The Horror Movie Appreciation Thread (1 Viewer)

[JasonRoer]

48 days til Halloween, Halloween, Halloween. 48 days til Halloween, Silver Shamrock.

 

[Malcolm R]

48 days til Halloween, Halloween, Halloween. 48 days til Halloween, Silver Shamrock.

Must be getting closer. I'm starting to see Christmas decorations in the stores.

 

[JasonRoer]

Must be getting closer. I'm starting to see Christmas decorations in the stores.

I'm surprised we aren't seeing chocolate covered marshmallow Santas yet.

 

[John Stell]

Watched 9/12/2021; Rating out of a possible 4

1) The Supernaturals (1986)

Military group on training exercise in the woods run afoul angry ghosts of Confederate soldiers. OK cast can do nothing with incredibly dull script and execution. Star Trek's Nichelle Nichols cusses a lot.

2) Goodnight God Bless (1987)

A great opening, a very good final jolt, and nothing else in between. Killer dressed in priestly garb murders random people (including 5 school children!) while the cops have little success tracking him down. One cop starts romancing the mother of a child witness. Classy. Poorly paced and mostly dull. Ending suggests something supernatural was at work but everything leading up to that suggests otherwise.

3) Haunting Fear (1991)

1/2

Brinke Stevens is wife who has nightmares about being buried alive. Her husband decides to take advantage of that fear so he can sell her father's estate to pay off $80K gambling debt. Small roles by Robert Clarke, Robert Quarry, and Karen Black help keep things interesting. But this is a mostly cheesy affair with nonsensical final act. Fails to capture the essence of Edgar Allan Poe despite claims of being based on his work.

 

[JasonRoer]

House (1985)

A horror novelist suffering from the loss of his son moves into his aunt's house (the house in which he lived for years) after she commits suicide. Strange things begin to happen and he is haunted by plethora of demons, some from his past. This is at it's heart a horror-comedy in the vein of Evil Dead, with fun practical effects with the quality one might expect from an 80s movie. I loved this movie as a teenager and so it has nostalgic charm for me. It certainly isn't a fantastic movie by any stretch, however, it is entertaining and fun. It's a solid 2.5 out of 4 for me, mainly due to the nostalgia. Otherwise it's a 2 out of 4 and definitely worth seeing.

Malignant (2021)

A pregnant woman (who has suffered 3 miscarriages) is in an abusive relationship. After she is smashed hard against the wall by her husband, she looses this baby to miscarriage as well. She also begins having visions of brutal murders, while the injury to the back of her head continuously bleeds for weeks after her husband attacked her. Through her visions she sees the killer and attempts to help the police.

FANTASTIC. Outrageous, audacious fun. Wan knocks this one out of the park with a seemingly endless budget to match his seemingly endless imagination. His technical work in this film is outstanding, with amazing shot selections and effects. This was a pure treat to watch and the blood oozes everywhere. It's original, exciting, and destined to be a cult classic. The film becomes crazier and crazier as the it spirals toward its amazing climax. My guess is this one will be a love it or hate it type of flick. Count me in the "love it" camp. My initial impression is a 3.5 out of 4, but we'll see how that holds up over the years. It could be that the film feels so fresh that my imagination is still grappling with how this could potentially change the direction of horror films, given the subgenre mashup.

Channel Zero season 2

I finished the 1st episode and it was fantastic, as the entire first season was. Like with all anthology series, I will write a review of the entire season rather than episode by episode. On that note:

American Horror Story: Double Feature

I watched episode 4 last night. This is the best season in years. I'm really enjoying it. Full review at the end of the season.

 

[JasonRoer]

Hi all. I had a thought for this year's Scary Movie Challenge for an addendum category. I've always been fascinated to see how many movies and TV everyone watches. But I've also always wondered how much actual time was spent watching given how varied the runtimes can be, especially with a 25 minute episode of the Twilight Zone (for example) being counted the same as a feature film. So, I wondered if anyone had an interest in keeping a tally of the approximate runtimes and tabulate it at the end of the month so we could see whose butt is the numbest!

I know this isn't the thread for it, however, since there is a crossover of people between this thread and the Scary Movie thread, I figured I'd pose the question here first until the 2021 thread is opened up.

I think it could be fun. Thoughts?

 

[Malcolm R]

Many in my family find it disturbing that I don't find anything disturbing. However, with what I see and hear every day, hey.. how could anything surprise or shock me, you know? Thankfully my wife accepts me with all my deficiencies.

Probably the most disturbing horror film I've ever seen I reviewed earlier in this thread: Found. You should see if you can track it down for October. I came close to turning it off a couple times, and don't think I'd ever watch it again. Though I don't consider myself much of a splatter-head, so I'm sure there are likely more disturbing films than this out there. But this really tested my limits.

https://www.hometheaterforum.com/co...ppreciation-thread.371428/page-2#post-4987337

It looks like it's available for streaming on Shudder.

 

[JasonRoer]

Probably the most disturbing horror film I've ever seen I reviewed earlier in this thread: Found. You should see if you can track it down for October. I came close to turning it off a couple times, and don't think I'd ever watch it again. Though I don't consider myself much of a splatter-head, so I'm sure there are likely more disturbing films than this out there. But this really tested my limits.

https://www.hometheaterforum.com/co...ppreciation-thread.371428/page-2#post-4987337

It looks like it's available for streaming on Shudder.

I'll give it a go. Thanks for the recommendation!

 

[JasonRoer]

Channel Zero season 2:

A young, introverted woman (Margot) grieving the death of her father goes out with her friends one evening. At the bar she meets a man who tells her and her friends about the No End House, which mysteriously shows up somewhere new every year. All of the friends enter the No End House, which contains 6 increasingly disturbing rooms they must go through. Through the house, Margo will be forced to face her grief in a shocking manner. Though not quite as good as the first season, it was excellent and should not be missed. However, there were some faults. Many questions were left unanswered, and these could have provided a richer experience. I do recommend it and I plan to visit season 3 tomorrow. Season 2 nabs 2.75 out of 4 from me.

 

[John Stell]

Rating out of a possible 4

Watched 9/13/2021

1) Grizzly (1976)

Jaws clone about wild grizzly slaughtering tourists. Lots of attack scenes but it's way too obvious director William Girdler is cutting between footage of real grizzly and and hairy stand in. Furthermore, while the acting is OK, Christopher George is no Roy Scheider, Andrew Prine is no Richard Dreyfuss, and Richard Jaeckel is no Robert Shaw.

2) Day of the Animals (1977)

It's The Birds meets Grizzly in Girdler's follow-up to his hit of 1976. All kinds of animals start attacking people because of the deteriorating ozone layer. Uh-huh. Vivid attack scenes but the human drama is lame. Leslie Nielsen is over the top as batsh*t crazy ad executive who gets in touch with his inner Cro-Magnon.

3) A Stranger is Watching (1982)

Director Sean S. Cunnigham's next directing effort after Friday the 13th. Rip Torn is psycho rapist who kidnaps newsman's daughter and girlfriend, holding them for ransom under the New York streets. There's some genuine suspense and Torn is very good. But Cunnigham throws in various murders for no good reason, and the villain has no nuance, making for a rather one-note film. Victor Miller (author of Friday the 13th) co-wrote the screenplay.

Watched 9/14/2021

Eli Roth's History of Horror: Season 2 (2020)

1/2

Six episodes covering hellish houses, giant monsters, body horror, witches, killer kids, and some of Roth's personal favorites. Various folks are briefly interviewed for each episode, including Rob Zombie, Joe Dante, Stephen King, Nancy Allen, Greg Nicotero, Leonard Maltin, and Slash (!). Entertaining but surface-level stuff, which rarely places the discussed films in the context of horror history, making the title somewhat of a misnomer. Also, not too much on stuff made before 1970 (boo!), although there is a good segment on 1932's Freaks.

 

[Malcolm R]

1) Grizzly (1976)

Jaws clone about wild grizzly slaughtering tourists. Lots of attack scenes but it's way too obvious director William Girdler is cutting between footage of real grizzly and and hairy stand in. Furthermore, while the acting is OK, Christopher George is no Roy Scheider, Andrew Prine is no Richard Dreyfuss, and Richard Jaeckel is no Robert Shaw.

I've always liked this one. I picked up Grizzly II earlier this year (quite an all-star cast, with George Clooney, Louise Fletcher, John Rhys-Davies, Laura Dern, Charlie Sheen, and Timothy Spall), but haven't watched it yet. Probably during October.

 

[John Stell]

Be warned. Gizzly II is awful. Some of that cast disappear after the first scene. Most of the film consists of watching the musical acts perform.

 

[Malcolm R]

Be warned. Gizzly II is awful. Some of that cast disappear after the first scene. Most of the film is consists of watching the musical acts perform.

I'm prepared to be underwhelmed. I think it's more of a curiosity due to its history and cast.

 

[JasonRoer]

Rating out of a possible 4

Watched 9/13/2021

1) Grizzly (1976)

Jaws clone about wild grizzly slaughtering tourists. Lots of attack scenes but it's way too obvious director William Girdler is cutting between footage of real grizzly and and hairy stand in. Furthermore, while the acting is OK, Christopher George is no Roy Scheider, Andrew Prine is no Richard Dreyfuss, and Richard Jaeckel is no Robert Shaw.

2) Day of the Animals (1977)

It's The Birds meets Grizzly in Girdler's follow-up to his hit of 1976. All kinds of animals start attacking people because of the deteriorating ozone layer. Uh-huh. Vivid attack scenes but the human drama is lame. Leslie Nielsen is over the top as batsh*t crazy ad executive who gets in touch with his inner Cro-Magnon.

3) A Stranger is Watching (1982)

Director Sean S. Cunnigham's next directing effort after Friday the 13th. Rip Torn is psycho rapist who kidnaps newsman's daughter and girlfriend, holding them for ransom under the New York streets. There's some genuine suspense and Torn is very good. But Cunnigham throws in various murders for no good reason, and the villain has no nuance, making for a rather one-note film. Victor Miller (author of Friday the 13th) co-wrote the screenplay.

Watched 9/14/2021

Eli Roth's History of Horror: Season 2 (2020)

1/2

Six episodes covering hellish houses, giant monsters, body horror, witches, killer kids, and some of Roth's personal favorites. Various folks are briefly interviewed for each episode, including Rob Zombie, Joe Dante, Stephen King, Nancy Allen, Greg Nicotero, Leonard Maltin, and Slash (!). Entertaining but surface-level stuff, which rarely places the discussed films in the context of horror history, making the title somewhat of a misnomer. Also, not too much on stuff made before 1970 (boo!), although there is a good segment on 1932's Freaks.

I was curious as to whether I should take a look at Eli Roth's History of Horror. With the surface nature, it seems like I should give it a pass. I have so many films/TV on my list from now until Halloween that I won't even be able to see of those, let alone something I was only mildly curious about.

 

[TravisR]

Rating out of a possible 4

Watched 9/13/2021

1) Grizzly (1976)

Jaws clone about wild grizzly slaughtering tourists. Lots of attack scenes but it's way too obvious director William Girdler is cutting between footage of real grizzly and and hairy stand in. Furthermore, while the acting is OK, Christopher George is no Roy Scheider, Andrew Prine is no Richard Dreyfuss, and Richard Jaeckel is no Robert Shaw.

2) Day of the Animals (1977)

It's The Birds meets Grizzly in Girdler's follow-up to his hit of 1976. All kinds of animals start attacking people because of the deteriorating ozone layer. Uh-huh. Vivid attack scenes but the human drama is lame. Leslie Nielsen is over the top as batsh*t crazy ad executive who gets in touch with his inner Cro-Magnon.

None of these movies are particularly good but I love both of them.

 

[JasonRoer]

Midsommar (2019)

Loooooooong folk-horror film in which a young woman's (Dani, played by the excellent Florence Pugh) sister commits suicide and kills their parents. Dani's boyfriend and his friends are going to a small village in Sweden to research the village mid-summer festival and the unique rituals used in the days-long ceremony, and Dani decides to join them. This may or may not have been a good decision.

Beautifully filmed with good shot selection, sustained creepy atmosphere, and SFX, as expected in the sophomore effort by Ari Aster (Hereditary). However, the slogging, downright boring pacing damages the interesting story. 30 minutes sliced out of the film would have been of great benefit. There is a difference between a slow build of tension and drawing out each character building/story development for far too long. Ultimately, Aster has tremendous talent; I greatly enjoyed Hereditary, Midsommar not nearly as much (ONLY due to the sluggish pacing) and I look forward to Aster's next film.


Malcolm - THANK YOU so much for the recommendation of Found. I've only seen half of the film thus far and I think it's fantastic. I will write a full review tomorrow after I finish it, but I will tell you that it's one of my favorite new horror discoveries in years. Given that you've seen the film, you should read the spoiler below. I think you will find it interesting. It's related to my career and two of the acts of violence depicted in the film:

Spoiler: For anyone who has seen Found, you might find this interesting. If you haven't seen the film, do not read.

As you may know, I'm a forensic psychologist. One of my patients (a serial killer) killed his cellmate, plucked out both of his eyeballs, ate one, and turned the other into a necklace. Another of my patients (a serial killer) severed the heads of some of his victims and performed sexual acts with the heads and engaged in necrophilia with with the bodies. It was interesting to see these depicted in the film. I wonder if the author of the book on which the film is based knew about these cases and used them for inspiration. Other than that morsel of info, I'll say that the depiction of a serial killer in the film is good, the acting from all of them is excellent, particularly the 12-year old lead character. The shot selection is fantastic. It's clear the budget was low, and they wisely put it all into the SFX. I wish they had more money, as they could have used a better camera, had more money for the DP to light naturally, and the worst of the bunch - the sound - could have been enhanced greatly. Nonetheless, I'm loving it, I can't wait to finish it tonight, and I can't thank you enough for the rec, Malcolm.

 

[John Stell]

Watched 9/15/2021 - Rating out of a possible 4

Viewed the Cold War Creatures box set last night. Overall great presentations of largely mediocre films.

1) Creature With the Atom Brain (1955)

During his exile a criminal hooks up with a mad scientist who's discovered a way to reanimate and control the dead. So the thug returns to the US to exact his revenge against anyone who crossed him. Basically a zombie film where the walking dead are propelled by science instead of voodoo. Drably told with bargain basement lab. The finale is memorable though.

2) The Werewolf (1956)

1/2

Or I Was a Grown Up Werewolf. An accident victim is turned into werewolf by sociopathic scientists. When he escapes to a small town, the doctors track him down in hopes of killing him to keep their secret. Steven Ritch is good as the werewolf and there are some scary scenes. Most of the other characters though are clichés and the scientists aren't credible. Where's Whit Bissell when you need him?

3) The Zombies of Mora Tau (1957)

Adventurers in search of diamonds have to do battle with the zombies that protect the treasure. On the plus side it has Allyson Hayes. But the cheapness of the production thwarts all attempts at creating menacing atmosphere.

4) The Giant Claw (1957)

Beaky Buzzard from the Looney Tunes shorts is reimagined as an alien who attacks air travelers and those foolish enough to wander outside. Silly but fun despite poor effects. Lone witness Jeff Morrow should have told everyone to kiss his ass after he's consistently mocked and called names by everyone he tells about the bird.

 

[JasonRoer]

Found (2012)

Tale as old as time in cinema: Fantastic 1st two acts, wheels come off in the 3rd. My excitement about this film was multi-facetted. The story was interesting, the acting was great for a low-budget film, particularly the 12-year old protagonist, the SFX were excellent, and the shot selection was good. Most important, the portrayal of the serial killer was mostly an accurate representation in the first 2 acts. As most of you know, I'm a forensic psychologist, I wrote my dissertation on psychopathy, and I work with serial killers and murderers. I'm generally dismayed at the portrayal of serials killers in films, not Jason, Myers, or Freddy (technically spree killers anyway), but in those films in which they are attempting to realistically depict a serial killer.

Moving on to the 3rd act situation - suddenly the acting takes a nose dive, the blocking and shot selection go to the level of a student film in some scenes, but worse, the serial killer goes Hollywood. Some of the psychological aspects remain (

Spoiler

what he does to his mother is very realistic, for example.

), however, his apparently meticulous, careful approach goes bye-bye. Throughout history there are examples of those who would be careless after being so cautious, however, that is A) rare and B) when they turn themselves in. There is no suggestion here he will do this, and it gives the realistic indie film (yes realistic despite what you are seeing) a sudden feel of a Hollywood movie.

Don't get me wrong - I totally recommend the film. It was wonderful. And most people don't have my training, so the 3rd act (other than the aforementioned acting/blocking/student film feel in certain scenes) would unlikely bother anyone if they are enjoying the film. With a larger budget, the presentation would have been much better - a better camera, better lighting, and especially better audio. Anyway, give it a go if you like serial killer films. The story has a great feel to it and there is much to enjoy. It's playing on Shudder.

 

[Malcolm R]

his apparently meticulous, careful approach goes bye-bye.

That bothered me a bit, too. I just took it that

Spoiler

his father's behavior toward Marty, especially hitting Marty after the church incident, sent Steve into a full-on protective meltdown and he saw it as him protecting Marty from the parents, regardless of the consequences. At that point it was no longer about the serial killings, it was just vengeance on the parents and he wanted them to suffer and die, immediately, for what he perceived they'd done to him over the years and were starting to do the same to Marty. He didn't feel he had time to waste in order to create a "plan" now that the father was physically beating Marty.

But that's just my take, and I'm not a psychologist.

 

[JasonRoer]

That bothered me a bit, too. I just took it that

Spoiler

his father's behavior toward Marty, especially hitting Marty after the church incident, sent Steve into a full-on protective meltdown and he saw it as him protecting Marty from the parents, regardless of the consequences. At that point it was no longer about the serial killings, it was just vengeance on the parents and he wanted them to suffer and die, immediately, for what he perceived they'd done to him over the years and were starting to do the same to Marty. He didn't feel he had time to waste in order to create a "plan" now that the father was physically beating Marty.

But that's just my take, and I'm not a psychologist.

That is a good take. However,

Spoiler

it was established he had killed numerous times in the past, and consequently, he would have the skill set to be able to have murdered his parents in a manner that would have kept it secret with little to no planning. Even in a fit of rage, the rage passes when the psychic tension is relieved. So he wouldn't have walked out of the house bloody and apparently naked. He should have had the wherewithal at that point to have covered his tracks (so to speak) in the house after presumably severing his parents' heads and disposing of the bodies in whatever manner he usually did (they never did show this). This, of course, is only for a killer who has been depicted in this fastidious manner. There are many killers out there who are never careful, and they are usually caught rather quickly. The truly devious ones, the ones who are all around us undetected, they aren't caught because they don't want to be. The serial killer in the film was portrayed as one who didn't want to be. Again, that can change at any moment and history has shown us this (in fact, one of my patients turned himself in, and if not for that, he'd have never been caught). But if that was the case in this film, I would have wanted to see an indication this is what he was planning. But good on you for working through that speed bump in the script at the end. It was a perfectly reasonable conclusion to draw. Well done.