-

Jump to content



Sign up for a free account!

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and you won't get the popup ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo

Andy Warhol's Horror Movies...My Thoughts


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
3 replies to this topic

#1 of 4 John Sturge

John Sturge

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 210 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 18 2001

Posted May 30 2002 - 10:19 AM

A horror friend of mine let borrow the Criterion Collection editions of Blood for Dracula and Flesh For Frankenstein.

I thought seeing the Criterion Collection symbol before the movie meant "classic"...Boy was I wrong.

In the spirit of movies such as Cannibal Holocaust(considered a snuff film), Jungle Holocaust or Buio Omega which are ****. Oh, and they also are diseases to the art of film making. Paul Morrissey has unleashed a plague, in the form of Flesh For Frankenstein and Blood For Dracula. Filmed back to back in Italy, they are the pinnacle of trash and exploitation films.

My thoughts? I do not know how I was able to watch both films in their entirety. I'm almost at a loss of words to describe how bad Flesh For Frankenstein and Blood for Dracula are.

What are your thoughts?

#2 of 4 DonaldB

DonaldB

    Supporting Actor

  • 765 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 30 2000

Posted May 30 2002 - 03:19 PM

You do seem to be at a loss for words. It's difficult to address your concerns about the films, since you only offer us a very general sense of objection without the benefit of having a list of particulars which you find objectionable.

...they are the pinnacle of trash and exploitation films.

Are they trash? A reasonable person may certainly think so, but this dialogue isn't going to go anywhere until you get into why you think this is so. And just who or what is being exploited?


One needs to understand that these films are satire above all else. Did you listen to Paul Morrissey's commentaries by any chance? They are rather good and will help you to better understand what he was after. I suggest you listen to them and then come back here if you're still unsatisfied.

Regards,
Don

#3 of 4 Andy Olivera

Andy Olivera

    Screenwriter

  • 1,302 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 25 2000

Posted May 30 2002 - 11:20 PM

Unfortunately, in order to listen to Morrissey's comments you must also sit through those of Maurice Yacowar. Discussion of symbolism can be interesting, but Flesh For Frankenstein was so over-analyzed I almost couldn't stand it(Blood For Dracula was tolerable). That aside, I would say they're worth a listen(if you still have the discs)...
"It is not, and never should be, the policy of the law to require the protection of the foolhardy or reckless few and therefore to deprive, or interfere with, the enjoyment by the remainder of society of the liberties and amenities to which they are rightly entitled." -unknown

#4 of 4 Tom Rhea

Tom Rhea

    Second Unit

  • 292 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 31 2000

Posted May 31 2002 - 01:45 AM

It's been years since I've seen these, but I do remember laughing out loud (in a good way) at both of them. Udo Kier is a lot of fun to watch. I guess it helps if one likes movies that most people consider trash (such as John Waters' early ones). I haven't picked up the Criterion editions of these yet, but they are on my want list at dvdempire.
Tom Rhea