glasses and bow-tie is a real square, man. Not cool at all. But just because he does well in school and isn't popular... he's involved in the dance committee. HUH? Valley Girl corrected this mistake 5 years later as Carrie did 2 years earlier - the popular kids are always on the dance committee! So, forget authenticity all together. The movie is also punctuated by Three Stooges routines (better seen with the actual Moe-Larry-Curly), cartoon character impressions, extras dancing in the background who don't belong and take away from the main stars... And the music from the quite good soundtrack is tampered with in the movie. For whatever idiotic reason, there's a background chorus added here, which completely screws up the award-nominated (and great on the movie's soundtrack) "Hopelessly Devoted to You." Anyway, the cast tries hard, some of them are very likable and the movie gets credit for that. But that's pretty much it. This poor movie was really beaten up by the critics back in good old 1995. Mostly because it wasn't as good as Tarantino's Pulp Fiction and he directed more than 1/4th of the movie. That was their reasoning. Does it deserve that? Sort of and not really at the same time. Re-watching it last night, I had a lot of "WHAT?!" reaction head-spins. A lot of this dialogue is stupid, atrocious, and doesn't do anything. Leonard Maltin even said, of the movie's 4 stories, he couldn't tell which was the worst. The first one is the worst. No question. The one directed by the woman of the group of directors. Ouch. Neat little cast, but the writing sucks. A lot. Alicia Witt is the best feature here, playing Madonna's bratty little lesbian girlfriend- "I want fries! You stupid jerks with your dumb, fucking ritual!" And Tim Roth tries to make this work with the same unbelievably entertaining routine he performs throughout the rest of the movie. But this one falls flat. The second is a slight improvement, just because a shouting David Proval is always fun and Jennifer Beals' little collection of penis references is the most thorough and complete I've ever heard. But again- the writing is so bad, I can't believe it. Again though, slightly better. Especially because of as it comes to mind, great music cues and wacky, intense camerawork. Then, it's Robert Rodriguez's turn. And this is where the movie gets good. Real good. Desperado sucked (it was just a remake of his independent hit, El Mariachi, anyway). The Faculty was stupid and lame. From Dusk Till Dawn was way too long. But this one is just right. It completely steals the show and sets the bar of excellence for the rest of the movie. High. Everything about this works. Tim Roth's mannerisms and quirky voice and hilarious running around like a crazy person are finally supported by excellent dialogue ("there's a dead WHORE stuffed in the bedsprings of the fucking bed!") and a great supporting cast. Antonio Banderas is actually funny here, Tamlyn Tomita is an amusing haggy drunk (" your kids are getting expensive"), and those kids... I always hate kids in mainstream movies, I always want to choke them. I love these freaking kids, they are the funniest kids in cinema history. That ending is an absolute riot. Then it's Quentin Tarantino's turn for the last 2 parts of the movie. A short interlude with Marisa Tomei, who's always wonderful, and Kathy Griffin, who's usually a little funnier than she is here. But from this point on, Tim Roth runs the show. For Quentin, this segment overall is not quite as great as his other mid-1990's work. Especially since he gets Bruce Willis and all he has him doing is yelling about a woman we never see onscreen and making bad curse-driven jokes. But other than that, Tarantino's character has a lot of great lines and intelligent observations. And Tim Roth's just perfect. Now Jennifer Beals is the haggy drunk and Paul Calderon is quick and good with line readings. If those mean anything. The camerawork and almost everything happening in 1-shot is pretty cool.
|
|
|
Post by malbowski13 on Nov 7, 2008 17:00:34 GMT -5
Dirty Dancing??? Maybe you and my sister should hang out...
Chapelle Show : Season 3(Lost Episodes) - What genius. It's a shame he went nutty. This could have been the greatest comedy show ever. 9/10
|
|
|
Post by lazario on Nov 8, 2008 1:28:28 GMT -5
Dirty Dancing??? Maybe you and my sister should hang out... Mal - Gay Man Here. I can watch anything I want to watch and nobody can label me. It's one of the only perks that comes with being a social outcast. Don't be jealous. About the Chappelle Show - we're in agreement.
|
|
|
Post by malbowski13 on Nov 8, 2008 9:35:26 GMT -5
I had the time of my life... j/k Laz.
My favorite thing about Chappelle Show was them using racial references or stereotypes and making them funny. I guess in hopes of helping people understand different people. Maybe trying to get people not to be so sensitive. Maybe???
|
|
|
Post by lazario on Nov 9, 2008 5:14:12 GMT -5
I don't know what my favorite thing about Chappelle is, probably just because he's so damn funny. He is. Don't know why. Holy masterpiece, Batman. Yeah I've seen this at least 7 times before. But this time was the best! With an Argento film that's over 2 hours long, you tend to notice things you didn't notice upon each viewing and I noticed shots I never seemed to see before. It was like Christmas. I'm also starting to think this is better than Suspiria, outdoing that film would be an incredible feat. But man, those scenes with Daria Nicolodi are amazing. I laughed, I almost cried when she was stabbed (first time in 7 viewings), I jumped at the startling sound of the squawking birds - that Amanda Righetti scene is an absolute show-stopper all around. This is probably the reason why people called Argento "the Italian Hitchcock." There's no question Deep Red is superior to most of Hitchcock's work in terms of effect. Also- what's the best scene? The Amanda Righetti scene, the creepy and psychologically tilted and piercing Parapsychology conference scene (great use of Giorgio Gaslini's music, before he was fired), or that amazing scene with Marc Daly alone in his place while someone approaches ( perfect editing on that scene). I'm going to have to re-watch Suspiria and see which one actually is better.
|
|
|
Post by malbowski13 on Nov 9, 2008 10:40:44 GMT -5
I found the little "puppet" to be pretty spooky too.
The Bourne Supremacy : We're going down, son. Not as good as the 1st. I don't even know how the 3rd one will turn out(good/bad). Not too impressed. 7/10
|
|