Just watched one last night on Netflix...pretty much a "VHS" reject IMO
"They're Watching"
Just watched one last night on Netflix...pretty much a "VHS" reject IMO
"They're Watching"
-=Will you stand by me against the cold night, or are you afraid of the ice?=-
I'd have to think this one through to give a concise reply, but if you want a good psychological thriller, I highly recommend "Let Us Prey".Originally Posted by Hal...
A Comfort Zone is not a Life Sentence
It's a TV rec, but it fits the categories. Stranger Things is an incredible new series on Netflix that is really a perfect 8-hour movie in the binge-watching trend of today. It embodies everything we loved from E.T., Close Encounters, The Goonies, The Thing, John Carpenter's ideas and synth soundtracks, and all that stuff from the early 80s.
Stranger-Things-poster.jpg
Agreed 100%
Just posted this review in Groups:
OK Confirmed.
Stranger Things is some great TV if you enjoy Stephen King, ET, Poltergeist, X-Files, mixed with some Goonies and lots more 80's references. The kid actors here carry the load, some of the best young acting I've seen since Stand by Me. (Also referenced many times.)
Winona Ryder is really good, and I'm a "Private Joker" fan, so how could I not enjoy Matthew Modine in a bad guy role? Also only 8 episodes, so like True Detective, they get their story across in a reasonable amount of time.
Nine out of nine trips to The Upside Down.
“Where words fail, music speaks.” - Hans Christian Anderson
[QUOTE=Hal...;593346]I'm not really a fan of horror movies, exactly, but I do enjoy a couple of subgenres of it: supernatural- and psychological-horror, tho I much prefer supernatural.
Any other fans with recommendations?
Yes, I think we all do here, though may disagree on what we think is the best, etc. For example, I still think The Exorcist is still one of the better ones made. That aside though:
We Are Still Here is a newer film in that genre.
The Conjuring
The Amityville Horror
The Changeling
The Legend of Hell House
Watched 1953's Shane on TCM the other night. Been quite a few years since I've viewed this gem from start to finish. A classic western,stylized good vs evil, with Alan Ladd's Shane allied with Van Heflin's Starrett for good and Jack Palance balancing the scale for evil. Palance is positively reptilian as the killer gunman. I noticed Clint Eastwood's homage to Shane in Pale Rider, in the recreation of the Shane Palance shooting Elisha Cook Jr scene, and I believe the stump scene recreated in the river rock scene. Substituting the young girl for young boy, and more similarities. Imatation being the surest form of flattery and such, Pale Rider is a fine film, as is Shane. IMO Shane much deserves its reputation as a classic, 10 of 10, worth seeing if you have not as yet.
You're one of the few people who I've seen disliking the original Wicker Man. I can't say I was over the moon with it either.
Recently saw Dead & Buried (1981). Liked it better than the first time I saw it. There's some supernatural stuff there.
Shock Waves (1977) - Peter Cushing & Brooke Adams. It was fine, though there was some nonsense as well. Worth watching at least once.
Death Line (aka Raw Meat) - directed by the same director who made Dead & Buried. Liked this one much better than the first time as well. Actually this was great, just an all round good movie. Donald Pleasence is there and his tea drinking habits are exciting.
Of Unknown Origin (1983) - Peter Weller vs a rat. Not bad.
Watch any of the John Carpenter horror films from the 70's and 80's. Well, maybe except the average Christine.
There are lots of watchable ones out there, especially in the 70's and 80's. I'd just recommend using the net, even on imdb each film on its page has recommendations of similar ones. There are also lots of lists there and on other sites. The thing is that this is all so subjective.
For example, some here praised Stranger Things. I saw it as well and thought it was watchable, nothing more.
Short Cuts - Been quite a while since I saw this one, Robert Altman's 'portmaneau' movie about the lives of various LA residents. Very similar to Paul Anderson's Magnolia (which I personally prefer), and I enjoyed this just as much second time around. Even watched it all through in one sitting (its almost 3 hours).
On the face of it the people are going about their boring, mundane lives, but of course in real life there are complications, affairs, insecurities, messy divorces, alcoholism, and inevitably death.
Some segments work better than others - The Bruce Davison/Jack Lemmon (has he EVER given a bad performance) story about their son being injured, Lemmon as the errant father turning up at the hospital after a prolonged absence, and Lyle Lovett's outraged cake-maker making sinister phone calls to the family about an uncollected birthday cake for the boy is probably the most powerful.
And there are some very strong sexual references and nudity for the time the film was made - Jennifer Jason Leigh as a sex-line worker, nonchantly changing her babies nappy while talking filthy to 'John's' on the phone...looked on by her cuckolded and emasculated husband Chris Penn.
Julianne Moore, in one of her early roles, also gets a startling full-frontal scene, shocking for its prolonged length and almost throwaway manner in which it is shown.
No point to list all of the characters and various stories, these are just a few. But it has one hell of a cast, and if this type of multi-character, multi-faceted storyline kind of movie is for you, its well worth checking out.
I only clicked on it because I thought it was going to be something more interesting...
?? Really? I'm a bit biased regarding the latter, but I love both.
I am another one that could never see the appeal not was I disturbed by The Wicker Man (though the final scene is quite powerful).
Same with Rosemary's baby, but quite some time after I saw The Exorcist, and it seemed to pale in comparison, especially as it had been considered up to that time to be one of the scariest film ever made. One of those movies I really need to watch again and re-evaluate.
I only clicked on it because I thought it was going to be something more interesting...
I do too. The problems with The Exorcist are that the FX don't hold up and those bits thrown in to shock the hell out of you (no pun intended) take away from the impact of the supernatural. In 1973, seeing a girl masturbate with a crucifix, spin her head 360°, or spew green vomit was considerably more upsetting than it is today. Today, the head spinning has almost dropped to the level of camp given the limitations of FX then. But to my point, most of those things come off over the top and push the supernatural aspect to the side. So often, in an effort to ratchet up the tension or shock value, directors go overboard and don't seem to know when to stop. And it's for that reason I thought The Exorcism of Emily Rose was really good; it was depicted realistically (from what I've read on real possessions).
Saw The Conjuring. It was okay. The problem for me is that it's associated with the Warrens, a pair of paranormal investigators, much of whose work has been debunked.We Are Still Here is a newer film in that genre.
The Conjuring
The Amityville Horror
The Changeling
The Legend of Hell House
Have seen The Amityville Horror a few times. Without going into detail, I'd grade this movie a B-.
Saw The Legend of Hell House on TCM not long ago. Wasn't impressed but I don't remember why.
I read up on The Changeling. It's now on my list. Thanks.
Don't know if any of you have heard of or seen Don't Be Afraid of the Dark, the 2010 remake produced by Guillermo del Toro, but man was I disappointed. It was good up to a point and then totally fell apart. I was very disappointed given del Toro's involvement. And speaking of del Toro, I never made it through The Devil's Backbone. Not sure what happened, there, but it didn't hold my interest.
The only movies of Carpenter's I've enjoyed are Halloween, Escape from New York, and The Thing, the latter being his best. I tried watching Prince of Darkness but couldn't get through it.
You're right. It is subjective. I consider the vast majority of horror films from the '70s & '80s, and even into the '90s, pretty poor. Since then, I feel there have been quite a few decent supernatural horror films (and zombie films don't fit the category; supernatural horror films "include menacing ghosts, demons, or other depictions of supernatural occurrences. Often, supernatural horror films combine elements of religion into the plot"). And maybe I should have qualified my request to anything made since the mid to late '90s.There are lots of watchable ones out there, especially in the 70's and 80's... The thing is that this is all so subjective.
Hmm. I saw the trailer somewhere and it piqued my interest, a little, but a couple of people, whose opinions I value, both thought it was good so I'll check it out.For example, some here praised Stranger Things. I saw it as well and thought it was watchable, nothing more.
I concede it's possible I was in the wrong mood for The Wicker Man; I haven't ruled out seeing it again. But the problem I have with Rosemary's Baby is Polanski didn't create the right mood for much of the movie, especially the impregnation scene. Why did Polanski choose a boat for that scene? It should have a been a much creepier setting.
It's not without its faults, but it's my choice for best western ever made.
You're not the first person to notice that. Pale Rider could have been an excellent movie but, overall, it pales in comparison.I noticed Clint Eastwood's homage to Shane in Pale Rider...
“From thirty feet away she looked like a lot of class. From ten feet away she looked like something made up to be seen from thirty feet away.” – Philip Marlowe
Hal...
Quote Originally Posted by nycsteve View Post
Watched 1953's Shane on TCM the other night.
It's not without its faults, but it's my choice for best western ever made.
IMO that honor belongs to The Searchers.
For (my own personal) nostalgia, I'm looking forward to a movie coming out this week that's of the type I would usually never even think about.
Streep playing Florence Foster Jenkins, a wealthy NYC socialite with a voice that could cause people to contemplate suicide when she sang. Her enabling millionaire husband (Hugh Grant) footed the bill for all sorts of concerts, including Carnegie Hall during the late 40s/early 50s.
I remember that as a little kid of 5-10, my parents and their friends would play her records (yeah, more than one) as laughable background to their cocktail parties, hence the nostalgia for me.
This woman makes American Idol "She Bangs" William Hung sound like Pavarotti.
"My choice early in life was either to be a piano player in a whorehouse or a politician, and to tell the truth, there's hardly any difference"
President Harry S. Truman
..sounds like a plot lifted straight from Citizen Kane!
-=Will you stand by me against the cold night, or are you afraid of the ice?=-
Take a look at this list of David Bowie's favorite records. He lists her at the very bottom of the list and writes a bit about the phenomenon of her appearances.
http://scallemang.ca/bowie25albums/
I don't like country music, but I don't mean to denigrate those who do. And for the people who like country music, denigrate means 'put down.'- Bob Newhart
Going to see Jason Bourne tomorrow. Hope it's decent.
I'd agree that The Thing is his best film. The problem with Prince Of Darkness is that it's not as well directed/put together. It drags in places and there is some nonsense as well. But after The Thing it's the only film which manages to re-create his stylings from 1974-1982. IMO, of course.I do too. The problems with The Exorcist are that the FX don't hold up and those bits thrown in to shock the hell out of you (no pun intended) take away from the impact of the supernatural. In 1973, seeing a girl masturbate with a crucifix, spin her head 360°, or spew green vomit was considerably more upsetting than it is today. Today, the head spinning has almost dropped to the level of camp given the limitations of FX then. But to my point, most of those things come off over the top and push the supernatural aspect to the side. So often, in an effort to ratchet up the tension or shock value, directors go overboard and don't seem to know when to stop. And it's for that reason I thought The Exorcism of Emily Rose was really good; it was depicted realistically (from what I've read on real possessions).
Saw The Conjuring. It was okay. The problem for me is that it's associated with the Warrens, a pair of paranormal investigators, much of whose work has been debunked.
Have seen The Amityville Horror a few times. Without going into detail, I'd grade this movie a B-.
Saw The Legend of Hell House on TCM not long ago. Wasn't impressed but I don't remember why.
I read up on The Changeling. It's now on my list. Thanks.
Don't know if any of you have heard of or seen Don't Be Afraid of the Dark, the 2010 remake produced by Guillermo del Toro, but man was I disappointed. It was good up to a point and then totally fell apart. I was very disappointed given del Toro's involvement. And speaking of del Toro, I never made it through The Devil's Backbone. Not sure what happened, there, but it didn't hold my interest.
The only movies of Carpenter's I've enjoyed are Halloween, Escape from New York, and The Thing, the latter being his best. I tried watching Prince of Darkness but couldn't get through it.
You're right. It is subjective. I consider the vast majority of horror films from the '70s & '80s, and even into the '90s, pretty poor. Since then, I feel there have been quite a few decent supernatural horror films (and zombie films don't fit the category; supernatural horror films "include menacing ghosts, demons, or other depictions of supernatural occurrences. Often, supernatural horror films combine elements of religion into the plot"). And maybe I should have qualified my request to anything made since the mid to late '90s.
Hmm. I saw the trailer somewhere and it piqued my interest, a little, but a couple of people, whose opinions I value, both thought it was good so I'll check it out.
I concede it's possible I was in the wrong mood for The Wicker Man; I haven't ruled out seeing it again. But the problem I have with Rosemary's Baby is Polanski didn't create the right mood for much of the movie, especially the impregnation scene. Why did Polanski choose a boat for that scene? It should have a been a much creepier setting.
It's not without its faults, but it's my choice for best western ever made.
You're not the first person to notice that. Pale Rider could have been an excellent movie but, overall, it pales in comparison.
Speaking about the horror of various decades - I'd say that there have been VERY few horror films in the history of cinema which are great both as horror and just good films. For example, Carpenter has said several times that most are awful, some are fair, very few are good and even fewer are very good. I think Alien still hold up, so does The Thing, The Omen is a well directed picture although it does suffer from too much melodramatics. Overall I wouldn't say there are many which are all round great.
Stranger Things - I haven't seen The Goonies or Stand By Me. Some reviews cite them as influences. But of those I have seen, it most resembles Poltergeist and ET. Some ideas are definitely borrowed and they don't particularly try to hide it. I didn't see almost any Carpenter nods there (except for some characters watching The Thing and some music) but there is lots of Spielberg. Also Firestarter could be a reference. If you like any of these, you could enjoy it. If you don't, then it depends.
The part of Rosemary's Baby on the boat is mostly Rosemary's dream, influenced by snippets of voices she hears from next door. The actual rape takes place in the neighbors' apartment.I do too. The problems with The Exorcist are that the FX don't hold up and those bits thrown in to shock the hell out of you (no pun intended) take away from the impact of the supernatural. In 1973, seeing a girl masturbate with a crucifix, spin her head 360°, or spew green vomit was considerably more upsetting than it is today. Today, the head spinning has almost dropped to the level of camp given the limitations of FX then. But to my point, most of those things come off over the top and push the supernatural aspect to the side. So often, in an effort to ratchet up the tension or shock value, directors go overboard and don't seem to know when to stop. And it's for that reason I thought The Exorcism of Emily Rose was really good; it was depicted realistically (from what I've read on real possessions).
Saw The Conjuring. It was okay. The problem for me is that it's associated with the Warrens, a pair of paranormal investigators, much of whose work has been debunked.
Have seen The Amityville Horror a few times. Without going into detail, I'd grade this movie a B-.
Saw The Legend of Hell House on TCM not long ago. Wasn't impressed but I don't remember why.
I read up on The Changeling. It's now on my list. Thanks.
Don't know if any of you have heard of or seen Don't Be Afraid of the Dark, the 2010 remake produced by Guillermo del Toro, but man was I disappointed. It was good up to a point and then totally fell apart. I was very disappointed given del Toro's involvement. And speaking of del Toro, I never made it through The Devil's Backbone. Not sure what happened, there, but it didn't hold my interest.
The only movies of Carpenter's I've enjoyed are Halloween, Escape from New York, and The Thing, the latter being his best. I tried watching Prince of Darkness but couldn't get through it.
You're right. It is subjective. I consider the vast majority of horror films from the '70s & '80s, and even into the '90s, pretty poor. Since then, I feel there have been quite a few decent supernatural horror films (and zombie films don't fit the category; supernatural horror films "include menacing ghosts, demons, or other depictions of supernatural occurrences. Often, supernatural horror films combine elements of religion into the plot"). And maybe I should have qualified my request to anything made since the mid to late '90s.
Hmm. I saw the trailer somewhere and it piqued my interest, a little, but a couple of people, whose opinions I value, both thought it was good so I'll check it out.
I concede it's possible I was in the wrong mood for The Wicker Man; I haven't ruled out seeing it again. But the problem I have with Rosemary's Baby is Polanski didn't create the right mood for much of the movie, especially the impregnation scene. Why did Polanski choose a boat for that scene? It should have a been a much creepier setting.
It's not without its faults, but it's my choice for best western ever made.
You're not the first person to notice that. Pale Rider could have been an excellent movie but, overall, it pales in comparison.
I know that movie ranks high on the BFI's decennial poll of the 50 greatest movies, but I didn't like it that much. I'm not sure why, other than I'm not a big fan of John Wayne. I have been meaning to see it again, tho.
Yeah, I agree with Carpenter. Halloween is by no means great, but it holds a special place in my heart as it reminds me of high school, since I'm about the same age as the characters. And as for The Thing, I think it's a very well made movie but suffers from the FX. IMO, they were over the top.
And of course, the era in which they're made is also a factor. The old Universal horror movies are a product of their time, just as Rosemary's Baby & The Exorcist are. Dracula & Frankenstein were both scary and excellent... in the '30s. I don't think anyone would consider them scary today. The same goes for Rosemary's Baby, imo. Not sure about The Exorcist. I know when I first saw it, I was at the drive-in with about 500 other teenagers and it was one big party. I don't think anyone was freaked out by it. But then, the air was a bit funky and there were a lot people drinking beer. Good times. lol
I did watch it later, by myself, in the dark and I had a different opinion the 2nd time around.
The only that can still give me goose bumps, tho, is The Haunting. To me, it's timeless. The first time I saw it was on the late show when I was 7 or 8 with my mom, sister, & brother. Scared the shit out of us. The next time I saw it was about 20 years later. Forced my girlfriend to watch it with me. She actually drew blood grabbing my arm and neither of us slept well that night. lol
That sounds familiar. I guess I forgot about that. Still, tho, it wasn't nearly as creepy as it could have been.
“From thirty feet away she looked like a lot of class. From ten feet away she looked like something made up to be seen from thirty feet away.” – Philip Marlowe
I don't find myself saying this much, but this is a bingewatch that I'm going to repeat soon. I enjoyed this one immensely.
-=Will you stand by me against the cold night, or are you afraid of the ice?=-
Hal...
Originally Posted by nycsteve
IMO that honor belongs to The Searchers.
I know that movie ranks high on the BFI's decennial poll of the 50 greatest movies, but I didn't like it that much. I'm not sure why, other than I'm not a big fan of John Wayne. I have been meaning to see it again, tho.
The Searchers is beautifully shot, Wayne plays against type, one of his best roles, and the film is populated with Ford "charactors", the edge that for me puts it a notch above even Shane. Richly drawn, detailed, mean. Fabulous.
The Shane/Pale Rider connection didn't click till the other night. As obvious as it is I missed it for years. It was fun when the light went on though.
I looked the movie up in this book I have called The New York Times Guide to the Best 1,000 Movies Ever Made. The review of The Searchers reminded me of why I had a problem with this movie. It also reminded me that there are many shots in Monument Valley when the movie takes place in Texas. Which then reminded me that I was somewhat confused when I first saw it because John Wayne must have traveled a very long way to get to Monument Valley. Having been to both places, it just didn't make sense. Maybe I was being dense? After reading the review I realized what John Ford was doing: he was placing Monument Valley in Texas.
Another problem I have is that most (all?) of the shots are in the desert. I have a tendency to dislike movies that take place in a desert. I know that's not fair but that's just me. When I was 6, we drove through TX, NM, and AZ on our way to CA; that is one long-ass drive through a very dry and barren environment.
Bear in mind, I know Shane isn't a perfect movie, either (has there ever been a perfect movie?). So many scenes in the movie were obviously shot on a sound stage because you can hear the subtle echo of a shouted voice. Having a degree in audio post-production, it bugs the hell out of me that way too many directors put way too much emphasis on the visual and then blow off the audio. David Lynch gets it, but he's a rarity.
Anyway, here's the review from the New York Times: The Searchers by Bosley Crowther. It's the last two paragraphs that pinpoint my main objections with the film. Feel free to ignore it. lol
“From thirty feet away she looked like a lot of class. From ten feet away she looked like something made up to be seen from thirty feet away.” – Philip Marlowe
Damn, I feel redeemed! Thanks Jer & Ziggy.
"My choice early in life was either to be a piano player in a whorehouse or a politician, and to tell the truth, there's hardly any difference"
President Harry S. Truman
The Evil Dead has even more over the top stuff.
Halloween - just good, IMO. I think The Fog has more going for it.
I haven't seen The Exorcist for quite a while. Friedkin is an inconsistent director even within the same movie. The same with De Palma. The French Connection and To Live and Die In LA have some mediocre stuff in them.
The Haunting is decent. I find Harris to be annoying there and I know I'm not the only one. Otherwise it's alright.
The problem with The Fog and any movie with Adrienne Barbeau is that she's rather unattractive. But she was Carpenter's wife.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks